'Judge makes order to restrict media reporting of Ana Kriegel trial'

TallGlass · 03-05-2019 04:13PM #1

What do people think of this, anyone else not think it's not right that the general public cannot be kept informed of this trail or any trail for that matter?

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/ana-kriegel-murder-trial-judge-restricts-any-further-reporting-of-evidence-until-after-verdict-38076210.html

Regards this case, I haven't seen anything from what I have read about the trail to make me think it needed a blanket ban?

Most papers where reporting the facts of the trail and quoting what was said in court.

Is there a court reporting thing online, if the judge is so concerned about keep to the 'facts' of the case, as unfortunately someone has to pay the bills to keep the lights on in the courts.

03-05-2019 04:18PM

TallGlass wrote: »

What do people think of this, anyone else not think it's not right that the general public cannot be kept informed of this trail or any trail for that matter?

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/ana-kriegel-murder-trial-judge-restricts-any-further-reporting-of-evidence-until-after-verdict-38076210.html

Regards this case, I haven't seen anything from what I have read about the trail to make me think it needed a blanket ban?

Most papers where reporting the facts of the trail and quoting what was said in court.

Is there a court reporting thing online, if the judge is so concerned about keep to the 'facts' of the case, as unfortunately someone has to pay the bills to keep the lights on in the courts.

It's probably wise to keep the media out of it while it's going on so as to not jeopardize the trial.

Newstalk reported earlier that the boys are pleading not guilty to murder and not guilty to violent sexual assault.

03-05-2019 04:20PM

its a funny thing to decide now as opposed to a few days ago, really

im against restrictions like this as a rule

going a step further the boys names and addresses should also be available and also free pitchforks

TallGlass · 03-05-2019 04:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It's probably wise to keep the media out of it while it's going on so as to not jeopardize the trial.

Newstalk reported earlier that the boys are pleading not guilty to murder and not guilty to violent sexual assault.

I agree with your point, I just didn't see anything the media where reporting as coming up with there own insight, they stated facts and statements from the court case, just reporting. I guess if it's needed then that's fine with me. I just however think, they should have there own website or similar where you can follow without it been bias.

Should the judge be trusting the jury to do these things anyway? They take a sworn oath at the start. Sound to me like he is reading to much about it in the papers!

Edgware · 03-05-2019 04:23PM

I can see a trip to the High Court by lawyers for the media outlets. This is a dangerous precedent.

zoobizoo · 03-05-2019 04:24PM

Why would you want to know the day to day happenings of a murder court case other than to keep yourself entertained?

I wish they'd done it with the Quirke case - 1 man murdered and 7 weeks or so of daily news coverage about it.

The Irish Indo has turned the trial into entertainment - the ad on the radio the other day promoting the reporting was distasteful.

punisher5112 · 03-05-2019 04:24PM

Why are their rights much better protected then the girl that was violently murdered.

I mean this with any crime as such and no matter the age why are these criminals so well protected and pandered to .....

I'm very surprised so many actually make it to trial and so on.

Tell me how · 03-05-2019 04:25PM

Deleted User wrote: »

its a funny thing to decide now as opposed to a few days ago, really

im against restrictions like this as a rule

going a step further the boys names and addresses should also be available and also free pitchforks

This sentiment is probably why the judge has made this decision.

Rightly so in this case in my opinion.

TallGlass · 03-05-2019 04:26PM

Also, is it not a bit unfair that one person gets reported on in the media and the next person doesn't? Is it because they are young teenagers or something.

ted1 · 03-05-2019 04:27PM

punisher5112 wrote: »

Why are their rights much better protected then the girl that was violently murdered.

I mean this with any crime as such and no matter the age why are these criminals so well protected and pandered to .....

I'm very surprised so many actually make it to trial and so on.

Because they are innocent till proven guilty

Skylinehead · 03-05-2019 04:28PM

TallGlass wrote: »

What do people think of this, anyone else not think it's not right that the general public cannot be kept informed of this trail or any trail for that matter?

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/ana-kriegel-murder-trial-judge-restricts-any-further-reporting-of-evidence-until-after-verdict-38076210.html

Regards this case, I haven't seen anything from what I have read about the trail to make me think it needed a blanket ban?

Most papers where reporting the facts of the trail and quoting what was said in court.

Is there a court reporting thing online, if the judge is so concerned about keep to the 'facts' of the case, as unfortunately someone has to pay the bills to keep the lights on in the courts.

Both before and after the judges decision, we can't discuss the case on boards, so I'm closing this.

'Judge makes order to restrict media reporting of Ana Kriegel trial'

Comments