Appeal court rules against public naming of deceased child.

political analyst · 03-12-2020 2:48pm

Change is coming.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1203/1182101-mcentee-courts-children-act/

stockshares · 06-12-2020 7:34pm

political analyst wrote: »

Change is coming.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1203/1182101-mcentee-courts-children-act/

I hope so but I would be skeptical of anything she says.

The amount of decisions that are made in the courts that don't benefit children at all would make you wonder about the Judges that made them.

Spanish Eyes · 06-12-2020 7:36pm

I think it will be changed.

To not change it would be a kick in the face for many who have lost children in fairness. It is ridiculous as it stands and everyone knows it.

political analyst · 09-12-2020 6:04pm

stockshares wrote: »

I hope so but I would be skeptical of anything she says.

The amount of decisions that are made in the courts that don't benefit children at all would make you wonder about the Judges that made them.

Why? She seems sincere.

political analyst · 09-12-2020 6:50pm

https://www.newstalk.com/news/laws-allowing-child-killers-to-be-named-will-be-tabled-as-soon-as-possible-mcentee-1116612

She said she expects to bring forward the new legislation by January at the latest.

“I would like to bring the heads of bills or proposal to Government in the next few weeks,” she said.

“It might not be possible as we have only two weeks left in the Dáil but if it is not before Christmas, it will certainly be in January.”

Nokia6230i · 13-12-2020 2:51pm

Another case; I don't think the person charged here (there was another charged with impeding investigation subsequently to killing also) would necessarily identify the suspect as a family member which is what I suspect a lot of Section 252 mis/interpretation was/is about but the killing is notorious & I guess locally if the mans name was given out the kid could be identified that way.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1213/1184141-man-charged-teen-death/

No matter what we think of the kids actions he is just that in eyes of law at 17, a child, a juvenile, a minor.

political analyst · 13-12-2020 5:34pm

Nokia6230i wrote: »

Another case; I don't think the person charged here (there was another charged with impeding investigation subsequently to killing also) would necessarily identify the suspect as a family member which is what I suspect a lot of Section 252 mis/interpretation was/is about but the killing is notorious & I guess locally if the mans name was given out the kid could be identified that way.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1213/1184141-man-charged-teen-death/

No matter what we think of the kids actions he is just that in eyes of law at 17, a child, a juvenile, a minor.

After you posted that link the article was updated to state the defendant's name. Obviously, he's not related to the deceased.

political analyst · 13-12-2020 6:37pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

Never mind the constitution, there's a plain common-sense requirement that legislators should consider legislation carefully before they enact it.

We're in the position we're in because the existing legislation wasn't fully thought through when it was enacted. And you want to solve that by passing new legislation with even less consideration than the existing legislation got. What could possibly go wrong?

Brenda Power wrote in The Sunday Times last week that the change in the law only requires the addition of one sentence. Why is it taking weeks or months to do that?

AndrewJRenko · 13-12-2020 9:07pm

political analyst wrote: »

Brenda Power wrote in The Sunday Times last week that the change in the law only requires the addition of one sentence. Why is it taking weeks or months to do that?

Brenda Power the expert in drafting legislation? Or Brenda Power the Junior Counsel who doesn't claim any expertise in drafting legislation?

https://www.lawlibrary.ie/members/Brenda-Power/1113.aspx

political analyst · 13-12-2020 9:47pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Brenda Power the expert in drafting legislation? Or Brenda Power the Junior Counsel who doesn't claim any expertise in drafting legislation?

https://www.lawlibrary.ie/members/Brenda-Power/1113.aspx

It can't be much more difficult than a barrister's day-to-day work.

Credit Checker Moose · 13-12-2020 10:25pm

It is an expert job to draft legislation.

Victor · 14-12-2020 12:33am

political analyst wrote: »

It can't be much more difficult than a barrister's day-to-day work.

The thing is, many barristers focus on particular areas of work. Some only do tax law, company law, planning law, etc. That rules all of them out. There there is criminal law - a chunk of them focus on finding the loopholes to protect their clients. You are left with a list of those who prosecute very serious crimes and those that deal with child protection issue. That overlap might be quite small. Whoever you pick then has to review the entire law to make sure there is no conflict between existing law (criminal, civil rights, child protection, etc.) and the proposed law. It is not straightforward.

I did law as a subject in college, not a course. I review council bye-laws. Often if can take me only minutes to find an error. Some of the errors I find are profound. Would you condemn the memory of children to precipitous action?

