Veronica Frydel - my journey through university degree

The Coastline documentary (Final version)

2011-08-09T07:05:00.001-07:00

The Coastline, part 1 out of 2

The Coastline, part 2 out of 2

Artistic documentary inspired by "Quatsi" trilogy and Tarkovsky style of filmmaking.

Producer Director - Veronica Frydel

COASTLINES - artistic documentary (Version 2)

2011-08-09T06:48:00.000-07:00

Second draft version and ideas for the Coastlines documentary, this time with attampted opening/title sequence.

The Coastline, part 1 out of 2 (Version 2)

The Coastline, part 2 out of 2 (Version 2)

Opening Sequences for Coastlines (examples)

2011-08-09T05:04:00.000-07:00

Examples of opening and title sequences for The Coastline documentary

Opening Sequence with the title- example 1:

Opening Sequence with the title - example 2:

The Coastlines - artistic documentary (Version 1) and Opening Sequences

2011-08-03T06:20:00.000-07:00

First drafts and ideas for an artistic documentary Coastlines inspired by Tarkovsky and 'Quatsi trylogy' style of documentary making.

The Coastlines - part 1 out of 3 (Version 1)

The Coastlines - part 2 out of 3 (Version 1)

The Coastlines - part 3 out of 3 (Version 1)

Confessional interview video - William Middleton

2011-06-28T13:11:00.000-07:00

-story by William Middleton

PART 1

PART 2

All this is Billy's side to the story that he had publicly said on the United Against Injustice public conference. After the conference I decided to ask him to repeat it for me again so that I could film it, he agreed, I have made a video out of what he said and transcribed it into a shorter form in article in other post IN HERE.

Migration through the South Coast of England Documentary

2011-06-10T07:55:00.000-07:00

The art of alternative documentary making exploring the subject of migration of people through the south coast of England by using different styles of documentary making.

PART 1

PART 2

My baby daughter died in house fire - by William Middleton

2011-05-26T13:20:00.000-07:00
William Middleton tells me his tragic experiences

I am William Middleton. In 2008 I was accused of murdering my baby daughter and attempted murder of my son and step daughter.

After the fire, I returned home from hospital to my broken family in Shetland. One Saturday morning I was taken to the police station and arrested. They thought I started the fire. It was as if someone reached in and took the life out of me.

That was when I started to find out how rotten and corrupt the whole justice system can be. Everything that they did was designed to break me. They took me into a cell where they made me strip completely naked. I still do not understand why. It was degrading and humiliating. When they questioned me later I thought that all I had to do was tell the truth and everything would be alright.

They were aggressive and relentless, whenever I thought it was over, they would start all over again. They said, 'if you could think of anything else that could help us then we can maybe get through this quicker.'

Then I would be taken back to the very first question: 'Why did you kill Annalise?' 'This is Scotland,' they told me, 'We don't have to provide a solicitor for six hours.'

The officers interrogated me for all of six hours before putting me in a cell. My son's statement confirmed everything that I had been saying despite the fact that he was only three at the time. The prosecution told my legal team that if they wanted to use it, they would have to call him in court.

My niece (2) was staying over that night with two friends. They asked if I could get them some drink. I was not keen on the idea, but I agreed to get them two small bottles of WKD to share. Everybody was having a good time, just group of girls having girly chats. One of them said that she did not think that boys found her attractive so we all kept reassuring her and I made a silly comment that 'I would be'. I just meant to give her some confidence but my wife got upset about it and left the house to calm down. My niece (2) went after her. Before going to bed I texted my wife saying 'please just come back, I love you'.

The next thing I knew I woke up with the fire alarm going off. I could hear the children screaming. I could see smoke coming through the gap in the door from the hallway. I opened the door and could feel the heat and saw thick dark smoke. I went to the bottom of the stairs, looked up and could just make out Christina and James standing there. I shouted, 'you've got to get out!' Christina came down but James was scared stiff. I went up, grabbed him and got him outside. I said, 'I'm going back in to get Annalise'. Going back inside, I closed the door to keep James out. By now the smoke was much worse but I had to go up the stairs again. I think I made it to the top, but I could not breathe. My eyes were stinging and I was choking... I knew I was not going to make it. The last thing I remember is trying to pick myself up after falling down the stairs. Then I woke up in the hospital.

At one point the social workers told my wife that if she continued to support me they would put James and Christina on the Child Protection List. All designed to turn my own wife against me, and make her believe that I had done it.

They later offered to drop the charges and replace them all with one charge of Culpable homicide (1) with a recommended six year sentence. I refused.

It is easy to accuse somebody of anything, but it is very difficult to prove innocence.

I was eventually acquitted, and after I was released from court I set up a website called “Wrongly Accused Person” to try to help people who were going through the same as I did. There has never been a day that I felt I have done enough.

As long as I believe that somebody is innocent, I won't give up because I know how it is to be in that cell knowing that you haven't done it.

1) A killing of a person with either or both of intention or absence of intention. 
2) Due to protection of vulnerable people her name cannot be shown

All this is Billy's side to the story that he had publicly said on the United Against Injustice public conference, After the conference I decided to ask him to repeat it for me agan so that i could film it he agreed, I have transcribed what he said to me and put it into an article above I have also made a video version of it in other post IN HERE.

Understanding the judgement - The philosophy of logical analysis

2011-05-02T05:42:00.000-07:00
“Reality and existence is not a predicate” (Ref.1)

In philosophy ever since the time of Pythagoras there has been an opposition between thoughts inspired by mathematics and those by empirical sciences. Beginning from Plato, Thomas Aquinal, Spinoza, and Kant who represented the mathematical thought; Democritus, Aristotle, and the modern empiricists from Locke and these onwards who stand on the empirical sciences side. Comparing this to the modern analytical empiricism, differs from Locke or Hume because it incorporates developments of the mathematics and its logical technique which enables define answers in problem solving. We do however need to bear in mind that the scientific methods are not relevant to everything let’s take questions of value or moral choices or even a judgement, “things that are legitimately matters of feeling lie outside its province.” (Ref.2)

Kant’s famous critique of the so-called, ontological proof of God’s existence, he "correctly found the source of error of this proof in the fact that existence is treated as a predicate.(...) Reality for him is a category, and if we apply it in any way, and say of an objects that it is real this means, according to Kant, that it belongs to a collection of perceptions connected according to the same natural law.” (Ref.1)

“Morally, a philosopher who uses his professional competence for anything except a disinterested search for truth is guilty of a kind of treachery. (...) The true philosopher is prepared to examine all perceptions. When any limits are placed, consciously or unconsciously, upon the pursuit of truth, philosophy becomes paralysed by fear, and the ground is prepared for a government censorship pushing those who utter ‘dangerous thoughts’ (...). ” (Ref.2)

I place this thoughts as relevant in my research as having to take up re-examination of a guilty verdict by law is standing up against this censorship and danger of questioning the judgement that has been already approved.

In order to see why any not factual judgement which has been supported by speculative scenarios is questionable. Not only logic dictates it but also moral duty to question it.

Reason why I will be looking into psychology and philosophy of judgement is that I believe that to understand the verdict that took place in certain time, place, sociological surrounding as well as economical circumstances may unveil the reasoning behind the decision and even perhaps show directions leading into the verdict that was decided. It this way I will see what influenced the verdict and learn if there is any possibility of it being wrong partially because of these influences.

References and inspiration:
Ref. 1) Logical Positivism, A.J.Ayer (1959)
Ref. 2) Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy (1946)

Positivism and Educational Research - studying process of judgement

2011-05-01T17:17:00.000-07:00
“Objectivity is of the essence of science, just as subjectivity is one of the essence of art. Natural scientists are natural objectivists ... But it is harder to scientific, hence objective, about human affairs than about the nature. (...) This is also why we often mistake opinions for data, value judgements for descriptive statements, and prophecies for forecasts.” (d Mario Bunge)

“The work of the logical positivists became known in the English-speaking world through the writings of A.J. Ayer and others, and it was the source of B. F. Skinners’s view that psychology should restrict itself to the study of behaviour. For only behaviour is observable.”

“To philosophers, positivism (including behaviourism) is a form of empiricism; and empiricism in turn is one of the two forms of foundationalist philosophy. The problems faced by positivism are merely variants of the problems that have surfaced with respect to foundationalism . The following schematic should make the relationships clear. “

Earlier this century philosophers like Ludwig Wittgenstein or Karl Popper argued that “observation is theory-laden: What the observer seen and what he or she doesn’t see (...)” the judgement of the observer will also be influenced by the background knowledge and the life experiences of the observer him/herself like “assumptions, hypotheses or even conceptual schemes that the observer harbours.”

It is worth exploring the concept of truth; I think it is safe concluding that the truth is rather something that people se as their truth and not always what is factually proven. And therefore we can say that there are multiple realities, individual truths that are created through individual beliefs and backgrounds. However we know that the belief and the truth are two completely separate things.

