My image appeared in paper without consent

qvsr46ofgc792k

My image was printed in several newspapers over the last few days as I was a witness in a court case. I'm not happy with that for several reasons and it also feels like such an invasion of privacy especially as I was under no legal obligation to be at court. Are the newspapers legally entitled to do this?

Giveaway

I wonder is their a mechanism for you to talk to the judge. I suspect they are allowed a court is a public spectacle with exceptions for certain offences and family law

I'm pretty sure they can. Have they said anything about you that could be considered defamatory?

yosser hughes

Have the newspapers actually named you along with the image?

qvsr46ofgc792k

yosser hughes wrote: »

Have the newspapers actually named you along with the image?

Yes they named me.

qvsr46ofgc792k

Willow Incalculable Transistor wrote: »

I'm pretty sure they can. Have they said anything about you that could be considered defamatory?

No not exactly.

qvsr46ofgc792k

Giveaway wrote: »

I wonder is their a mechanism for you to talk to the judge. I suspect they are allowed a court is a public spectacle with exceptions for certain offences and family law

It doesn't exactly give comfort to a witness though does it. I probably would not have done it had I known, my image and name would have been plastered all over the papers.

STB.

Kaylani Purring Menu wrote: »

It doesn't exactly give comfort to a witness though does it. I probably would not have done it had I known, my image and name would have been plastered all over the papers.

Was this a high profile case, perhaps in another jurisdiction ?

jimmynokia

Did they ask you for the images. If not you can ask them. The MSM have a nasty habit of doing this and I've encountered similar issues myself and they basically told me to fcuk off until I threatened legal action.

qvsr46ofgc792k

STB. wrote: »

Kaylani Purring Menu wrote: »

It doesn't exactly give comfort to a witness though does it. I probably would not have done it had I known, my image and name would have been plastered all over the papers.

Was this a high profile case, perhaps in another jurisdiction ?

No not high profile at all.

punisher5112

Any time I go to court I keep head down and extremely difficult for a photo shoot of the face.

I think it fair game for criminals but I don't believe witnesses should be published in any way.

I would be speaking to the court about it.

Discodog

I would be tempted to publicise this - Liveline springs to mind. It's hard enough to get witnesses to testify without this.

Victor

Kaylani Purring Menu wrote: »

My image was printed in several newspapers over the last few days as I was a witness in a court case. I'm not happy with that for several reasons and it also feels like such an invasion of privacy especially as I was under no legal obligation to be at court. Are the newspapers legally entitled to do this?

Were these photos taken by the newspapers or by you / your social circle?

Were they taken in a public place?

FunLover18

Not a legal expert but surely court cases are a matter of public record and as such your name would be available in all relevant documents and records anyway. There are only certain types of cases where names either of the accused or victim are withheld and I'm presuming that because it wasn't a high profile case, the court would have been open to the public as well. As you said, you weren't under any obligation to be a witness, you chose to be and unfortunately it appears to be a newsworthy case. It's a shame that that the legal team didn't warn you this might happen.

Again, not a legal expert and open to correction on all of the above.

STB.

Up to the publisher to make the call. They normally would publish it if it was of interest to the story. I presume the photo was taken after the case was decided!

https://www.digitalrights.ie/photographers-rights/

rivegauche

I suffered this as well. It was not a particularly flattering picture either which made me look 20 years older than I am.
I was a Witness, not the Defendant and the court report while sexed up to make a trivial enough incident seem interesting didn't show me in a bad light I was still not happy to have my picture in the paper.

I saw the photographer taking my photograph and approached him and told him that I really would prefer if he didn't take my picture. I was not aggressive and we had a polite conversation but he obviously had to fill column inches.
He wasn't really in Court for the case where I was witness. He was in Court for another more interesting case but while I was waiting in the foyer(???) of the Court I saw a Barrister come out and phone her client the Defendant to warn them that there was a photographer around. That phone call which I overheard didn't discuss any other topic, just "watch out for the Photographer". I told the photographer this which didn't seem to surprise him. As they got no pictures of proper criminals they had to carry something else...
Some Legal Professionals seem to go the extra mile for their drug dealing Clients. I suppose that is how you get the repeat business.