L1011 · 14-12-2020 12:40am

Does she even practice anymore? Thought she'd gone fully for the op/ed and broadcasting work by now.

political analyst · 14-12-2020 4:21pm

Victor wrote: »

The thing is, many barristers focus on particular areas of work. Some only do tax law, company law, planning law, etc. That rules all of them out. There there is criminal law - a chunk of them focus on finding the loopholes to protect their clients. You are left with a list of those who prosecute very serious crimes and those that deal with child protection issue. That overlap might be quite small. Whoever you pick then has to review the entire law to make sure there is no conflict between existing law (criminal, civil rights, child protection, etc.) and the proposed law. It is not straightforward.

I did law as a subject in college, not a course. I review council bye-laws. Often if can take me only minutes to find an error. Some of the errors I find are profound. Would you condemn the memory of children to precipitous action?

But the memory of those children is obscured by the recent appeal court judgement. Those children's families want to be able to talk to the media with the children's names made known to the public. What else matters?!

Peregrinus · 15-12-2020 2:31am

political analyst wrote: »

Brenda Power wrote in The Sunday Times last week that the change in the law only requires the addition of one sentence. Why is it taking weeks or months to do that?

Did she by any chance say what the one sentence was?

If yes, what was it?

If not, why not?

Peregrinus · 15-12-2020 2:33am

political analyst wrote: »

But the memory of those children is obscured by the recent appeal court judgement. Those children's families want to be able to talk to the media with the children's names made known to the public. What else matters?!

Other children might matter. How does Brenda Power's one sentence affect the cases of other children in different circumstances?

Marcusm · 15-12-2020 1:37pm

I saw the Irish Times yesterday named the 17 year old deceased for the person from Drogheda charged at the Dundalk Courthouse. Surprised that got through based on this.

political analyst · 15-12-2020 3:26pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

Other children might matter. How does Brenda Power's one sentence affect the cases of other children in different circumstances?

What children might they be? The following was posted earlier on this thread.

Peregrinus wrote: »

But we need to think about what change should be made. It would be simple to say that the law doesn't apply to a child who has died, but that might be too crude. Suppose a child who is the victim of a crime has died, but the death is unrelated to the crime. Now the media can identify the child and write what they like; this might cause considerable distress to the child's family. Or, suppose that a child is a victim of murder or manslaughter in circumstances where they child was engaged in sex work, or committing a burglary, or joyriding, or whatever. Again, you can see considerable distress to the family resulting if there is no protection at all.

So maybe the change should be one in which court permission is still required, but where the child is deceased the court must consider the interests, not of the child, but of the child's family. But, of course, where the offender is a member of the child's family - which, in child death cases, will often be so - then it's not in the interests of the child's family to identify the child, since that will also identify the offender.

In short, there's a wide variety of possible situations here, and a short one-size-fits-all rule about naming deceased children is not likely to be satisfactory. It's easy to say that the present law is satisfactory; it's a bigger job to work out what a satisfactory law would say. What set of principles should be applied to protect the dignity of a deceased child, and the feelings of the surviving family?

If a child victim's death is unrelated to the crime, that's academic because a person's death is a matter of public record - not wanting others to know that one of your relatives has died sounds absurd.

As for a child victim being the victim of prostitution before death, public knowledge of that fact would not diminish the victim's innocence and thus would not be 'victim-blaming'.

It was secrecy that led to sexual abuse of children in institutions and in families taking place for years before intervention took place.

political analyst · 15-12-2020 10:10pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

Did she by any chance say what the one sentence was?

If yes, what was it?

If not, why not?

No. But it's obvious what she said should happen - change the law so that the names of child murder victims can be mentioned by the media, so that their relatives can make sure that the victims' names are known to the public. Furthermore, there is also the matter of child sexual abuse victims who have since reached adulthood and whose perpetrators have been convicted having the choice of whether to waive anonymity.

Nokia6230i · 23-12-2020 3:16am

Very interesting case; Mr. Gregory, a Paedophile, might've benefited but the judge here clearly disagreed regarding Section 252

"The subsequent Court of Appeal did indeed interpret section 252 at extending past the death or “ageing out” of child victims but Justice Hunt said the section still allowed the court to dispense with the reporting prohibition where the court “is satisfied that it is appropriate to do so in the interests of the child”."