Charles Sanders Peirce defined the truth as “that upon which a person is prepare to act” and this seems like quite a logical perception of individual truth as people do act on things that they believe to be true as well even though that truth may not be a proven fact.

Lets take an example from 1492. Many people believed that our globe is flat and Colubcus believed it was spherical. This belief of spherical globe, even though as we know being a fact, was not taken as a general true fact until it was proven. And since travelling proved it to be so, it was then taken as a general proven truth - a fact. Also “because people strongly believe or imagine the world to be certain way, it has become colloquial to refer to ‘their ‘ realities.”

All the quotes above and inspiration are from:
Positivism and Educational Research by D.C. Phillips and Nicolas C. Burbules, (2000)

The Psychology of Judicial Sentencing

2011-05-01T16:29:00.000-07:00
“Why should we not take the legal literature as it stands?
Why not accept the principals which the academic lawyers infer from the reasoning of senior judges?

The first answer to that question has little to do with psychology. It is that the (perforce) abstract and diffuse enunciation of sentencing principles offers limited scope for understanding sentencing in the individual case. “

It is quite logical that the rules and acts are there to set main example that would suit situations in general terms or main aspects like murder, theft or rape but because, understandibly there are so many different sitiations with various circumstances that are to be considered with every new case.

One of the reasons “for scepticism about judges’ expressions of sentencing principles does derive from the work of psychologists. The literature of cognitive psychology has shown, clearly and repeatedly, that people in general simply do not have enough access to their own thought processes for us to take their reasons seriously. “

“While skilled problem-solvers may not be able to tell us explicitly how they proceed while solving a problem, they are able to complete the solving itself. If we ask them to think aloud in written protocols, the analysis of the protocols might lead us to a formal description of what, in fact, is done. We have tried this. Rather informally, but the results were disappointing. The most striking result was that what was said while thinking aloud created a rather chaotic and unsystematic impression.”

In interviews with Crown Court judges (Fitzmaurice, 1981), one judge said: ‘When a judge passes sentence ... there are so many things which he has got to take into account ... it’s just in what I call the mental mixer of sentencing.’ This sort of description is echoed by judges interviewed by Ashworth el al. (1984): ‘Most judges described it as an instinctive process, using such terms as “instinct”, “experience”, “hunch” and “feeling”. ‘ In the authoritative Encyclopaedia of Crime and Justice, edited by Stanford Kadish (1983), Judge Marvin Aspen describes sentencing thus:

Sentencing is anything but simple task. Many diverse data must be considered by the judge: other material must be consciously excluded from the sentencing equation. After this tortuous process, the judge will render a reasoned sentence that is subject to one final ‘litmus’ test: is the sentence what is best for society? If it is, then judge has performed well.”

Having look into judgement process it is inevitable to study Oedipus complex. The Psychology of Judicial Sentencing by Catherine Fitzmaurice and Ken Pease from 1986 takes its look on the Oedipus complex trough Freud. From Sophocles’ play, “Oedipus kills his father, Laius, Freud argues, because of jealous wish to possess his mother. In Sophocles’ play, however, Laius is largely instrumental in causing his own death. He goads (in both senses) Oedipus, who retaliates with fatal results. Thus, in large measures, Laius’ death resulted from his own bellicosity. Despite this, Freud takes the story as an illustration of the son’s desire to kill the father. Popular culture as well as academic psychology has uncritically followed the conventional Freudian interpretation. Yet the conventional view fits the original story less well than does the alternative interpretation that Oedipus myth is (...) really about paternal envy and fear. (...) The interpretations can be the product of respect for power? Fathers are more powerful than sons. (...) Unconscious wishes are more safely located in the psyche of Oedipus than in that of Laius. What is meant by safety in this context?

Safety here means the confidence of not suffering guilt or ridicule, the confidence that the blessings of the powerful feeding hand. Consistent with this sort of interpretation is the fact that psychological research on decision-making in courts has tended to concentrate more on the decisions of jurors than on the decisions of judges (...). Perhaps judicial criticism of jurors by judges (...) has been more likely to be translated into funded research than has jurors’ criticism of judges. “

“Now going back to sentencing, "some judges regard the process of sentencing as uncomplicated. In the opinion of Lord Devlin, ‘In the majority of cases there is little room for choice. The judges has only to fix the appropriate term of imprisonment by applying the tariff to the circumstances of the case.’ “

Idea of false consensus bias comes from the fact that “people tend to generalise falsely from their own views to a belief in a consensus. They take their choices and judgements to be relatively common and appropriate to existing circumstances while viewing alternative responses as uncommon, deviant and inappropriate.”

Another psychological conclusion that I found after examples given through the study of this book which I completely agree with is that “people tend to ignore or to underlay the prior probability of out-comes and to emphasise unduly individual case information in making decisions. (...) People so much prefer to base their judgement on information about individuals that they will do so even when that information is fallible, and that doing so they will ignore information about overall probabilities which they could properly use.” This tells me in it's full sense that there can be a reasonable room for misjudgement and that person's background, beliefs etc whether that would be of a judge or a defendant can influence the verdict.

Other very straight to the point summary of what can be seen as some sort of form of influence of impure judgement in my eyes called the 'knew-it-all-along-effect’ which is “that a judge may, when sentencing someone with a previous record, reconstruct with inappropriate confidence the likelihood of the reappearance before the court, and may reconstruct the story about what explained the reappearance. It is argued that the effect of this would be to increase the severity of sentence imposed on those with previous records beyond the increase which would be appropriate on other grounds (...). “

Process of giving reasons for the judgement has also been explored, when the choice of reasons lies between few alternatives it is more likely to be trusted more. “If the judge has clear recollection of the facts of the case they may appear more clearly as justifications of sentence. If the reasons are well tried they will invite more confidence in their truth.” Then, “the relevance of the research is only indirect, because it deals with sentencers’ acceptance or rejection of the people’s preffered reasons rather than with the formulation of sentencers’ own reason. (...) These reasons included: having a mental blackout before the crime; being overcome by an irresistible urge; coming from neighbourhood where the behaviour was the rule rather than exception; cold deliberate choice (...) .”

All the quotes and inspiration
'The Psychology of Judicial Sentencing by Catherine Fitzmaurice and Ken Pease, (1986)'

Psychology of Crime by Craig Webber

2011-05-01T13:45:00.000-07:00
"One cannot understand our present situation without an awareness of the past." And this is also why study of history of psychology of crime is also important when studying investigative journalism.

"The tensions that exist within criminology tend to split between the two dominant subjects that form its core ideas, sociology and psychology. Recently, these two subjects have viewed each other with suspicion and occasional contempt. Where sociology tends to place its emphasis on society and environment, Psychology situates its main focus within the individual. This often leads diametrically opposed explanations for phenomena and sometimes referred to as the structure/ agency debate."

"For some psychologists, poverty is the result of individual failure due to low IQ, personality or lack of positive motivation such as might be caused by depression. When these two approaches are contained within criminology not only are there the usual heated discussions but there is the added frisson of distract in another discipline's methods and theoretical foundations. Yet, fundamentally, the concern is with what causes crime."

"(...) The interconnectivity of sociology and psychology when both are brought together in criminology by looking at the way that the study of crime became increasingly 'scientific'. Moreover, the bipolarity of the structure/agency debate has developed into a more complex argument that posits an integration between the two extremes of structural determinism and the free choice of the agent. By way of setting out the argument early, W.I. Thomas in the first edition of the American Journal of Sociology in 1894 noted that sociology and social psychology were inseparable (Strauss 1964)."

According to Garland (2002) criminology as a 'science of crime' has been in existence foe about 120 years. "The term 'criminology' was created in the 1890s as a broader term than others such as criminal sociology or criminal psychology. The later two terms are too specific and separately bead within boundaries peculiar to their own traditions. Consequently, the discipline of criminology from the outset subsumed the concerns of other, more established traditions within its intellectual remit. As Lea has noted (1998), criminology can be seen not as a subject in its own right, but as field that academics from other disciplines can enter, such as economics, historians, geographers, psychologists and sociologists.(...) The focus tends to be on the question of what causes crime. How academics from different subjects do that is, to a large degree, based upon the traditions of their 'master' disciplines. Hence, Gerland has argued that '[i]ts epistemological threshold is a low one, making it susceptible to pressures and interests generated elsewhere'(2002:17). "

In it's book Craig Webber talks about criminals to be "by and large, rational actors choosing to commit crime and therefore should be punished in proportion to the seriousness of the offence. Punishment should take the form of attempting to change the moral failures of the offender in prisons."

Further more Webber mentions in his book that "(...) psychology has recently been confronted by a new challenge that some see as indicative of a move to a later or postmodern society. It has been argued that as indicative of a move to a late or postmodern society. It has been argued that there has been a shift away from individual causes of crime towards the statistical analysis of a group's risk factors. This has impacted on the way that crime and justice research is carried out.