Charles Ingles

High profile murdey case, I know exactly the case you are talking about, a lot of evidence was pertaining to you this week even though you had no Involvement with case, papers shouldn't have Printed your picture morbid curiously by reporter

coylemj

If you're a witness in a trial (with a jury), your name and address will be supplied to the accused in the book of evidence. I'm not sure that you have any grounds for complaining if a newspaper publishes your photo, unless there are reporting restrictions on the case.

Plenty of people are shown on TV and in the papers going into and coming out of court, some of them are witnesses, others are the accused. The only time I can recall a judge pulling up the media was during the Catherine Nevin trial when some of them were slapped over the wrists for the details they published about the clothes she wore each day during the trial.

Sleeper12

punisher5112 wrote:

I think it fair game for criminals but I don't believe witnesses should be published in any way.

Would I have seen photos of witnesses in failed or bogus compensation claim cases?

MyKeyG

I'm not sure but unless a Judge orders a hearing to be held in camera it's considered a public venue therefore there's no expectation of privacy therefore no invasion of privacy. Even if you did pursue it in civil court a judge might decide you should have been aware that the media would be present.

I know it's too late now but you could contact them and request that they don't use the photos again. It's no skin off their nose whose picture they use. I was actually up in circuit court a few years ago and I asked the local paper if they made sure my name didn't appear in their 'who was up in court' section and it turns out they were going to but had plenty of other stories so they agreed.

evolving_doors

Is the 'journalist/photographer shakedown' an urban myth or does it actually go on?
I've heard 2nd hands stories.

c6ysaphjvqw41k

This post has been deleted.

AndrewJRenko

Juliana Mango Tangent wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There is an exemption to GDPR requirements for 'journalistic purposes' and for 'academic, artistic or literary expression'.
https://gdpr-info.eu/art-85-gdpr/

evolving_doors wrote: »

Is the 'journalist/photographer shakedown' an urban myth or does it actually go on?
I've heard 2nd hands stories.

What's this - being asked to pay a bribe to NOT have your article or photo printed?

c6ysaphjvqw41k

This post has been deleted.

angel eyes 2012

Juliana Mango Tangent wrote: »

Thanks! Didn't know about that part.

Also Section 159(7) of the Data Protection Act 2018, which provides a legislative basis to bona fide journalists for the "fair and accurate reporting of the proceedings".

Although the GDPR is directly applicable as a law in all Member States, it allows for certain issues to be given further effect in national law.

Under His Eye

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's this - being asked to pay a bribe to NOT have your article or photo printed?

I have heard of it many times.

Conor84

rivegauche wrote: »

I suffered this as well. It was not a particularly flattering picture either which made me look 20 years older than I am.
I was a Witness, not the Defendant and the court report while sexed up to make a trivial enough incident seem interesting didn't show me in a bad light I was still not happy to have my picture in the paper.

I saw the photographer taking my photograph and approached him and told him that I really would prefer if he didn't take my picture. I was not aggressive and we had a polite conversation but he obviously had to fill column inches.
He wasn't really in Court for the case where I was witness. He was in Court for another more interesting case but while I was waiting in the foyer(???) of the Court I saw a Barrister come out and phone her client the Defendant to warn them that there was a photographer around. That phone call which I overheard didn't discuss any other topic, just "watch out for the Photographer". I told the photographer this which didn't seem to surprise him. As they got no pictures of proper criminals they had to carry something else...
Some Legal Professionals seem to go the extra mile for their drug dealing Clients. I suppose that is how you get the repeat business.

Ended up with mu picture in the paper after a minor case in the District Court. I had pleaded guilty but hadnt told my family I was up im court. A few days later my picture was in the Courts page in the Evening Herald. Embarrasing and I never realised how many people still read the paper. I think it was only in because the judge made a funny comment about mt case.