He could've appealed; he had 28 Days to do so but didn't.

https://www.sundayworld.com/crime/courts/court-lifts-order-preventing-the-naming-of-wicklow-man-who-raped-his-step-sons-39892378.html?fbclid=IwAR2v0P_XybYxWxMH6_inDGCgiuEmKYybCEOkxtGJXJDZj79fJsGuscMugn0

If the kids, now adults in this, hadn't pursued it, and there is most certainly merit in him being named even if it does identify them (though they're not named in the article; I've no reason, as the reader, to want to know; it was more important for their request he be named to be acceded to & if the media elsewhere've kept their names out of it at national level fair play to them; it's a win-win for the survivors), he could've remained anonymous as so many child sexual abusers are.

Nokia6230i · 05-01-2021 1:08pm

Section 252 strikes again. The victim in the case here & the defendants couldn't be named; the guy got community service in lieu of 4 months in prison.

Claimed he didn't know it was an offence......of course not lad.........such b/s.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/courtandcrime/arid-40200939.html

Also in Irish Times Weekend on Saturday they did a list of upcoming events and one of them is an upcoming appeal by a defendant for the murder of a teenager; again we know which one/who it is due to its notoriety.....how long more will we be waiting for Section 252 to be rectified?

By Summer recess in July maybe?

Nokia6230i · 18-01-2021 10:09pm

Not a clue which one this is/was; the judge even directed the location of the crime be kept out of the media; "South of the Country" doesn't exactly narrow it down.

Would imagine the media have to retrospectively edit their pieces from when the boy was arrested as well as when the man was arrested.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0118/1190458-south-murder/

cml387 · 18-01-2021 10:35pm

Nokia6230i wrote: »

Not a clue which one this is/was; the judge even directed the location of the crime be kept out of the media; "South of the Country" doesn't exactly narrow it down.

Would imagine the media have to retrospectively edit their pieces from when the boy was arrested as well as when the man was arrested.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2021/0118/1190458-south-murder/

A quick Google search will give you the answer.

Nokia6230i · 21-01-2021 4:08am

Wonder how local & national media will deal retrospecitvely when (eventually.....) Section 252 is altered?

Will they re-run articles (with consent of victims/families of course)?

Another one where victim wished to waive her anonymity but Section 252 strikes again > https://www.longfordleader.ie/news/national/603573/man-jailed-for-repeatedly-raping-a-child-over-a-two-year-period.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Unusually he is to serve the sentence consecutively to a "15" year term he is already serving dating back, by my interpretation, to 2015 or 2017; would expect a CofA approach on grounds of severity/light at end of tunnel type plea & for it to be reduced and/or to be ordered to run concurrently.

Mysterypunter · 21-01-2021 4:39am

I would take issue with the law in this case as a lot of people who commit these type of violent crimes, do not accept their guilt, and move away to start a new life, putting other people at risk of falling victim to their tendencies, which in my opinion are not curable or treatable, although the bleeding hearts will always opt for light sentencing and treatment programmes. Psychopathic behaviour is not reverseable, and will always manifest itself in horrible ways, realistically, there are plenty of horrible and dangerous people in society who shouldn't be, because of the soft approach and under resourced prison system. The obvious thing to do is to put yourself in a hypothetical situation. A man, or could be a woman, kills a child, is not named or known, and receives a light sentence due to a grovelling defense team, who would deny Hitler killed millions, the perpetrator is released after 4 years, moves away, joins a dating site, and finds a lovely separated mother of one child. He is charming and fun, and gets on well with the child, which is a real bit of luck. After 3 months, it's all going well, and the woman introduces the man to family and friends gradually, one evening the woman asks him to mind, the child while she heads out for a couple of hours with the girls, I'll leave it there, but I'm sure you can fill in the rest, let's just say she let the fox in charge of the chickens. Many will argue that my mind has gone to fantasy land, but sadly psychopathic behaviour may be much worse than you or I can imagine. This is one of the many reasons for naming and knowing the identity of killers, especially child killers, but as usual, people will have conflicting views.