It has been argued that the research for individual causes of crime fell out of fashion between the 1970s and 2000 (Gerlan 2001; Hudson 2003). David garland argued that the:
new policy advice is to concentrate on substituting prevention for cure,
reducing the supply of opportunities, increasing situational and social con-
trols, and modifying everyday routines. The welfare of deprived social
groups, or the needs of maladjusted individuals, are much less central to
this way of thinking. (2001:16)"

Criminologists have drown on the risk society thesis in literature by sociologists such as Anthony Giddens (1990) and Urlich Beck (1992), to analyse changes in the way that the tools of social control and justice became different. "Rather than focus on the risk factors on an individual, criminal justice has increasingly moved towards making judgments that are collective in focus and based on prediction (O'Malley 2001). This is a form of actuarialism, the kind of risk assessment undertaken by insurance companies to determine how likely it is that a car might be stolen."

"Moreover, in the risk society we are increasingly challenging the expertise of experts, such as psychologists or criminologists (Giddens 19900. Essentially experts cannot offer what society wants, security. This clearly impacted on the work of psychologists, but how profoundly it has undermined the core philosophy of the focus on individual differences is unclear. " Another valid point is that "in many ways, there is a contradiction within psychology anyway, since many theories attempt to categorise individuals into groups. Moreover, there are many criticisms of the risk society thesis, some point out that the perceived shift to a focus risk is nothing new. "

Fears over terrorism, for example, "are not exclusive to those living after '9/11'. (...) Since New Labor were elected in the UK in 1997 the much quoted phrase 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime has had a tentative, patchy but nevertheless significant effect. After the credit crunch and world-wide recession, the part- nationalisation of the banks and other parts of industry and the election of Democrat Barack Obama as American President, we may yet see a return to welfarism and away from the sense of risk so pervasive under President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair. It is also essential to look at the history of criminology and how it had shaped the views on judgment within criminal justice. "

Other reason why it is essential to look back in time on the history of criminological movements is to see what influenced and developed the thoughts that shape today's thoughts. Researching into these can help in understanding what are the reasons of crime and how much of the science and analysis of humans' behaviours and social and economical background influences the judgement about the person. And to understand how the judgments in court are driven it is important for me to get to know the history of Crime and how has it been studied so far.

"Criminology and psychology are regarded as disciplines that developed out of modern period. The major historical event that characterises this period is the move from an agricultural to an industrial economy." Modernism is characterised by the greater faith in objectivity, rationality and using scientific methods. "In sociology the application of the scientific method is termed positivism after the term coined by one of the earliest sociologists Augustine Comte whose most influential book
Cours de pholosophie positive
(...) set out the argument for a scientific form of sociology that provided a positive agenda for political change. Positivism can be split into two main forms, individual and sociological positivism.

Individual positivism has an assumption that behaviour is the result of individual, internal factors to the neglect of social factors. For example, individual positivists would not be concerned with issues like poverty in explaining why there is a higher rate of crime in groups who are poor. Instead, they might argue that the cause is lower intelligence based on Intelligence Quotient (IQ) scores in groups of people who are poor(...). The research methods are wide-ranging but tend to be those which can be verified by other researches using the same procedure so are likely to result in data that is statistical. Psychology, in general, has been regarded as being individual positivism, although there are some theories, such as some areas of social psychology, which focus to a greater extent on environmental factors."

Having mentioned individual positivism it is worth going back to its origins to gain greater understanding of its idea. Going back even into times of Darwin and the evolution of the species is relevant, because it is from these times that the thought on criminal tendencies that appear in some more than others have been brought up already.

"Darwin's theory that humans have evolved from earlier species began some people to speculate that maybe there were different types of human, differing from each other in such areas as intelligence and race. It was also argued that maybe criminals were also different to non-criminals. The initial research into this idea began with (…) phrenology. Phrenology is the study of the association between bumps on the skull and behaviour, with a raised area on the skull being thought to be indicative of more less of a particular character trait. Phrenology is often seen as an unscientific precursor to more sophisticated research into the identification of criminals."

"There are many discredited scientific ideas that criminology has studied. Phrenology is important because it helped shape scientific study of crime and influenced the work of the leading nineteenth-century positivist Cesare Lombroso. As a progenitor of positivist explanations for crime it can be credited with moving the debate in a radical direction, away from treating crime as a rational choice requiring the punishment of the offender towards seeing crime as a pathology to be treated. (…)"

"(...) From 1800 to 1830 phrenology was developed by psychiatrists and physicians into a 'scientific' system based on measurement and observation, but within 20 years there occurred a popularising of phrenology. (…) By the 1850 (…) the categorization of crimes into different causes opened up an area of research into the possibility of multiple and varied causations and in the idea of desistance from crime (…). "

Another research that began during the middle of the nineteenth century was "into the idea of psychopathy. It was necessary to explain why some people could commit heinous crimes, but not appear to be intellectually damaged. Before the term psychopath was coined, however, the term 'moral insanity' described someone whose behaviour lacks moral awareness of right and wrong but where their intellect had not been impaired. This term was replaced by Rush (…) with micronomia and anomia."

With the decline in phrenology, psychiatry, particularly in prisons and asylums began to take over the study of criminals. Rafter argued here that the term had metaphorical purpose "to describe almost anyone who did not fit what was then regarded as the norms to which people should be measured."
"As the cities grew and populations raised throughout nineteenth and early twentieth century the middle class fears of crime and disorder started to find answers in psychology and criminology. (…) In America the diagnostic tool for all behavioural disorders is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM IV) (APA 1994), however it has been criticized for a number of arbitrary categories that do not sufficiently delineate between behaviours. Such as example is its inability to distinguish a psychopathic disorder from conduct disorders (CD) and antisocial personality disorder (aspd). (…) Essentially, psychopathy is distinguished from cd and aspd as an emotional dysfunction that leads to a greater use of instrumental aggression, as opposed to reactive aggression. Instrumental aggression is characterized by the use of aggression for the purpose of achieving a goal, either financial or emotional, whereas reactive aggression refers to aggression that is caused by something. Therefore psychopathy is not adequately described in the American system of diagnosis and so its use as an explanation for why types of crime are committed is problematic."

In the Lombroso, the Positivist School, Garland noted that the ideas of Lambroso are not new and an extension of racial anthropology in the 1870s and the creation of categories such as genius or insane (Garland 2002). Lambrosso's approach became one of the dominant ideas that have set "the new science of criminology on route that was to be dominant for the best part of 80 years . Whereas phrenology suggested that people could change, and that there were finely tuned gradations in severity of behaviour, Lambroso presented a human as a fait accompli, readymade and without much hope of change, except long-term policies to prevent those identified as criminal from reproducing. "

"Lambroso argued that the criminal was an atavism, a throwback to an earlier stage of evolution. Lambroso, like many of his contemporaries such as A.M. Guerry and A. Quetelet , was interested in the emerging use of statistics. His work was about measuring the body to see if the body would give away any indication of criminality."

"Much research during the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century is essentially a variation on the same theme: crime is a stable trait that can be measured and which is either largely inherited or conditioned in early life and remains a constant influence. Crime is caused by internal mechanisms gone wrong. Crucially, this has little effect on the underlying the rationality of humans. Crime is not caused by humans acting irrationally since their underlying physiology or upbringing compels them to act in the only way they can. The legal system in the UK was set up, albeit unsystematic, to account for both those who rationally chose to commit crime and to take into account extenuating circumstances for those whose background suggested social or psychological pathology. The originator of psychoanalysis Sigmund Feud represents a conduit, or link between the constitutional theories of Lombroso and the later approaches of psychology to social learning and upbringing. His work also marks the beginning of questioning of this rationality, at the same time as critics suggested that psychoanalysis was not scientific. Chaos and disorder are thought to be under the control of humans, and yet humans were about to embark on a global war. "

Eric Hobsbawm, on the other hand argues that "there was a sense of unease about the achievements that could be made through positing a purely rational human actor or trying to understand the world solely though the application of scientific methods (Hobsbawm 1987). "

As we know according Sigmund Freud "human behaviour is directed not by reason but by underlying unconscious impulses and instincts." Also unlike Lambroso he focused on finding causes for "behaviour where no physical or chemical reason could be determined."

Freud argued that "every mental process, every thought or emotion had a meaning, even if that meaning was not consciously intelligible to the individual." Even unintentional actions had a reason for him. Freud's psychoanalysis challenges the positivists' quest of "psychology to identify single causes for crime and in their place presents a more complex theory of humans. We can see in this, arguably, the first signs of the retreat from the aetiology of crime towards the more pragmatic attempts of contemporary psychology, and all other forms of governance, to attend to the risk and not the cause of crime."

Among forms of sociological positivism Durkheim's work is mentioned here, "his work is anomie. This literally means without norms. Anomie develops when social systems go through major changes. A norm is the usual way of behaving. Durkheim termed this the conscience collective or collective consciousness. (...)The relationships we have with other people normally keep our behaviour in check. But, significant social change disrupts those relationships."