Just wondering how the photographers would know who I was coming out of court. I left pretty much straigh after my case and there were loads of other cases going on. Never expected to make the papers and it was a horrible picture.

punisher5112

Conor84 wrote: »

Ended up with mu picture in the paper after a minor case in the District Court. I had pleaded guilty but hadnt told my family I was up im court. A few days later my picture was in the Courts page in the Evening Herald. Embarrasing and I never realised how many people still read the paper. I think it was only in because the judge made a funny comment about mt case.

Just wondering how the photographers would know who I was coming out of court. I left pretty much straigh after my case and there were loads of other cases going on. Never expected to make the papers and it was a horrible picture.

They have spotters inside who then let the ones outside know.

Sometimes you will see them just take shots of everyone they can.

Victor

punisher5112 wrote: »

They have spotters inside who then let the ones outside know.

Sometimes you will see them just take shots of everyone they can.

Take photos going in. Compare to parties.

Mrs OBumble

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's this - being asked to pay a bribe to NOT have your article or photo printed?

A very normal part of some public-relations practises.

1874

coylemj wrote: »

If you're a witness in a trial (with a jury), your name and address will be supplied to the accused in the book of evidence. I'm not sure that you have any grounds for complaining if a newspaper publishes your photo, unless there are reporting restrictions on the case.

Plenty of people are shown on TV and in the papers going into and coming out of court, some of them are witnesses, others are the accused. The only time I can recall a judge pulling up the media was during the Catherine Nevin trial when some of them were slapped over the wrists for the details they published about the clothes she wore each day during the trial.

That would put me right off witnessing anything, so someone guilty of how serious a crime will have name and address details or their legal team? all the same what might a legal team do to get their client off, leave your name and address laying around possibly?
Think Id easily forget what I saw

Mrs OBumble

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's this - being asked to pay a bribe to NOT have your article or photo printed?

A very normal part of some public-relations practises.

Mr. Incognito

Go see a solicitor to see if its defamatory

You can made a complaint to the Press Council

http://www.presscouncil.ie/

GarIT

I was on the Luas a few weeks ago and there was a guy bragging to another about how he got away with being a getaway driver and a stabbing but apparently got done for arson and has currently not gone back after getting out on bail. He then went on to mention where they had been looking for him and where he was hiding. I had everything needed to find this guy and put him away for years. I took a note of the Luas number, which carriage it was, the exact time, where he got off, a description and which camera should be able to see him. I was delighted to be able to assist with getting a dangerous criminal off the streets, until I got home and my family pleaded with me and convinced me not to tell anyone. All I can say now is thank god I didn't tell the Gardaí what I knew.

AndrewJRenko

GarIT wrote: »

I was on the Luas a few weeks ago and there was a guy bragging to another about how he got away with being a getaway driver and a stabbing but apparently got done for arson and has currently not gone back after getting out on bail. He then went on to mention where they had been looking for him and where he was hiding. I had everything needed to find this guy and put him away for years. I took a note of the Luas number, which carriage it was, the exact time, where he got off, a description and which camera should be able to see him. I was delighted to be able to assist with getting a dangerous criminal off the streets, until I got home and my family pleaded with me and convinced me not to tell anyone. All I can say now is thank god I didn't tell the Gardaí what I knew.

You almost certainly wouldn't have been a witness. Once you provided the information to find the guy, they'd have been arresting/prosecuting him on the original charges. You have no information about those charges, so you wouldn't be a witness.


If you still have the information, call one of the confidential Garda lines, you can hide your caller ID if you like - but let them find the guy.

Under His Eye

you can hide your caller ID if you like

That don't work with numbers belonging to the law.

GarIT

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You almost certainly wouldn't have been a witness. Once you provided the information to find the guy, they'd have been arresting/prosecuting him on the original charges. You have no information about those charges, so you wouldn't be a witness.


If you still have the information, call one of the confidential Garda lines, you can hide your caller ID if you like - but let them find the guy.

