Should Ireland prohibit the contemporaneous media reporting of juvenile trials?

• Author: Peo Mosepele
• Position: Currently a Legal Researcher in the Office of the Attorney General
• Pages: 71-99

IRISH JUDICIAL STUDIES JOURNAL

71

[2021] Irish Judicial Studies Journal Vol 5(1)

71

SHOULD IRELAND PROHIBIT THE

CONTEMPORANEOUS MEDIA REPORTING OF

JUVENILE TRIALS?

Abstract: Whenev er serious crimes such as murder, manslaughter or rape are allegedly committed by children,

they are heavil y reported by the media. This occurred duri ng the murde r trial of Ana K riégel, and may be

observ ed again if children are ever tried in the Central Criminal Court. But what does the Ana Kriégel case

tell us about the wa y juvenile trials are reported in Ireland? Do recent legislative and judicial developments

threaten childrens’ right to anonymity during trials? Can contemporane ous media reporting of juvenile trials

infringe upon the right to a fair trial? Are there any legal impediments towards the prohibition of

contempora neous media reporting of juvenile trials? This paper seeks to answer these questions.

Author: Peo Mosepele is currently a Legal Researcher in the Office of the Attorney General.*

Introduction

On 14th May 2018, a 14-year-old girl by the name of Ana Kriégel went missing in Lucan, Co.

Dublin.

1

Following an extensive search by the local authorities, the girl’s body was found on

17th May 2018 in an abandoned derelict house in the local area. On 24th May 2018, two boys

who were aged 13 at the time of the murder were arrested on suspicion of the girl’s murder.

The two boys were given the pseudonyms ‘ Boy A’ and ‘Boy B’ by the media reporting the

case in order to protect their identities as they were juveniles. The trial of both boys, which

was lauded for ‘how swiftly it took place’ ,

2

began on April 2019. It was one of the highest

profile murder trials in the nation. Delahunt argues that this can be attributed to both the

young age of the defendants and the circumstances of the case.

3

The trial was extensively

reported by the press from its beginning to its conclusion. In the middle of the trial, a ban

on contemporaneous media reporting was imposed by McDermott J, the presiding judge.

4

When imposing the ban, McDermott J expressed a concern that the jury may be influenced

by media publications.

5

The ban was implemented following the publication of a front page

headline by a newspaper stating, ‘CCTV shows Ana being led to her death’; the judge feared

such reports would ‘incite public outrage against the accused’.

6

However, for reasons

unstated by the judge, the ban was overturned on the same day it was imposed for all

newspapers apart from the newspaper that had published the scathing headline.

7

On 18th

* The author wou ld like to thank Dr. J ohn Danaher for not only his insightfu l feedback on earlier drafts of this

paper, but also for his advice and support throu ghout the peer review process.

1

Conor Gallagher, ‘Ana Kriégel m urder trial: The complete story’ Th e Irish Times ( Dublin, 18 June 2019).

2

Miriam Delahun t, ‘The trial of children in the Central Criminal Cou rt’ (2020) 25(1) Th e Bar Review 19-22.

3

ibid.

4

Miriam Delahun t (n 2) 22.

5

ibid.

6

ibid.

7

Natasha Reid, ‘Latest: Ju dge lifts order bannin g reporting in Ana Kriégel m urder trial for all but one publish er’

Irish Examiner (Dublin, 3 May 2019).

IRISH JUDICIAL STUDIES JOURNAL

72

[2021] Irish Judicial Studies Journal Vol 5(1)

72

June 2018, both boys were convicted for the murder of Ana Kriégel, with Boy A facing an

additional sentence for aggravated sexual assault.

8

Should the Court have removed the ban? More importantly, should Ireland prohibit

contemporaneous media reporting of juvenile trials? This is important to consider because

whenever serious crimes such as murder, manslaughter or rape are allegedly committed by

children, they catch the attention of the nation. They are heavily reported by the media who

are eager to get into the courtroom if the cases go to trial.

9

This occurred in the murder trial

of Ana Kriégel,

10

and may be observed again if children are ever tried in the Central Criminal

Court. However, what does the Ana Kriégel murder case tell us about the way in which

juvenile trials are reported in Ireland? Can contemporaneous media reporting of juvenile

trials infringe upon the right to a fair trial? Lastly, are there any legal impediments towards

the prohibition of contemporaneous media reporting of juvenile trials? This paper seeks to

answer these questions. The Ana Kriégel case is utilised as an illustrative example to re-

consider conceptual notions, rationales and legal grounds for contemporaneous media

reporting of juvenile trials in Ireland. The ability of the media to be present in the courtroom

during child trials derives from section 257 of the Children Act 2001 (Children Act) which

provides that:

Where in any proceedings for an offence a person who, in the opinion of the

court, is a child is called as a witness, the court may exclude from the court

during the taking of his or her evidence all persons except officers of the

court, persons directly concerned in the proceedings, bona fide representa tives of

the P ress and such other persons (if any) as the court may in its discretion

permit to remain.

11

This section prevents the judge from barring bona fide members of the media from the

courtroom if a child is a witness in proceedings. It also specifically refers to ‘child witnesses’

as opposed to ‘child defendants’ , so it is uncertain whether section 257 extends to child

defendants. This paper is concerned wi th the latter case only, specifically with proceedings

involving child defendants for indictable offences tried in the Central Criminal Court.

12

If

the provision applies to proceedings where a child is a defendant, then the court is prohibited

from excluding bona fide members of the press from the courtroom in such cases. However,

if the provision does not apply to child defendants, the media can indeed be excluded. In any

event, the significance of the provision is that it permits the press to obtain evidence during

certain child trials. Although we can assume that this is done with a view to eventual

publication, the media are not mandated to publish the evidence obtained, and there is

nothing in the provision preventing the court from delaying publications until trials are over.

This paper will argue that delaying publications should be the preferred practice.

8

Neil Leslie, ‘Gardaí review CCTV footage after attack on Ana Kriégel killer Boy A at Oberstow n detention

centre; It's understood Gardai have reviewed CCTV foo tage of the alleged incident bu t there have no t been

any arrests’ Irish Mirror (Dublin, 5th June 2020).

9

See Natasha Reid, ‘“You left me for dead”: Teenage b oy pleads guilty to attempted m urder of wom an he met

on social media, court hears’ T he Journal (Dublin, 5 March 2019). See also Michelle Hennessey, ‘Thousands of

crimes, including rape, not prosecuted due to serious failings in Garda youth scheme’ The Journ al (Dublin, 17

January 2019).

10

Miriam Delahunt (n 2). See also Conor Gallagher (n 1).

11

Children Act 2001, s 257.

12

The paper is not concerned with cases h eard in the Children Court which is a special Court for children th at

sits in t he District Court and h ears sum mary offences com mitted or in volving children. It has the jurisd iction

to hear almost all child cases apart from murder wh ich m ust be heard in the High Court. See also: Children

Act 2001, s 71.