Studying into concepts of disruptions, "crime is deemed to be a deviation from the norm. There is an altruistic, welfare-oriented element to these approaches in that deviations from the norm are not held to be in the control of the individual, but instead outside their rational control. This is either as a consequence of internal mental deficits of some kind in individual positivism, or else the consequence of social structural factors such as the economy, religion or poverty in the sociological variant. Since the causes are not in the control of the individual, or group, and that crime is therefore not seen as being a rational choice, then punishment is not deemed to be appropriate."

What is more, "crime tends to be regarded as pathological, as an illness to be treated rather than a moral failure to be punished. Moreover, such approaches tend to posit causes which are regarded as necessary for the activity to take place. Without the cause, the activity would not occur."

Moving onto late modern approaches to the theory of crime, "in criminology, the way law developed over time and reflected different moral debates lead to a contrast between those who believe the positivist trait believe those who discussed above, and that crime is socially constructed, changeable and not real, the labelling, symbolic interactionist or social constructivist tradition."

Then, during the modern and postmodern times questioning of the positivism started. Eysenck, controversially in my view created opinion that some people are biologically predetermined to be criminal because of their personality. He justified this idea by the psychology of potential criminals' brains, their extroverted personality and law cortical arousal, as if "their brains ticked over too slowly". And to compensate for that these people would find other ways to fuel with excitement. And this excitement could by crime.

Searching further into theories of psychological approach to a criminal mind, in the chapter about period of 1970s I found another very interesting information that "the mad person is driven mad by crazy families and the madness is a rational response to mad situations, a breaking through of the restrictive chains of rational society and the restrictive envelope of the industrial demands on time and labour."

Moving from learning about the history into study of the mind, it is worth looking into personality disorder.
“(...) Some authors maintain that that there is evidence that many serial killers are psychopathic (...). An inability to empathise or sympathise with the suffering of the other people and an inflated opinion of their own self-worth tends to characterise psychopathic individuals."

My attention was drown specifically into interesting discussions in the book about the interests of the potential offender's enjoyment. The focus is often turned into one type of interests that the offender could enjoy, stressing on the factors like military, the occult, heavy metal music, use of pornography and martial arts. But it is rightly pointed out that such conclusions are open to interpretation and are socially influenced by factors like right wing or religious morals. And " the amount of media devoted to such sensational interests, from the television through to the Internet, would over-predict the amount of violent crime committed if there was a causal effect. There are simply not enough offences to validate a causal link with sensational interests."

Looking further into the mind of the murderer, the "definitions including those of Holmes and Holmes (2002) and Ressler, Burgess and Douglas (1988) tend to equate serial killing with a motive that has no pecuniary or direct vengeful motivation and in the majority of cases there is a sexual component also. “ One particular type of a killer's profile drawn my attention relevant to my research was the so called mission serial killer. Which is not defined as psychopathic, "but like the vision serial killer tends to go after a certain category of people, for example, homosexuals, an ethnic group other than his or her own, women, etc. The mission serial killer is propelled not by voices but a perceived mission to eradicate the world or area of such people." It is often that certain personality trait is associated with the criminal activity, such as Eysenck's extrovert.

Another part that is of the interest for my research is, criminal profiling.

I also found another very interesting statement when looking into the British approach to offender profiling, David Canter (Liverpool University) is concerned that the approach of Investigative Psychology has at its core of traditional American forms "the making of inferences based on little evidence." His approach to "offender profiling is to apply psychological principles to the investigation of crime. (...) Through analysing the way that different offenders move between the crime site and their home, Counter argues it is possible to make some generalisations that are helpful to investigators. Since a profile is used for crimes where there is little evidence that would help link the victim to the offender," Canter says that psychology is far more helpful than the current preoccupation with high profile serial crimes like murder or rape.

Other very crucial point was that “criminal activity may well be an extreme reflection of non-criminal activity (Canter 1995). Crime scene behaviour that reflects elements of an offender's general lifestyle may be useful for investigators because it may be that people might notice such behaviour. Here, Canter makes links to a criminological theory called Routine activities Theory (RAT) that posits the need of criminologists to fuss on the crime event and the role of the victim in that event (Cohen and Felson 1979). By doing this, attention is shifted away from why some people commit crime whilst others do not and instead focus on crime prevention. Very important pinpoints stated here is that "for a crime to occur there needs to be three factors coinciding in time and space. The first is a motivated offender; the second is suitable target and finally the absence of capable guardians able to prevent the offence taking place."

"The argument that crime is linked to the routine activities of everyday life kinks into Counter’s approach because Canter is less concerned with motivations than with the crime scene themes that might practically help investigations."

“The discovery that the offender may offend near to their home is not new to criminology. (...) A group of criminologists who called themselves left realists carried out victim surveys and came to simple conclusions. Crime was mainly intra-class and intra-race. That is, crime was committed within the same socio-economic and ethnic group. Offender and the victim are similar."

"One of the problems of the idea of a profile is that a statistic and flexible approach that may only have relevance for early stages in an investigation. " And it of course leaves room for incorrect judgement. It is an academic study and I believe that following the logical and factual approach as future journalist it can be taken into hypothetical suggestions and help in discovering facts but the danger is to waste time of going into investigating incorrect hypothesis. Reasonable level of scepticism should be kept with using the speculative approaches to anything if there are no facts involved that would support the theories."

For example, "a British study by Alison, smith and Morgan (...) presented police officers with a 'bogus' offender profile designed to be deliberately ambiguous but based on a real murder and a description of the characteristics of an offender. The respondents split into two groups and each were asked to rate the accuracy of the offender profile to the offender. One group was presented with a description of a convicted offender and the other group were presented with description of a fabricated offender designed to have characteristics the opposite to that of the real offender. (...) The majority of the police officers said that the profile would be a useful tool for an investigation and just over half of the forensic professionals thought it would be useful. Despite the different characteristics of the offenders the majority of the respondents felt that the profile was accurate. Useful analogies as to why profiles may be seen as accurate even when they contain ambiguous statements that could apply to many people are horoscopes."

"Eye witness testimony is a major tool of the Criminal Justice system and accounts for many convictions. (...) With advances in the use and reliability of forensic science, in particular DNA testing, many cases of innocent people convicted on the basis of eyewitness testimony have come to light after forensic tests proved their innocence (...). "

All the quotations and inspiration:
Psychology of Crime, Craig Webber, 2010

Language, Truth and Logic - Understanding the judgement system

2011-05-01T12:03:00.000-07:00
POSITIVISM AS LEADING PSYCHOLOGICAL MOVEMENT FOR LOGICAL JUDGEMENT
"For a consideration of any dispute about a matter of any taste will show that there can be disagreement without formal contradiction, and that in order to alter another man's opinions, in the sense of getting him to change his attitude, it is not necessary to contradict anything that he asserts. Thus, if one wishes to affect another person in such a way as to bring his sentiments on a given point into accordance with one's own, there are various ways in which one may proceed. One may, for example, call his attention to certain facts that one supposes him to have overlooked; and, as I have already remarked, i believe that much of what passes for ethical discussion is a proceeding of this type. It is, however, also possible to influence other people by a suitable choice of emotive language; and this is the practical justification for the use of normative expressions of value. At the same time, it must be admitted that if the other person persists in maintaining his contrary attitude, without however disputing any of the facts, a point is reached at which the discussion can go further. And in that case there is no sense in asking which of the conflicting views is true. For, since the expression of a value judgement is not a proposition, the question of truth or falsehood does not here arise.

In such cases as these one does indeed arrive at something that approaches a definition in use; but there are other cases of philosophical analysis in which nothing even approaching a definition is either provided or sought. Thus, when Professor Moore suggests that to say that "existence is not a predicate" may be a way of saying that "there is some very important difference between the way in which 'exist' is used in such a sentence as 'Tame tigers exist' and the way in which 'growl' is used in 'Tame tigers growl,'" he does not develop his point by giving rules for the translation of one set of sentences into another. What he does is to remark that whereas it makes good sense to say "All tame to say "All tame tigers exist" of "Most tame tigers exist." Now this may seem a rather trivial point for him to make, but in fact it is philosophically illuminating. For it is precisely the assumption that existence is a predicate that gives plausibility to "the ontological argument"; and the ontological argument is supposed to demonstrate the existence of a god. Consequently Moore by pointing out a peculiarity in the use of word "exist" helps to protect us from a serious fallacy; so that his procedure, though different from that which Russell follows in the theory of descriptions, tends to achieve the same philosophical end.

I maintain in this book that it is not within the province of philosophy to justify our scientific or common-sense beliefs; for their validity is an empirical matter, which cannot be settled by a priori means. At the same time, the question of what constitutes such a justification is philosophical, as the existence of "the problem of induction" shows. Here again, what is required is not necessarily a definition. For although I believe that the problems connected within induction can be reduced to the question of what is meant by saying that one proposition is good evidence for another, I doubt if the way to answer this is to construct a formal definition of "evidence". What is chiefly wanted, I think, is an analysis of scientific method, and although it might be possible to express the results of this analysis in the form of definitions, this would not be an achievement of primary importance. And here I may add that the reduction of philosophy to analysis needs not to be incompatible with the view that its function is to bring to light "the presuppositions of science." For if there are such presuppositions, they can no doubt be shown to be logically involved in the applications of scientific method, or in the use of certain scientific terms.

