AA pilot thread closed...potential contempt of court??? really??
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: US
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA pilot thread closed...potential contempt of court??? really??
well, the AA pilot (court trial) thread has been closed.
I'm curious, can citizens in the UK "not" discuss any and all aspects of trials, in private or in public?
Is there a 'standing' gag order, or what?
FL talks about Danny's possible liability with the judge...possibly a contempt of court?
Maybe things work differently over there, I don't know. I would think contempt of court would/could ONLY be issued to someone who violated a judge's order...and if there hasn't been any (gag) orders given by the judge, then aren't people free to discuss freely? ....unless there's some sort of 'standing' rules?
so, what's up with this, guys?
KC135777
I'm curious, can citizens in the UK "not" discuss any and all aspects of trials, in private or in public?
Is there a 'standing' gag order, or what?
FL talks about Danny's possible liability with the judge...possibly a contempt of court?
Maybe things work differently over there, I don't know. I would think contempt of court would/could ONLY be issued to someone who violated a judge's order...and if there hasn't been any (gag) orders given by the judge, then aren't people free to discuss freely? ....unless there's some sort of 'standing' rules?
so, what's up with this, guys?
KC135777
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not a lawyer, but work in an area where the Contempt of Court Act 1981 is a major consideration in carrying out my work...
I would direct you to this link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/edit...contempt.shtml
Essentially any publication (including, I would imagine an online forum such as PPRuNE) would be in contempt of court if it published any material which "created a substantial risk of serious prejudice".
Therefore, any speculation presented as fact, and most definitely any hearsay evidence not presented to the jury, could be considered prejudicial to the fair trial of the defendant (the pilot in this case).
I think PPRuNE were cautious, but right to protect themselves by locking the thread, but I might argue its deletion may offer greater protection.
NMTBB
I would direct you to this link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/edit...contempt.shtml
Essentially any publication (including, I would imagine an online forum such as PPRuNE) would be in contempt of court if it published any material which "created a substantial risk of serious prejudice".
Therefore, any speculation presented as fact, and most definitely any hearsay evidence not presented to the jury, could be considered prejudicial to the fair trial of the defendant (the pilot in this case).
I think PPRuNE were cautious, but right to protect themselves by locking the thread, but I might argue its deletion may offer greater protection.
NMTBB
