Rape trial collapses after allegedly prejudicial newspaper article

27/11/2018


A rape trial has collapsed as a result of an allegedly prejudicial article which appeared in a national newspaper, which linked the case in question to the wider debate about the fairness of rape trials.

Counsel for the defendant in the case told the Central Criminal Court that a comment piece that appeared in a major national newspaper on Saturday had implicitly suggested that the defendant is guilty and said that “the complainant is, in fact, a victim.”

Counsel said the article had appeared to suggest that society has had enough of incorrect or wrongful acquittals of persons in rape trails and that the piece amounted to an exhortation to the jury to convict the accused.

She went on to say that her client had felt he had received a fair trial up until the publication of the article but now could no longer be confident that the jury could assess the evidence objectively. She submitted an application to discharge the jury.

The trial had been ongoing in the Central Criminal Court for six days and was into its closing stages, with the jury having been sent out for deliberations on Friday. The man on trial was accused of raping a woman he met on a night out in 2015.

Counsel on behalf on the DPP opposed the application, arguing that the court could remedy the situation by instructing the jury of eight women and four men to put any media comment out of their minds while deliberating.

The judge agreed to the application to discharge the jury. He said that while people are entitled to have an opinion on these matters, it was unacceptable to compare on ongoing trial with other cases with a degree of notoriety.

He said the article had come close to scandalising the court and had caused a situation to arise in which the difficulties presented to the complainant would have to be revisited and the defendant would have to await a retrial.

He added that there was an implicit criticism of defending an accused, but this was fundamental to the right to a fair trial and said that the suggestion that the trial had been run improperly was simply wrong.

Contact us for more information


Share this article