In saying that the philosophy is concerned with each of the sciences, in a manner which we shall indicate, we mean also to rule out the supposition that philosophy can be ranged alongside the existing sciences, as a special department of speculative knowledge. Those who make this supposition cherish the belief that there are some things in the world which are possible objects of speculative knowledge and yet lie beyond the scope of empirical science.

But this belief is a delusion. There is no field of experience which cannot, in principle, beyond the power of science to give. We have already gone some way to substantiate this proposition by demolishing metaphysics; and we shall justify it to the full in the course of this book.

With this we complete the overthrow of speculative philosophy. We are now in a position to see that the function of philosophy is wholly critical. In what exactly does its critical activity consist?

One way of answering this question is to say that it is philosopher's business to test the validity of our scientific hypotheses and everyday assumptions. But this view, though very widely held, is mistaken. If a man chooses to doubt the truth of all the propositions he ordinarily believes, it is not in the power of philosophy to reassure him. The most that philosophy can do, apart from seeing whether his beliefs are self consistent, is to show what are the criteria which are used to determine the truth or falsehood of any given proposition: and then, when the sceptic realises that certain observations would verify his propositions, he may also realize that he could make those observations, and so consider his original beliefs to be justified. But in such a case one cannot say that it is philosophy which justifies his beliefs. Philosophy merely shows him that experience can justify them. We may look to the philosopher to show us what we accept as constituting sufficient evidence for the truth of any given empirical proposition. But whether the evidence is forthcoming or not is in every case a purely empirical question.

If anyone thinks that we are here taking too much for granted, let him refer to the chapter on "Truth and Probability," in which we discuss how to validity of synthetic propositions is determined. He will see there that the only sort of justification that is necessary of possible for self-consistent empirical propositions is empirical verification. And this applies just as much to the laws of science as to the maxims of common sense. Indeed there is no difference in kind between them. The superiority of the scientific hypothesis consists merely in its being more abstract, more precise, and more fruitful. And although scientific objects such as atoms and electrons seem to be fictitious in a way that chairs and tables are not, here, too, the distinction is only distinction of degree. For both these kinds of objects are known only by their sensible manifestations and are definable in terms of them.

One may attempt to deduce the preposition which one is required to prove either from a purely formal principle or from an empirical principle. In the former case one commits the error of supposing that from a tautology it is possible to deduce a proportion about a matter of fact; in the latter case one simply assumes what one is setting out to prove. For example, it is often said that we can justify induction by invoking the uniformity of nature, or by postulating a "principle of limited independent variety." But, in fact, the principle of uniformity of nature merely states, in a misleading fashion, the assumption that past experience is a reliable guide to the future; while the principle of limited independent variety pre-supposes it.

We shall see, when we come finally to settle the conflict between idealism and realism, that his actual conception of the relationship between material things and sense-contents was not altogether accurate. It led him to some notoriously paradoxical conclusions, which a slight emendation will enable us to avoid. But the fact that he failed to give a completely correct account of the way in which material things are constituted out of sense-contents does not invalidate his contention that they are so constituted. On the contrary, we know that it must be possible to define material things in terms of sense-contents, because it is only by the occurrence of certain sense-contents that the existence of any material thing can ever be in the least degree verified. And thus we see that we have not to enquire whether a phenomenalist "theory of perception" or some other sort of theory is correct, but only what form of phenomenalist theory is correct. For the fact that all causal and representative theories of perception treat material things as if they were unobservable entities entitles us, as Berkeley saw, to rule them out a priori. The unfortunate thing is that, in spite of this, he found it necessary to postulate God as an unobservable cause of our "ideas"; and he must be criticised also for failing to see that the argument which he uses to dispose of Locke's analysis of a material thing is fatal to his own conception of the nature of the self, a point which was effectively seized upon by Hume.

But first of all we ought, perhaps, to justify our assumption that the object of a "theory of truth" can only be to show how propositions are validated. for it is commonly supposed that the business of the philosopher who concerns himself with "truth" is to answer the question "What is truth?" and that is is only an answer to this question that can fairly be said to constitute a "theory of truth."

It may be objected here that we are ignoring the fact that it is not merely propositions that can be said to be true of false, but also statements and assertions and judgements and assumptions and opinions and beliefs. But the answer to this is that to say that a belief, or statement, or a judgement, is true is always an elliptical way of ascribing truth to a proposition, which is believed, of stated, or judged. Thus, if I say that the Marxist's belief that capitalism leads to war is true, what I am saying is that the proposition, believed by Marxists, that the capitalism leads to war is true; and the illustration holds good when the word "opinion" or "assumption," or any of the others in the list, is substituted for the word "belief." And, further, it must be made clear that we are not hereby committing ourselves to the meta-physical doctrine that propositions are real entities. Regarding classes as a species of logical constructions, we may define a proposition as a class of sentences which have the same intentional significance for anyone who understands them. Thus, the sentences, "I am ill," "Ich bin krank," "Je suis malade," are all elements of the proposition "I am ill." And what we have previously said about logical constructions should make it clear that we are not asserting that a proposition is a collection of sentences, but rather than to speak about a given proposition is a way of speaking about certain sentences, just as to speak about sentences, in this usage, is a way of speaking about particular signs.

Reverting to the analysis of truth, we find that in all sentences of the form "p is true," the phrase "is true" is logically superfluous. When, for example, one says that the proposition "Queen Anne is dead" is true, all that he is saying is that Queen Anne is dead.

This point seems almost too obvious to mention, yet the preoccupation of philosophers with the "problem of truth" shows that they have overlooked it. Their excuse is that references to truth generally occur in sentences whose grammatical forms suggest that the word "true" does stand for a genuine quality or relation. And a superficial consideration of these sentences might lead one to suppose that there was something more in the question "What is truth?" than a demand for the analysis of the sentence "p is true." But when one comes to analyse the sentences in question, one always finds that they contain sub-sentences of the form "p is true" or "p is false," and that when they are translated in such a way as to make these sub-sentences explicit, they contain no other mention of truth.

"What makes a proposition true or false?" And this is a loose way of expressing the question “With regard to any proposition p, what are the conditions in which p (is true) and what are the conditions in which not-p?" in other words, it is a way of asking how propositions are validated. and this is the question which we were considering when we embarked on our digression about the analysis of truth."

In chapter exploring critique of ethics and theology A.J.Ayer explores synthetic propositions and it comes to the conclusion that before it justifies views on all synthetic propositions saying that they are empirical hypotheses one more objection has to be met. "This objection is based on the common supposition that our speculative knowledge is of two stint kinds-that which relates to question of empirical fact, and that which relates to question of value. (...) "Statements of value", which is both satisfactory in itself and consistent with our general empiricist principles. We shall set ourselves to show that in so far as statements of value are significant, they are ordinary "scientific" and that in so far as they are not scientific, they are not in the literal sense significant, but are simply expressions of emotions which can be neither true nor false."

All above is either direct quotation from the book or rephrased points that I found of the most value in my study of Investigative Journalism research into psychological part of judgement.Language, Truth and Logic by Alfred Jules Ayer, (1967)

Interview with SALLY PALMER from BBC Knowledge Magazine

2011-04-07T04:22:00.000-07:00

I interviewed Sally Palmer from BBC Knowledge Magazine.
This was part of our assignment for the third year Magazine Journalism module. I took an approach to find a magazine that would interest me and produce content that I would be interested in personally or even be eager to work for myself. I decided to go with a little bit of unconventional looks for the interview make it artistic and use cut aways from the magazine purely for the visual effect and learning new editing tricks.

BBC Knowledge Magazine looked perfect for this task.

I wanted to find out how the process of making a magazine looks and how did her day as an editor of this particular magazine is. I was curious about the history of the magazine and what was her drive for working within Magazine industry. I was also interested about her view on celebrity coverage of other magazines as BBC Knowledge is made for a completely different audience. I wanted to know her reasons why she had gone into Knowledge type of magazine content rather than celebrity orientated magazine. Another subject I touched on in the interview was the future of print magazines in light of everything going online and is video based and finally as a future graduate I wanted to find out what sort of advice could she give for young graduates of journalism or freelance writers.

As Sally says on the front page of the online website for the magazine BBC Knowledge Magazine's international publication is "for everyone who is curious about the world we all share – the natural life that inhabits it, the history that has shaped our lives upon it, and the science that is propelling us onward into the 21st century.

Each issue, the best science writers explore life, the Universe – everything. The world’s leading historians explain the past and tell us why it all matters. And wildlife experts file reports from points right across the planet."

