Long Awaited Blog Update

Unfortunately I had no internet connection last week and so was unable to update my blog online. However I did prepare it in a Word document, which I shall paste below:

After a week on the course, I have begun to ask questions as to what exactly makes up the Journalism course. Media and Journalism fit together fairly well, as they work within the same industry. But Media Law surely should only be relevant to those journalists whom report on court cases. However, I have learnt in the introduction to Media Law that all Journalists must have a basic knowledge of law, as it can be very easy for a journalist to commit contempt of court. Something as simple as taking a mobile phone into a court case can land you a maximum 30 year prison sentence.
Also, Journalism History, and Philosophy. These also interlink in some ways, as it is important to know how the industry started and important events which have lead up to this present day. I found it more perplexing however, to figure out exactly why we have lectures on Philosophy, as there is no obvious connection to me. I found the answer to this through a conversation with another member of the course: Andrew Giddings, who explained it to me like so: “Philosophy isn’t about finding the answers, it’s about asking the questions, which is just what Journalists do.”
Back to Law: For a guilty verdict to be given, the offence must be proven in court “beyond reasonable doubt”. It is up to the prosecution to prove someone of being guilty, rather than the accused having to prove that they are innocent. Not all people who are taking into the police station for questioning have been arrested, however some people whom voluntarily attend may be detained or arrested depending on their responses to police interrogation. Journalists need to check whether the suspect has been arrested or is voluntarily helping with the investigation. If a suspect is under arrest, the case automatically becomes active under the Contempt of Court Act 1981, which affects what can be published about it.
By law, people who have been detained for further questioning can only be held for 24 hours. If no charge is given after this time the person must be released. An extra 12 hours can be authorised by higher ranked officers for indictable offences. After this time, if the police want to hold a person for longer, they must apply to the courts for permission. Reporters cannot attend hearing applications for further detention.
The Terrorism Act 2006 allows those suspected of terrorism offences to be held for up to 28 days.
A government department called the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) are responsible for most prosecutions. The CPS decides the charge in all major cases which involve police investigations. The charge is an accusatory statement giving details of the crime committed I.e. rape, murder.
Police Bail is granted when a suspect is not charged, but police want more time to continue investigations.
Once a person has been charged all questioning must stop and they must be brought before a magistrates court the following day. The decision to prosecute can be made quickly or can take weeks or months if more evidence is needed. The next stage in the case is for the prosecution to decide the charge, or for them to lay down the information before a magistrate, who will then issue a summons, regardless of any evidence.
A summons is a formal document, which requires (or summons) the receiver to attend court on a specified date to respond to the allegations. Therefore, this is another way of starting a prosecution. In court, the summons becomes the charge.
If evidence is presented to a magistrate which proves a person guilty of an indictable offence or other offence punishable by imprisonment then an arrest warrant may be issued. This document gives any police officer the power to arrest this person anywhere in the UK for them to be brought to the magistrates court. This is how prosecution usually begins for suspects who are “on the run”.
If a media organisation discovers that someone is under investigation, they must not identify the person, as they could then be sued for libel if the investigation does not lead to criminal prosecution. Publishing details about a person under investigation may create the impression that they are guilty, which is defamatory. The name of a person under investigation may only be published if the CPS or local council officially release the details for publication.
In some instances, the media are willing to run the risk of libel, if the person is unlikely to take legal action against them. For examples, some celebrities would not sue for libel as they don’t want to alienate the media.
Also, if the media fail to report or charge accurately (I.e. reporting burglary instead of theft) then it can be successfully sued for libel.
The police follow guidelines which state that people under investigation should not be named but may be described, as long as the description does not make them identifiable.
Some crimes stories come with ethical considerations. For example, victims of rape or other sexual offences may not want to be identified.
There are 3 main categories of criminal offence:
Indictable (e.g. murder). These are punishable by a minimum of 5 years imprisonment, and can only be dealt with by Crown court, as the judges have more power.
Either-way offences can be dealt with by magistrates court or at Crown court, depending on magistrates decision and defendants choice. An example of an either way offence is burglary. These may also be referred to as indictable.
Summary offences are minor offences which are fairly straightforward to deal with and so are generally dealt with in magistrates court. Suspects of summary offences do not have the right of Crown court trial.
There are 2 elements to most crimes:
An act which is potentially criminal (actus reus) and
A guilty mind (menz rea), which means the crime was commited with guilty intent, for example, pre-planned.
For some offences, prosecutors do not need to prove guilty intent. These are said to be of “strict liability” and are offences which may put society at risk. For example, a speeding motorist may not have realised how fast he was going, and so had no guilty intent, but will be prosecuted for a strict liability offence.
The majority of court cases are dealt with by magistrates.
There are 2 types of magistrate:
Lay judges, which are mostly part-time volunteers, and
district judges-who are professional, paid judges appointed after at least 7 years as a solicitor or barrister.
However, magistrates have limited powers to sentence in the event of a conviction, and so all indictable offences are referred to Crown court. Magistrates can also refuse to try an either-way charge, or if the defendant chooses trial by jury, then the case will be considered in a committal hearing, and if there is sufficient evidence, the case will be referred to Crown court. If a defendant admits committing an either-way offence, magistrates may sentence him/her or may commit them to Crown court for a higher sentencing. If the case is referred to Crown court, the defendant may be granted bail, or may have to stay in police custody. Reporting restrictions apply to preliminary hearings in the magistrates court if the case has potential for a jury trial. Most cases in the magistrates court can be reported fully, however there are restrictions on what can be reported about a Crown court case, which cease to operate when the trial has finished.
In Crown court, the jury may reach a verdict unanimously, or by a majority vote (10-1). Reporters should not report that an acquittal was by a majority decision.