Peregrinus · 21-01-2021 4:42am

Mysterypunter wrote: »

I would take issue with the law in this case as a lot of people who commit these type of violent crimes, do not accept their guilt, and move away to start a new life, putting other people at risk of falling victim to their tendencies, which in my opinion are not curable or treatable, although the bleeding hearts will always opt for light sentencing and treatment programmes. Psychopathic behaviour is not reverseable, and will always manifest itself in horrible ways, realistically, there are plenty of horrible and dangerous people in society who shouldn't be, because of the soft approach and under resourced prison system. The obvious thing to do is to put yourself in a hypothetical situation. A man, or could be a woman, kills a child, is not named or known, and receives a light sentence due to a grovelling defense team, who would deny Hitler killed millions, the perpetrator is released after 4 years, moves away, joins a dating site, and finds a lovely separated mother of one child. He is charming and fun, and gets on well with the child, which is a real bit of luck. After 3 months, it's all going well, and the woman introduces the man to family and friends gradually, one evening the woman asks him to mind, the child while she heads out for a couple of hours with the girls, I'll leave it there, but I'm sure you can fill in the rest, let's just say she let the fox in charge of the chickens. Many will argue that my mind has gone to fantasy land, but sadly psychopathic behaviour may be much worse than you or I can imagine. This is one of the many reasons for naming and knowing the identity of killers, especially child killers, but as usual, people will have conflicting views.

You're in the wrong thread, MP. The discussion here is not about laws on the naming of perpetrators; it's about laws about the naming of victims.

Peregrinus · 21-01-2021 4:49am

Nokia6230i wrote: »

Wonder how local & national media will deal retrospecitvely when (eventually.....) Section 252 is altered?

Will they re-run articles (with consent of victims/families of course)?

I suspect it will depend on how sensational the particular crime was.

The main point of allowing victims to be names is to allow media coverage that focusses more on the victim, and tells us something about the, so that the public record of this appalling incident presents us with a fuller picture of the victim, who is not just a nameless child that was murdered.

But, the sad truth is, the public's horrified fascination is generally with the perpetrator more than the victim. We want to know who would do such a thing, what brought them to the point where they would do it, how is such depravity to be understood or accounted for, etc, etc. Rerunning the coverage of the crime, but with the addition of the name and possibly some other information about the victim, doesn't usually contribute more to our undertanding of the perpetrator.

Nokia6230i · 29-01-2021 3:34am

So, riddle me this then.

Why doesn't Section 252 kick in here? Because she waived her right to anonymity right?

If she hadn't, he couldn't've been named because since it was brother/half-sister by naming him it would've effectively named her right?

The judge here, while wary of Section 252, waived the anonymity clause (both were juveniles when it happened); no point in defendant appealing it was it's not quite something that can be reversed; the genie's out of the bottle now.

https://www.sundayworld.com/crime/courts/man-who-orally-raped-his-half-sister-when-he-was-teenager-given-one-year-sentence-40023202.html

Peregrinus · 29-01-2021 3:51am

There's no riddle.

Why doesn't section 252 kick in here? It does kick in. Because of s. 252(1), media reports may not name or identify the victim, or publish her picture, or give details likely to lead to her being identified, unless the court makes an order under s.252(2) allowing them to do so. The court can only make an order under s.252(2) " if it is satisfied that it is appropriate to do so in the interests of the child". If it does make such an order, s. 252(3) requires the court to "explain in open court why it is satisfied it should do so".

And that's exactly what happened. The victim, who was a child at the time but is now an adult, indicated that she wished to be named in reports. The prosecutor applied to court for an order allowing her to be named. The court made the order, and the judge made a statement of his reasoning. All this is described in the linked report.

The offender could appeal but, as you say, there would be no point now. He could have indicated at the time of the trial that he intended to appeal, and asked for a stay on the order allowing identification, pending the outcome of the appeal against it.

But on the facts reported it seems unlikely that the appeal would have met with much success. The fact that the offender would be prejudiced by the publication of his name or other identifying matieral is irrelevant; the only consideration the court is required to take into account is whether publication is in the interests of the child victim. So the appeal would have to have argued that it was not in the interests of the victim that the victim or the offender be named, and as the victim is now an adult and considers that it is in her interests, that would be hard argument to make.

Quantum Erasure · 29-01-2021 4:33am

political analyst wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1029/1174666-court-of-appeal-children/
Does this mean that, if the Court of Appeal had passed this judgement before Ana was murdered, her parents would have been unable to have her name or family photos of her published in the media?

I see that a man has been arrested over the stabbing of Josh Dunne, and Josh is named in all the reports. If this man is charged, will papers be unable to name the victim at that stage?

Appeal court rules against public naming of deceased child.

Comments