Getting Media involved into investigating an alleged miscarriage of Justice

2011-04-04T11:07:00.000-07:00
Press are the eyes and the ears of the public, to whom they report said Lord Bingham (ref.1) and The Public interest is the main priority for a journalist to pursue their inspiration, “the information’s value to society is argued to be particularly high, or potentially so.” (ref.1)McNae also gives that Lord Bingham said that “the proper functioning of a modern participatory democracy requires that the media be free, active, professional and enquiring” and that is as long as when working for the public interest (certain information is valuable to the society).

The press is free in UK and journalism can be therefore called "‘the fourth estate’ - the body of professional who police the criminal justice system and act as the public’s eyes and ears - 'a bloodhound as well as a watchdog' ”. (ref.2) And court reporters exercise watchdog role on the justice system having at the same time not much more than the same rights as citizens of this country protecting them in difficult or controversial situations surrounding some of the reporting techniques.

Thanks to freedom of expression, everyone (including press) in UK has a right to communicate information and ideas. Without this right Democracy wouldn’t exit. Textbooks like McNae give that until 2000 UK had ‘residual’ rights – making people free to do whatever law does not prohibit. Before the constitution embedded from European law the law was set by law-jury trial and the rule against prior restraint. After the European Convention of Human Rights was adopted directly into UK law human rights became codified (incl. Freedom of Expression).

Two provisions in section one of the convention - article 8 (which establishes a right to privacy) and article 10 (which is a right to freedom of expression) are of special concern to journalists. Journalism itself is intimately related to Human Rights and the rule of law in a free society, with free speech and the right of the citizen to express themselves to the public good. (ref.2)

Privacy Act in Convention (Art 8) did not previously exist within UK law but constant changes to adjust UK conventions to Human Rights act led to developments within case law. The case law is the system by which reporters of previous cases and the judges ‘interpretation of the common law can be used as a precedent where the legally material facts are similar’.

For journalists the most important part of the Convention is Article 10 Freedom of Expression thanks to which “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall not include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority.” (ref.1)

Journalism and law are closely related professions. "Criminal law such as contempt of court places grave restraint on what journalists can write or broadcast and presents a constant danger of imprisonment or fines. (ref.2) A professional journalist needs to be very familiar with branches of the law. The law is important to journalists not only because it is a fantastic source of news but also it is a constraint on the actions of journalists. Press can see this aim to be of such principle that sometimes the forms of obtaining that information can be questionable (undercover journalism). Within this idea hides the main conflicting idea of obtaining information that is created because of two opposite sections within the European law, Freedom of Expression and the Privacy Act. (ref.2)

Within the law of Defamation, libel and slander “strikes a balance between the media being free to express wrongdoing and individual being able to defend reputation from baseless attacks.” (ref.1) Contempt of Court Act 1981 restricts reporting in the court and this could be also seen as restriction on freedom of expression (recent example: Coroners & Justice Bill 2009 & Counter Terrorism Act 2008, McNae's, ch1.).

Another type of restrictions put on press are so called Injunctions (recent example: Lilly Allen who complaint about press crossing the line and disturbing her right to privacy). Injunctions are “stopping publication when media organisation plans to air matter which an individual argues will breach his/her privacy or duty of confidence owed to it.” (ref.1)

Acting in the Public interest is supported by The Freedom of expression law and Qualified Privilege or Absolute Privilege in certain circumstances. “Under the European Communities Act from 1972 the UK is part of European Union, EU treaties and other EU law are thus part of UK law. “(ref.1) After World War II, Western European nations signed a treaty creating the Council of Europe which was a body that would promote individual freedom, political liberty, and the rule of law.(ref.1) This council’s rules led to a further treaty, The European Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECtHR), which includes fundamental laws like right to life, freedom off torture or freedom of expression. The European Court of Human Rights was created to which individuals can take their case to this court to argue that a signatory nation has failed to protect them from, or to sufficiently compensate them for , a breach of Convention right by a public authority. (ref.1)

The Human Rights Act 1998 that came to force 2 October 2000 increased influences of the Convention and the ECtHR on UK courts because the act integrated the Convention into UK law. The UK does not have a written constitution or "fundamental law". Going back to ancient rules of services of law, in England there is still a common law tradition and the constitution is based on historic documents (eg the Magna Carta); there is also statute law (Acts of Parliament) and case law (the actual decisions made by judges and juries). Case law is a general term used when speaking of sources of law.

CRIMINAL LAW deals with offences against society as a whole (such as murder, violence in general or blasphemy) or offences against another person which - (although they may also be a civil-type dispute between people) are abhorrent to society as a whole. Examples include fraud, dangerous driving, robbery, murder, rape and other types of violence or threatening behaviour. The Crown Court Prosecution (CPS) decides whether the case will be brought to the court.

Few last points to that are certainly worth mentioning are that it is incredibly important for journalists to not only have a wider knowledge about the legal systems and the constitution in the country they are practising their profession at but also to stay alert to challenges from the sides of unreasonable or unlawful restrictions on their freedom. They have to remember that there are two constitutional bulwarks that protect freedom of expression in UK such as jury trial and rule against prior restraint. And last but not least for a journalist to remember is to follow the Code of Ethics that should guide journalists in their work.

“ The issue of alleged wrongful convictions has been inextricably bound up with the UK’s media for the last century. “(...) The media and this important issue have formed a powerful and dangerous partnership. “ Dr Eamon O’Neil (Ref.3)

There are many instances of the press and the issue of wrongful convictions coming together. Conan Doyle. “His two most famous cases involved George Edalji and Oscar Slater: a half-Indian living in England, and a German-Jew living in Scotland. (...) Conan Doyle found himself supporting and publicising both cases widely. The author’s standing and reputation catapulted the cases into the public eye and support for them slowly grew until both were satisfactorily resolved.The involvement of the great writer, the press and the public showed that there was an appetite amongst society for acknowledging that the criminal justice system sometimes gets it wrong and convicts the innocent of crimes they did not commit. (...)" (Ref.3) Canon Doyle’s exposure of the Edalji case helped bring about reform of the justice system itself and contributed to the formation of the Court of Criminal Appeal in 1907.

(...) a notable aspect to Slater case however, was the fact that Conan Doyle was attracted to the case after reading a (...) book written by lawyer named William Roughead, a much overlooked person in the whole saga. It was that humble document, which systematically dismantled the case against Slater, which was the spark that ignited the eventual firestorm.” (Ref.3)

When there is the individual claiming wrongful conviction there is the mystery of the case itself which is served up for public consumption through the press. “There is usually a central victim who readers can also identify with; there is the tantalising possibility that the establishment – in the form of the police and justice system – got it “wrong’ which is always of interest to most open societies; there is the high-profile supporter of the case (...) who adds credibility to the case, redressing the moral balance when dealing with someone the system has already convicted and locked-up; there is the opportunity for wider society to jump onboard (...) all of the aspects that create a great story and attract attention of the public becomes worthwhile. “ (Ref.3) All of these parts from “an attractive package for journalists, editors and readers and therefore it is no wonder wrongful convictions and the press often form an intoxicating marriage.” (Ref.3)

The times that have been famously remembered that have exercise the legal system by miscarriages of justice are shown in a short film called: Reeling in the Years 1974-3, which shows two of the cases that I would like to talk about. The case of The Birmingham Six and the case of The Guilford Four (Ref.12 & 13). The Guildford Four case has been brought to the history and a film has been made ‘In the name of the father’ that has kept this glorious moment of justice winning over in our memories.

In the film Who Bombed Birmingham an example is shown when the outcome of investigative work of journalistic genius becomes heroic was the work of Chris Mullin on the Birmingham Six case. It shows how “a brilliant, exemplary and genuinely imaginative piece of investigative journalism (...) can lead to sections of the tabloid press (...). Only with hindsight can we see that their fight with him wasn’t legal, factual or even journalistic – it was purely political. (Ref.3)

Six men were arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment after the bombing in Birmingham in 1970s. IRA seemed to be the instigator but what the IRA insisted was that none of the sentenced six were their members. Two of the public houses were bombed by the IRA, 21 people were killed and 162 injured, 6 people were convicted and had been in prison since 1974. A Granada film is a reconstruction of examining of their case by three journalists since 1985 giving the story of the Birmingham six. The journalists kept on knocking on the doors and they did not give up until the truth won. The journalists noticed inaccuracies to do with the times of interrogation by the police and started questioning the course of the investigation that had put the six men into prison. As we can see on the film, the men were brutally beaten and assaulted. Journalists find a clue in ‘playing cards’ and interview men in prison later they decided to run a simple DNA test that proves that the test carried out on the Birmingham six may have been misleading . (Ref.11)

