THE STAR NEWSPAPER EDITOR, MR BRIAN HITCHIN, AND H
THE STAR NEWSPAPER EDITOR, MR BRIAN HITCHIN, AND HIS
EMPLOYERS, EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS, TOLD AN OLD BAILEY JUDGE TODAY
(MON) THEY WERE NOT GUILTY OF CONTEMPT OF COURT IN PUBLISHING A
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE WIFE OF THE ALLEGED RAILWAY MURDERER.
MR JUSTICE FARQUHARSON, WHO HAD BANNED THE TAKING OF
PICTURES OF MRS MARGARET DUFFY, DECIDED THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE
DEALT WITH BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR POSSIBLE ACTION.
MRS DUFFY, ESTRANGED WIFE OF JOHN FRANCIS DUFFY, WHO
DENIES THREE MURDERS AND SEVEN RAPES, WAS PHOTOGRAPHED LAST THURSDAY
AFTER SHE HAD GIVEN EVIDENCE AT THE OLD BAILEY.
THE PICTURE APPEARED
IN THE STAR THE FOLLOWING DAY.
MR GEOFFREY SHAW, REPRESENTING EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS AND MR
HITCHIN, SAID THE DECISION TO PUBLISH WAS TAKEN IN MANCHESTER BY THE
NIGHT EDITOR, MR HILL, AND PICTURE EDITOR MR SUTHERLAND.
IT WAS NOT
MR HITCHIN’S DECISION ALTHOUGH HE ACCEPTED FULL RESPONSIBILITY.
COUNSEL TOLD THE JUDGE: ‘NEITHER MR HILL, NOR MR SUTHERLAND
NOR MR HITCHIN KNEW OF YOUR ORDER ON WEDNESDAY OR OF YOUR FURTHER
ORDER ON THURSDAY.
IF THEY HAD KNOWN OF THE ORDERS THEY WOULD HAVE
CHOSEN NOT TO PUBLISH THAT PHOTOGRAPH AND IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES THEY
REGRET THAT IT WAS PUBLISHED.
‘ALL THAT SAID, THEY, THROUGH ME, PLEAD NOT GUILTY TO
CONTEMPT OF COURT FOR THREE REASONS.
‘
THE FIRST REASON WAS THAT IT APPEARED MR JUSTICE FARQUHARSON
HAD BANNED THE TAKING OF PICTURES BUT HAD NOT BANNED PUBLISHING
PICTURES OF MRS DUFFY.
THE JUDGE, SMILING SLIGHTLY, INTERRUPTED TO REMARK: ‘THAT IS
NOT THE MOST ATTRACTIVE POINT I HAVE EVERY HEARD, MR SHAW.
WHAT
IS THE POINT OF MY PROHIBITING THE TAKING OF PHOTOGRAPHS IF THEY CAN
BE PUBLISHED.
‘
THE JUDGE SAID HE WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT PEOPLE BOTHERING
WITNESSES IN THE TRIAL AND ADDED: ‘I HAVE A WHOLE SERIES OF YOUNG
GIRLS COMING TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE AND IF THEY SEE THAT
PICTURE OF THE WIFE, WHAT EFFECT IS IT GOING TO HAVE ON THEM? THESE
ARE PRECAUTIONS I AM TRYING TO TAKE.
‘
MR SHAW: ‘NEITHER MR HITCHIN NOR MR HILL KNEW ANYTHING
OF.
.
.
.
.
‘
THE JUDGE: ‘IF THIS WAS SOME OBSCURE COURT IN CORNWALL I
MIGHT UNDERSTAND.
BUT THIS CASE HAS BEEN ON THE FRONT PAGES OF
NEARLY EVERY NEWSPAPER IN THIS COUNTRY.
‘
MORE
CENTRAL/CONTEMPT.
.
.
2
MR SHAW AGREED THAT THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE JUDGE’S ORDERS
SHOULD HAVE BEEN PASSED ON.
‘CERTAINLY SOMETHING WAS KNOWN IN LONDON BUT NOTHING WAS
KNOWN ABOUT THEM IN MANCHESTER,’ HE SAID.
HE HAD MADE EXHAUSTIVE INQUIRIES SINCE THE PICTURE APPEARED
AND NOW HAD ALL THE REPORTS BY THE PRESS ASSOCIATION OF THE CASE.
THESE REPORTS DID NOT MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT PHOTOGRAPHY ON WEDNESDAY
AND IT WAS NOT UNTIL 7.
10 PM ON THURSDAY THAT THERE WAS A REPORT
ABOUT A P.
A.
PHOTOGRAPHER BEING ARRESTED OUTSIDE THE OLD BAILEY FOR
TAKING PICTURES
‘WHAT IS ONE TO DO TO TRY AND PROTECT JUSTICE IN THESE
COURTS ?’ ASKED THE JUDGE.
‘ONE ASSUMES THAT WHEN THERE ARE A
LARGE NUMBER OF REPORTERS IN THIS COURT THAT THEY WILL GO AND TELL
THEIR EDITORS OF THE ORDERS OF THIS COURT.
‘
MR SHAW SAID HE REALISED THE MATTER MUST BE TAKEN FURTHER
AND SUGGESTED THAT THE RIGHT COURSE WAS TO REPORT THE MATTER OF
ALLEGED CONTEMPT OF COURT TO THE ATHORNEY GENERAL FOR HIM TO TAKE
SUCH ACTION AS HE CONSIDERED APPPROPRIATE.
THE JUDGE HAD EARLIER ANNOUNCED HE WOULD DEAL IMMEDIATELY
WITH ANY CONTEMPT OF COURT, BUT IN VIEW OF WHAT MR SHAW HAD SAID HE
WOULD REFER THE MATTER TO THE ATHORNEY GENERAL.
HE ACCEPTED A SUGGESTION BY MR SHAW THAT DETAILS OF HIS PAST
AND FUTURE ORDERS WOULD BE TYPED OUT AND PLACED OUTSIDE THE COURT.
ENDS
