Andy Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 I try to avoid agreeing with the Daily Mail, but I think their outrage here is justified: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2648832/First-trial-held-secret-Closed-terror-case-branded-outrageous-assault-open-justice-thanks-free-Press-know-happening.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490 In summary it would appear that a terrorism trial is going to be held completely in secret, with no members of the public or press allowed. I always thought it was a principle of law that justice was not only done, but seen to be done. I understand that some parts of the evidence may be sensitive, and it may be necessary to exclude the public from certain sessions, but to exclude them from the whole trial seems extreme and worrying. Were it not for the press fighting, we would not even know this was taking place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blake Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 agree appalling precedent, and it has never happened before except in little bits of trials, never with the whole of trials. Why don't they just declare martial law and stage a coup and be done with it, if they are going to be like this. However I would expect other elements of the constitution there is here, like the press you mention, to cry foul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 It is worrying, something you'd expect in a dictatorship, not Britain. The rest of the media are equally outraged. Here are some alternative links... http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jun/04/major-terrorism-trial-secret-first-time-legal-history http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10876499/Secret-terror-trial-is-assault-on-British-justice.html http://news.sky.com/story/1276135/outrage-over-plan-to-hold-secret-terror-trial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosey Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 agree appalling precedent, and it has never happened before except in little bits of trials, never with the whole of trials. Why don't they just declare martial law and stage a coup and be done with it, if they are going to be like this. However I would expect other elements of the constitution there is here, like the press you mention, to cry foul. I don't mean to shock you but it has happened before, even here in Sheffield. I've been involved in a couple of trials where the media and public gallery weren't allowed in. Quite a few years back now when I first started in law but it has certainly happened. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 I don't mean to shock you but it has happened before, even here in Sheffield. I've been involved in a couple of trials where the media and public gallery weren't allowed in. Quite a few years back now when I first started in law but it has certainly happened. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android So, all the media reports are wrong? Since they start with "First trial to be held in secret..." "Civil rights activists have expressed concern over the first ever court order allowing two terror suspects, arrested in "high-profile circumstances", to be tried anonymously and in secret." "A major terrorism trial is to be heard entirely in secret in a “totally unprecedented departure” from centuries of open justice, it can be disclosed. " "A major terrorism trial is set to be held entirely in secret for the first time in British legal history in an unprecedented departure from the principles of open justice, the court of appeal has heard." Do you have any evidence for your claim? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosey Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 Quote: Originally Posted by Moosey I don't mean to shock you but it has happened before, even here in Sheffield. I've been involved in a couple of trials where the media and public gallery weren't allowed in. Quite a few years back now when I first started in law but it has certainly happened. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android So, all the media reports are wrong? Since they start with "First trial to be held in secret..." "Civil rights activists have expressed concern over the first ever court order allowing two terror suspects, arrested in "high-profile circumstances", to be tried anonymously and in secret." "A major terrorism trial is to be heard entirely in secret in a “totally unprecedented departure†from centuries of open justice, it can be disclosed. " "A major terrorism trial is set to be held entirely in secret for the first time in British legal history in an unprecedented departure from the principles of open justice, the court of appeal has heard." Do you have any evidence for your claim? Working on the trials. One related to an operation by SYP in which they were acting undercover to effectively entrap criminals (can open worms everywhere). HHJ Bentley was quite happy to hear that in closed court. The media have never ever understood law. Their reports are often total garbage and cause me no end of hassle with clients who believe them. Why did the papers report that man got 500grand for his broken thumb but I'm getting 6k. Papers love scandals. If they actually understood law it'll help a great deal. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android ---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 22:33 ---------- As a side note, go try to get into a youth court. You're not allowed. Closed courts. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share Posted June 5, 2014 I don't mean to shock you but it has happened before, even here in Sheffield. I've been involved in a couple of trials where the media and public gallery weren't allowed in. Quite a few years back now when I first started in law but it has certainly happened. Were they completely secret to the extent that the media couldn't even report that the trial was happening? In the terrorism case, I may have misunderstood but from what I read, the press won't even be able to report the verdict? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 Working on the trials. One related to an operation by SYP in which they were acting undercover to effectively entrap criminals (can open worms everywhere). HHJ Bentley was quite happy to hear that in closed court. The media have never ever understood law. Their reports are often total garbage and cause me no end of hassle with clients who believe them. Why did the papers report that man got 500grand for his broken thumb but I'm getting 6k. Papers love scandals. If they actually understood law it'll help a great deal. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android ---------- Post added 05-06-2014 at 22:33 ---------- As a side note, go try to get into a youth court. You're not allowed. Closed courts. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android All the media I can find seem adamant that this has gone further than ever before, BBC gives some more details... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27704747 Anthony Hudson, counsel for the media organisations challenging the restrictions, told the appeal judges: "The Crown has sought and obtained an unprecedented order that the trial of two defendants charged with serious terrorism offences should take place entirely in private with the identity of both defendants withheld and a permanent prohibition on reporting what takes place during the trial and their identities. Did they misquote Mr Hudson, or is he mistaken too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosey Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 Were they completely secret to the extent that the media couldn't even report that the trial was happening? In the terrorism case, I may have misunderstood but from what I read, the press won't even be able to report the verdict? There was an embargo on the judgment until the police operation was complete for obvious reasons. It was one of many contentious points that Bentley was happy to allow. We had huge arguments about the entrapment issue too. I always remember the barrister we had instructed was a chap called Pete Weatherby who is now a QC and involved in the new Hillsborough inquests. Utter genius. One of the most intelligent guys I've ever met. The fights between him and Bentley on that trial were legendary. Eventually all the verdicts were released and I'm sure the other trials weren't dealt with that way. Ours went to the appeal courts on the entrapment points as Bentley didn't care and allowed the evidence. Verdicts are embargoed often by the way. The press can be told what they can and can't report particularly in civil proceedings. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 5, 2014 Share Posted June 5, 2014 I agree that this could well be the start of a very slippery slope. I also have an issue with Family courts, which to the best of my knowledge are still largely secret, and can impose draconian punishments for any breach. These are not dealing with terrorists but ordinary families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.