Well I heard all the details about the questions the Gardaí were asking him, what he told them and what the real answers were, they seemed to drop the charges for the stabbing the driving the getaway car. I might have been able to be a witness saying I heard him talking about exactly how he did it and I could have answered a few questions that would have helped the Gardaí gave more evidence. I got rid of all the info and I've no intention of pursuing it now.

jimmycrackcorm

Ring the confidential no 1800 666 111.
It's confidential for a reason

jimmycrackcorm

Ring the confidential no 1800 666 111.
It's confidential for a reason

uck51js9zml2yt

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Ring the confidential no 1800 666 111.
It's confidential for a reason

I rang traffic watch recently. Made a confidential complaint. Didn't give my contact details and 20 minutes later got a call from the local station looking for an update in the trucks location.

Victor

Nash Raspy Nail wrote: »

I rang traffic watch recently. Made a confidential complaint. Didn't give my contact details and 20 minutes later got a call from the local station looking for an update in the trucks location.

You phoned the Garda, they only shared the number among themselves.

AndrewJRenko

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

A very normal part of some public-relations practises.

It's certainly not normal. It may be frequent or common or typical - I've no experience or information on that.


But it's certainly not common. If it is happening regularly, it exposes journalists as completely unethical.


If it is happening regularly, isn't it a bit strange that no-one is attacking the leading lights of journalism about the time they took that bribe?

Victor

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

took that bribe

Sold the rights to a photograph.

Duffryman

GarIT wrote: »

Well I heard all the details about the questions the Gardaí were asking him, what he told them and what the real answers were, they seemed to drop the charges for the stabbing the driving the getaway car. I might have been able to be a witness saying I heard him talking about exactly how he did it and I could have answered a few questions that would have helped the Gardaí gave more evidence. I got rid of all the info and I've no intention of pursuing it now.

With respect, that wouldn't be credible evidence, and it certainly wouldn't be strong enough to have you called to court as a witness. Legally, it would be no more than hearsay, which is simply not allowed.

Assetbacked

GarIT wrote: »

I was on the Luas a few weeks ago and there was a guy bragging to another about how he got away with being a getaway driver and a stabbing but apparently got done for arson and has currently not gone back after getting out on bail. He then went on to mention where they had been looking for him and where he was hiding. I had everything needed to find this guy and put him away for years. I took a note of the Luas number, which carriage it was, the exact time, where he got off, a description and which camera should be able to see him. I was delighted to be able to assist with getting a dangerous criminal off the streets, until I got home and my family pleaded with me and convinced me not to tell anyone. All I can say now is thank god I didn't tell the Gardaí what I knew.

Red line?

You could still report it to the Gardai anonymously.

AndrewJRenko

Victor wrote: »

Sold the rights to a photograph.

And the journo 'sold the rights' to their article too, right?

Effects

GarIT wrote: »

I was delighted to be able to assist with getting a dangerous criminal off the streets.

Do you honestly think the Gardaí would have the time to track this sort of nonsense down, even if they wanted to?

Marcusm

GarIT wrote: »

I was on the Luas a few weeks ago and there was a guy bragging to another about how he got away with being a getaway driver and a stabbing but apparently got done for arson and has currently not gone back after getting out on bail. He then went on to mention where they had been looking for him and where he was hiding. I had everything needed to find this guy and put him away for years. I took a note of the Luas number, which carriage it was, the exact time, where he got off, a description and which camera should be able to see him. I was delighted to be able to assist with getting a dangerous criminal off the streets, until I got home and my family pleaded with me and convinced me not to tell anyone. All I can say now is thank god I didn't tell the Gardaí what I knew.

You could simply have provided the details of his whereabouts anonymously. Your overhearing his statement is not valuable evidence although his whereabouts might be.

by8auj6csd3ioq

OP how did you get on? Did you complain to the papers? As far as I know your being in a news story and in a public place menas you can be photographed bt ifit was inferred you were in any way involved it may be defamation. i do not know the story and did not see the pictures as far as i know

by8auj6csd3ioq

OP how did you get on? Did you complain to the papers? As far as I know your being in a news story and in a public place menas you can be photographed bt ifit was inferred you were in any way involved it may be defamation. i do not know the story and did not see the pictures as far as i know

Victor

Duffryman wrote: »

With respect, that wouldn't be credible evidence, and it certainly wouldn't be strong enough to have you called to court as a witness. Legally, it would be no more than hearsay, which is simply not allowed.

However, it may be very useful intelligence.