The journalists see a clue in the fact that the men are severely beaten up on their faces as they can see from the pictures, all six men were abused in prison. Looking into the bombing routine - bombings Chris comes to the conclusion that there were four people responsible for the bombing, 2makers two planters and “we have agreed that you are one of them” says the journalist to one of his interviewees. Chris now needs the planters to make the application for an appeal stronger. Chris finds the guy who put the suitcase with the bomb under the table in the pub and later on he publishes a book ‘Error of judgment’, it doesn’t get men out of the prison but it makes the governing bodies start to question things again (Home office 1986). During the questioning Chris keeps his sources covered fulfilling his journalistic duty. Police says to him that they never said that the imprisoned 6 were members of IRA even though that he knows that in evidence they said that the Birmingham 6 was. Further material is being broadcasted, possibility of the DNA judgment to be wrong and mistreating by the looks of the prisoner’s faces. After two programs had been published and book by Chris Muller, 1987 the case goes into the court of Appeal and the case is investigated again as the case has been taken to the court of appeal. 1987 in court, while being questioned, the police officer denies all the allegation on violence used on the Birmingham six and inaccuracies within the schedule of questioning them but the turning point is when the police woman who has previously given a false statement (because she was being threatened) came back to court and said in front of the judge and jury how she witnessed one of the defendants to be physically assaulted, she also heard what was said “This is what we do to the fucking murdering bustards”(Ref.10). Then the forensic scientist who examined the original samples of the defendants’ DNA is called a witness and his statement proves that his judgment then was wrong. In the meantime Chris Mullin goes to the house of the man who he believes to be ‘the young planter of the bomb’ and challenges him to deny what Chris believes to be true. He says that the six couldn’t tell the police where the bombs were as they didn’t know because it was him who knew it. (Ref.11)

The appeal fails but Chris does not give in. It took until the 1991 for the court to admit that they had the wrong men The Birmingham Six spent 16 years in prison before found not guilty and was released.

“Journalists are ethically bound to investigate any claims of innocence for themselves. They are at the most part, trained not to sign up to anyone’s campaign. They are also trained to be professionally sceptical” which does not mean that they are disinterested but maintaining professional balance of open possibilities to clearly see factual evidence and use them effectively to their best potential. “ (Ref.3) Mullin’s enemies were willing to castigate him in order to annihilate the merest possibility that the public would ever know that the Establishment had wrongfully convicted six Irishmen whose only crime was being who they were in the wrong place and at the wrong time. Lesser journalists would have cracked under the pressure and it is to Mullin’s everlasting credit that his truth did eventually come out.” (Ref.3) In this example “the tabloid newspapers not only published erroneous facts before the trial which could have swayed a jury but they went further and called for capital punishment to be brought back. Reading headlines from that era suggests that the newspaper editors had taken leave of their senses and were happy to urge the readers to literally lynch the accused (and as it turned out innocent) men at the centre of the firestorm.” (Ref.3)

Other more recent examples like Barry George “show that certain sections of the media are still willing to frame the facts in a certain way to suit their preconceived agendas. As Dr Eamon O’Neil admits himself he had plodded around editors more times trying to interest them in possible wrongful convictions stories and the numerous outcomes would be suggestion just to interview gangsters because ‘that’s more glamorous’ and he would be often be told that certain criminals claiming innocence ‘must have done the crime because ‘they look like they are guilty’. (Ref.3)

Other great examples of effective investigative journalism are Ludvic Kennedy's great series of BBC team at Rough Justice or more recent Guardian ‘Justice on Trial’ series was a great work of British investigative journalism and as Eamon points out “socially-engaged journalism at its best. (...) Powerful because it comprehensively conveyed the depth of complexity of wrongful convictions in their entirety.” (Ref.3)

There is always the other side of the coin in getting media involved, as I must point out.

Just like being a solicitor or a judge being an investigative journalist is also a profession and with every profession comes desire of financial award at the end of the investigatory route, it is worth keeping in mind that “press does get on board an alleged miscarriage of justice case and uses its considerable resources to investigate and publish on the case. “ Eamon also admits that the “urge to print a hot story on a miscarriage of justice can often overpower the need to call a lawyer and ask whether immediate publishing was a good idea.” (Ref.3) Also remember that “reporters are now under the greater pressure to produce more articles in shorter times than ever before. Publishers and editors seem to believe in the magical powers of technology to make their journalists be in two places at once and never make mistakes. This means that alleged wrongful conviction cases which demand time and resources to examine, are pushed to one side. “ (Ref.3)

Professional and real journalists like Eamon would always aim to put the fullest version of facts before the reading and viewing public, but there are also other priorities that the journalist have to fulfil. He also emphasises that it is a “fact of life” that it is good “to build a strong and open partnership with the press. He has witnessed himself, as he says, to have the crucial witnesses telling him important facts which they would otherwise have denied or acknowledged of hours before to the police officers, criminal defence lawyers and case staff from the CCRC. As he points out, as a journalist, there is “no legal powers to compel a witness to speak out”.

Sometimes journalists are seen as “the last court of appeal for many of the spectrum of witnesses who want to have their say.” (Ref.3) And last but not least, form of well fulfilled role of journalist makes it the last chance if everything else fails, “then well-placed pre piece can undoubtedly shunt a possible wrongful conviction case forward. (...) So the occasionally light-beam of attention from a journalist can jolt the system into action.” (Ref.3)

To conclude, journalist can of course be of great help to challenge a claim of wrongful conviction and reach their aim of “best obtainable version of truth”, but as Dr Eamon says, stay open to the journalist working on an alleged wrongful conviction sometimes turning up something which challenges your position as it is just like lawyers of defence or prosecution it is their job to dig deep in factual evidence.

References
Ref. 1.McNae's Essential law for Journalists (20th Edition)
Ref. 2. Media law and ethics, notes for week 1 of Media Law and ethics module by Chris Horrie
Ref.3. Claims of Innocence, An Introduction to wrongful convictions and how they might be challenged Michael Naughton with Gabe Tan (2010)
Ref.11) Who bombed Birmingham?
Part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbTqTbmMgkQ
Part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNCGyaS3oPk&feature=related
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpPW2LjkYnE&feature=related
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXMUuyEgbb8&NR=1
Part 6 (which is the following part after part 4 on youtube): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XstdO1PY5gQ&feature=related
Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu9isCmV-rs&NR=1
Part 8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YBqyYOjCcQ&NR=1
Part 9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIO0lClllzI&NR=1
Part 10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nY70XT_Muo&NR=1
Part 11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WhtXQo5EC4&feature=related
Ref.12) Reeling in years 1974-3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_OFo7Crigs&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Ref.13) The Guilford Four, In the name of the father : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgUWn0gVpq0&feature=related

Methods for investigating claims of Innocence (evidence of facts) - studying investigative Journalism

2011-04-04T08:55:00.000-07:00

In their book Claims of Innocence, An Introduction to wrongful convictions and how they might be challenged Michael Naughton and Gabe Tan give fantastic guidelines listing few steps to how to approach an alleged miscarriage of justice.

Crucial are ensuring the retention of evidence and case documents, team will have to ensure of the retention of material by the police, Forensic Science Services (FSS) and by solicitors.

Few good tips there were that if “you are still seeking to challenge your conviction even after you have lost in your appeal or the CCC has refused to refer your case back to appeal courts it is vital that you make a formal written request to the relevant police force for all material relating to your case to be retained.” In case of FSS, “All items submitted by the police to the FSS will normally be returned to the police upon completion of the laboratory examination except in circumstances where the samples are thought to pose a potential hazard (e.g. biological samples such as blood), or, where an agreement has been reached with a relevant police force/organisation for the FSS to retain them, or part of them, under specialised storage conditions, for reference purposes or for possible future re-examination using improved techniques.

The FSS will maintain a document audit trail in relation to retained and destroyed material. The FSS will retain [keep in their possession] material for 30 years as a matter of course in serious cases” including the the murder . This 30 year period do not cover items of perishable nature, like body fluids for example. A “Notification of Intention to Destroy Items of a Perishable Nature' will be sent to the defence team prior to destruction which lists the items that the FSS are intending to dispose of. “ In light of this alleged victims of wrongful convictions should instruct their defence team to respond to the FSS ' Notification of Intention to Destroy Items of Perishable Nature' and request to the FSS for the destruction to be stayed – stopped.” It is also stated here that in addition o above, “ a formal request to the FSS should be made for other non-perishable materials to be retained beyond the minimum retention period.” In situation when the materials have been destroyed it is still possible that material taken from the item has still been retained. Further advise is given here that “it is worth contacting the FSS to ascertain the specific items and samples that they still hold in relation to your case.”

Retention policy with forensic science providers other than FSS is within General Specification Schedule 6A Items 3.22-3.26 Storage, Retention and Disposal, further on it was advaised again that “it is recommended that it be requested in writing to the forensic science that the police need to be contacted is that once a forensic science provider has finished with a case, most exhibits will be sent back to the police. However, certain items such as microscope slides , DNA extracts , acetate sheets containing fibre tape lifts etc will be retained by the forensic science provider for a variable amount of time.” an example of a case study given here is the conviction of Sean Hodgson who was imprisoned for murder of Teresa De Simone in 1979 because FSS had incorrectly declared that “all exhibits in the case were destroyed when the first request for DNA testing on the samples was made”. He served 27 years in prison before his conviction was overturned “when DNA testing of the semen sample collected at the crime scene did not match his profile.”

It is also important that the solicitors are also instructed “in writing not to destroy their files, including instructions and briefs, attendance notes and correspondence sent to third parties on their behalf.”

