Quickest Way To Get A Gift To My...
ChatterBank2 mins ago
No best answer has yet been selected by royfromaus. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.https:/
Prior to 1981, the term [sub judice] was correctly used in English law to describe material which would prejudice court proceedings by publication. Sub judice is now irrelevant to journalists because of the introduction of the Contempt of Court Act 1981. Under Section 2 of the Act, a substantial risk of serious prejudice can only be created by a media report when proceedings are active. Proceedings become active when there is an arrest, oral charge, issue of a warrant, or a summons.
all this is a bit knickers-y
can raving mod read THIS please
consider her actions - not EVERY comment need be contempt of court.
The matter is also now sub judice, meaning that posts speculating about the possible guilt or innocence of the arrested person,
no it is not - sub judice when he is charged.
oh lardy dah!
oh and has anyone noticed? Yorks police wdnt be asking if it were certain to be contempt of court
now my dears has it ever happened that a case here was abandoned froo adverse publicity?
well yes - magistrate Bartells threw out the case of perjury and perverting the course of justice against the policemen who had framed the Irish non-bombers - far too long after the event |( 18 y) and no one cd be certain of damn all
hooray for British justice !
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.