Saturday’s Irish Independent
The jury had begun deliberating in the case, but yesterday morning, Mr Justice Paul McDermott discharged them, telling them an article (above) had been published in the Irish Independent, juxtaposing the facts of the current case with other cases which had gained a level of notoriety.
He said the ongoing case had been referred to in ways which indicated a fair trial was not being conducted and that there had been an unfairness in procedures at a level unacceptable to society at large.
….Mr Justice McDermott said he was at a loss to understand why the Irish Independent chose to publish this article in circumstances where the jury was conducting deliberations.
Rape trial collapses over ‘unprecedented media coverage’ (RTE)
Rape trial collapses following a newspaper reporÉ (RTÉ)
Thanks Conall
Jaw. Drop.
shame on the indo. Everyone involved in the case has to go through the whole fupping agonising thing again.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
“this is not a high-profile rape case – in fact, this hearing has had hardly any coverage at all because it has not yet concluded”
And this is written by the type of “bona fide” journalist that Judge Frank Clarke wants to protect in the court-rooms of Ireland.
This just proves Clarke’s case. If this is the type of dross that a national newspaper with editors and research staff produce, the dangers of bloggers become more apparent
Not necessarily but take the point all the same
Juries don’t read newspapers, no need to stop this trial.
Wow, you’re so omniscient, ollie. How do you know juries don’t read newspapers?
How did that prejudiced the trial , having read it , I still don’t have a clue who its referring to …
You’re nor a juror in the trial.
You are not very informative
The prejudice refers to a juror being influenced by something outside the courtroom, the case should rely solely on the evidence given. It’s not particularly important how the general public feel. In this particular incident the Judge decided that the article could possibly have swayed the opinion of the jury.
Her editor should resign and the ‘journalist’ should be sacked.
+1 The editor, in particular, should consider their position.
the journalist can’t be sacked – most likely a freelancer who’ll (eventually) get €60 for that piece
OFF WITH THEIR HEADS.
“Judge McDermot said the publication appeared to involve contempt, but there was a “whiff of scandalising the court” as well”
https://www.pressreader.com/ireland/irish-examiner/20181127/282282436354728
I’m amazed it took so long for this to happen. The paper should be sanctioned.
One presumes the Editor will be facing a contempt of court charge at some stage …. ?
Welcome! Chin up. Sometimes we are praised for things we don’t deserve, and sometimes blamed for things we don’t. At my age, we know that life has a way of sorting things out. Enjoying the twitter discussion!
Very true, Conall. Thank you.
Leaving aside for a moment the awful timing of the article, that is a shockingly badly written and thought out piece.
I agree. It’s terribly poor writing. Incoherent almost
I agree. It’s terribly poor writing. Incoherent almost. This is common enough though these days. Una Mulally is the same; as is Ewan McKenna. No fluency at all. One would think that at least a talent for writing is required to write for a national title.
It’s enough to have a #cause to talk about. It’s like it doesn’t matter if anyone understands the actual words.
Churlish, non-accountable decision by an Irish judge again. The world and its mother knows the judiciary and their friends the Bar Council are fuming over the kicking the dip-poo SC rightfully got in the Cork rape case “thong” episode; a case presided over by a female judge – also noted on social media. It’s a case of “my court” syndrome and getting one back for “the team”.
Society has had a bellyful of the Irish judiciary and Bar Council antics too.