1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Leeds trial blackout?

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by SqueamishOssifrage, May 26, 2018.

  1. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    Every evening I spend around an hour with a pre-dinner G&T reading world news from several web sources. For the UK this is principally the BBC. This morning, I was asked if I knew about a 'new grooming trial' in Leeds - to which I answered no.

    After a search I came up with the following article, but found no reference from what I consider to be main-stream media sites:


    I wonder if someone can tell me if this is fake news, or if for some reason it is being supressed by either the authorities or the press. I would have thought that yet another grooming type of trial of 29 people would generate more of a news footprint than it has.
  2. AndyTake2

    AndyTake2 Well-Known Member

  3. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    I do not know anything about this particular trial but I have noticed that there is a strong trend toward secret trials. Personally I don't like it and it seems a very retrograde step back toward the days of the "Court of the Star Chamber"
    David Loxley likes this.
  4. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    On inspection, that is the same trial as in my link. The thing I was looking for I was told happened yesterday. The person who brought it up knows I am very anti extreme right and very pro freedom of speech, and he asked me how I felt about Tommy Robinson (ex EDL) being arrested outside the trial when acting as a journalist - yesterday. He provided a link to a page on Breibart which I saw first off, but now no longer exists.

    OK - just found an item at the Independent - it seems the original Breitbart article was in error. where it made it sound as if the trial that had started was a new trial of 29 people. It now appears that it is a trial of part of the crew who were indicted last year in the BBC article.


    OK - panic over - but still strangely little from other news sources.
  5. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    I know of one charge/trial at the moment involving a Labour Party MP (not sexual). There is nothing whatsoever on the interweb about the person (trial related) it is common knowledge in a certain force and it gets discussed. I have no idea why it is being kept secret and knowing what it is in relation to I find it hard to imagine why it is.

    I don’t think I’m on dodgy ground here by mentioning this but appreciate it if a mod wants to delete this.
  6. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    Are these trials secret, or just not being reported as much as say, Brexit, or what the bride wore?

    TheFatControlleR likes this.
  7. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    The one I mentioned is not mentioned anywhere that I can find. Google the persons name and nothing about that person appears (offence related) not even the persons initial arrest. I know it is fact (as best I can know, as I wasn't actually there) as I was talking to the squad that dealt with the person.
  8. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    Maybe a judge has decided that certain things should not be reported.
    recently I remember a local trial where it was announced that a number of people had been found guilty of offences but others involved in that crime and other crimes were also sentenced but it wasn't allowed to be reported until the conclusion of the later trial.
  9. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    Absolutely. That happens a lot. That is so a jury isn't influenced by associated party's guilt. Similarly it used to cause us difficulties if we were providing armed security for some trials. The jury were not supposed to be aware that we were in and around the courts for their trial as that would give the impression that the defendants were guilty and or dangerous. It was a nightmare behind the scenes making sure we were not seen or heard by juries. At times we were that close we could hear them. If they saw us, the trial would have to be restarted with a new jury. I have no doubt though that many of them would have been aware that we were there. All it would take would be a friend etc to go and watch proceedings in court and they would pass armed officers at the entrance to their actual court room.
    SqueamishOssifrage likes this.
  10. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    That raises the whole question of how a jury can decide correctly if information is kept from them.
  11. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    Maybe so, but I can also understand why.
  12. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    Presumption of innocence and good character
    Bit like Jeffrey Arrcher
  13. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    Thanks for that - all is now clear. I understand that yesterday's trial was of a subset of the original 29 indicted last year, and there is a total of three separate trials. Clearly reporting restrictions would be in place.
  14. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    In general and without refference to any particular trial:-
    An accused should be tried only using evidence that relates directly to the offence and is given in court. A jury should not be influenced by offences committed by the accused friends and associates, or even by previous offences of the accused himself.
    Trials are hardly secret if the public are allowed into the court.
    Reporting restrictions imposed during a series of linked trials are usually lifted at the end of the series.
  15. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    He did have the advantage of a fragrant wife. ;)
  16. Malcolm_Stewart

    Malcolm_Stewart Well-Known Member

    I'm not sure what you meant by that comment, but whenever I smell heavy perfume, I assume the wearer (normally female) has something serious to hide.
    RogerMac and spinno like this.
  17. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    The somewhat fatuous comment of Mr Justice Caulfield during the 1987 libel trial between the Daily Star and Jeffrey Archer which led the latter into prison when his duplicity was revealed in 2001.
  18. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    No, Tommy Robinson was arrested and jailed for contempt of court. He was previously given a suspended sentence in which the judge specifically instructed him not to behave as he did during the Leeds trial. The far right are making it about "free speech" but what it's actually about is Robinson just being a stupid fascist.
  19. Malcolm_Stewart

    Malcolm_Stewart Well-Known Member

    It seems that the media have now managed to get some lifting of a reporting blackout.
  20. AGW

    AGW Well-Known Member

    And that all is actually well with the criminal justice system.... an all round unpleasant fellow, maybe he will be converted to Islam while he is in the jail?


Share This Page