As an important starting point to investigation it is crucial to learn trial proceedings and examin how the jury decides on convictions which I already did go through the law aspect in two of my other posts when looking into law aspects of Criminal sentencing and jury decision making as well as focused on studying specific crime (murder) and different asoects of defence:

Criminal Law– Smith and Hogan, studying Investigative Journalism
Criminal Law by Alan Reed and Ben Fitzpatrick, chosen aspects- studying Investigative Journalism

The trial scripts and judges summing up are very important and probably best starting point before going deeper into specific areas of the case like for example DNA evidence or handprints. It is good to recognise what wa sthe Prosecutions' and Defence case for the defendant.

In Prosecution's Case, as Michael and Gabe point out it is significant to learn what is the prosequtions's version of what happened and what were the evidence supporting this version and what evidence was produced to undermine the defence's case. They also give advise to construct a list of all the proseqution witnesses who testified in court or whose statements were read out in court, and the evidence given by each of these witnesses. It is a key factor to understand evidence that led to the conviction and look for evidence undermining it or as Gabe and Michael say "disprove it tottaly". The same thing should be done for defence case just studying how the prosecution case was undermined by the defence and all the rest to do with the statements but corresponding to the defence. To stand up arguments against prosecition "evidence needs to be found that contradicts their statements or testiminios."

It is also equaly significant to "to get grips with how the police investigation was conducted, how the evidence was obtained, and whether there is evience that could support your case at trial which was not disclosed by the prosecution or which was ommited by the defence team." As an Inocence Project team that re-examines the case "you have to actively find evidence that undermines the prosecution's case and/or produce new evidence that could positively establish that alleged victims of wrongful conviction are innocent ot the crime that they have been convicted of."

When looking at the witness testimonies it is worth looking into things like whether the evidence given to the police is consistent with the evidence that the witness gave in court; "if a witness provided more than one statement, and the evidence which incriminates the alleged victim of wrongful conviction only came out in the later statement, it is crucial to question why the witness did not provide the evidence in his or her earlier statement(s). " Other thing to be done in course of examinations are looking into unused materials like witness statements perhaps there was something in there that that could contradict the witness's evidence or even find out if any of the witnesses had ever had a history of making false allegations.

Further on, loking into witness evidence, eyewitness identification evidence "featured in the prosecution's case at trial and you think that eyewitness might have been genuinely mistaken, (i.e. you are not claiming that the eye witness lied to the police or in court) the following pointers could assist you in proving that the eyewitness identification evidence is unreliable (...).”

Identififation procedure also has to comply with the Police and Crim inal Evidence Act 1984, particulary the Code of Practice for the Identification of Persons by the Police officers (Code d). Other significant tip is that “the witness should not see suspect on any photographs or description of the suspect prior to the ID parade.” Or even “could the witness have heard or heard any describtion of the suspect from the media prior to making the identification?” All these are vitally important, Michael and Gabe also give website that helps with other aspects of identification issues on Crampton, S. (2005) ‘Identification Issues’. (www.unitedagainstinjustice.org.uk )

Other aspect of giving statements is confesions, “if an alleged victim of wrongful conviction is convicted on basis of a confession, and s/he now [is] claiming that confession is false, the following pointers might assist in showing the unreliability of the confession:”
- all police interviews with suspects have to be audio recorded,
- if a person is forced to make a false confesion – check if police compied with the provisions set out under the PACE (Code of Practice C) (including the alleged victim of wrongful conviction)
- if the alleged victim of wrongful conviction is a vulnerabl suspect or suffers from mental or physical disability, check if the proper procedures for interviewing vulnerable suspects were adhered to.
-Does the confession contain describtions like how the crime was committed which do not fit with the evidence ,
- “At which point did the confession emerge? Are there any inconsistencies in the evidence given by the alleged victim of a wrongful convicton in the course of the police investigation? Did the alleged victim attempt to retract their confession in the course of the police investigation?”
-check how long was the alleged victim of wrongful conviction retained in custody before making the confession?
-Was the confession made in presence of the solicitor
- “if the alleged victim of wrongful conviction is alleging that the confession was fabricated by the police, send the statement for analysis by forensic psychologist. There might be words or forms of expressions contained in the statement that does not fit with the age/or educational background of the alleged victim”
-“if the alleged victim might have an undiagnosed mental or personality disorder which could make him/her vulnerable to making a false confession, arrange for a diagnosis by forensic psychologist.”

All above is vital, I will be dealing with more Forensic issues in separate chapter, which I will publish soon.

Finally, last but not least to end this post it is worth adding fue more quotes from Michael and Gabe’s book regarding solicitors. In the centre of all major wrongful conviction cases that Michael and Gabe cited in their book are “defence solicitors who were committed to the plight of the alleged innocent victims and dedicated themselves to assisting them to overturn their criminal convictions.

Such criminal appeal solicitors are vital in attempts to overturn alleged wrongful convictions. They can use their legal powers to ask for, and obtain, disclosure of evidence, challenge decisions made by authorities such as Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) or the police, ensure that correspondence to prisoners is confidential and not opened before it reaches them, obtain affidavits from witnesses who want to prove alibis or retract their incriminating statements, they can commission new tests to be conducted to produce new evidence that can call safety of the conviction in question, they can make the application for the appeal or to Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).”

*All quotes and information are from:
Claims of Innocence, An Introduction to wrongful convictions and how they might be challenged
Michael Naughton with Gabe Tan (2010)

*My other posts created on basis of this book:
SEE HERE - Claims of Innocence by Michael Naughton and Gabe Tan – studying Investigative Journalism

Claims of Innocence by Michael Naughton and Gabe Tan – studying Investigative Journalism

2011-04-01T12:28:00.000-07:00

“Criminal justice process is not perfect and factually innocent individuals can, and for variety reasons are , wrongly convicted and even imprisoned for crimes they have played no part in.”

Through my research and reading I will be trying to show the emergence of rethinking the circumstances which allowed for some of the wrongful convictions to happen. Claims of Innocence by Michael Naughton is on of these books which explore number of wrongful convictions and introduce the concept of challenging them.

As a third year student of Journalism being part of the Innocence Project I am interested in certain aspects of investigatory techniques as well as trying to learn important law concepts that have affected our case.

In his book, Michael lists causes of wrongful convictions including aspects of the pre-trial and trial stages of the criminal justice process “from false allegations, police misconduct, prosecution and and police non-disclosure, erroneous forensic science and expert evidence, and poor representation from criminal defence lawyers.” Michael, a founder and leader for Innocent Project in Bristol wrote this book along with Gabe Tan giving useful guidelines for not only members of Innocence Project but also future lawyers and investigative journalists.

“Innocence projects were established in recognition of failings of the Court Appeal (Criminal Devision) and the Criminal Cases Review Commission to guarantee that factually innocent victims of wrongful conviction will overturn their convictions. But innocence projects, too, are constrained by the lack of resources and investigatory powers. “

Michael talks about the beginning of the need for creation of organisations like Innocence Project.
“The CCRC [Criminal Cases Review Commission] followed a recommendation by the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice (1993) (RCCJ) that was prompted by the public cricis of the confidence in the entire criminal justice system, which was caused by the cases of the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six and a string of other notable cases in which Irish people were wrongly convicted upon suspiction of being connected with terrorist crimes that were commited by the IRA (Irish Republican Army). “

Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) “was set up in response to notorious cases such as Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six, but it cannot guarantee that innocent victims of wrongful conviction will have their cases referred back to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Devision) if the evidence of innocence was available at the time of the original trial.”

The CCRC website states ' We do not consider innocence or guilt, but whether there is new evidence or argument that may cast doubt on the safety of an original decision'. It seeks to check the decisions are made within the rules and procedures and to determine lawfulness of the convictions. Important are new evidence that “may undermine legal safety of the criminal convictions”.

Since 2002, applicants for CCRC have to write a letter to the CCRC setting out basis of challenge before proceeding with an application for judicial review.
The CCRC will decide within 14 days id the challenge should be conceded or not. (www.ccrc.gov.uk/canwe.htm> and guide to making application: http://unitedagainstinjustice.org.uk/advice/CCRC%20applications%20guide.html+constraints>)

Following that another quite a shocking fact in English law I found was that if the convicted person doesn't admit the guilt and “refuse to undertake specified offending behaviour programmes to provide the Parole Board with the evidence that it needs to recommend release.” So effectively, law is not particularly concerned with absolute truth, but “with proof before a fallible human tribunal to a requisite standard of probability in accordance with formal rules of evidence” (House of Lords ruling in the case of Director of Public Prosecutions v. Shanron [1974] 59 Cr. App. R. 250) The above accounts for reasons of innocent people being convicted, what is more, the fact that “proof that the evidence that led to the conviction is unreliable does not guarantee that the Court of Appeal (Criminal Devision) will deem a wrongful conviction unsafe and quash it.” Successful appeals in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) are “mainly achieved by new evidence that shows criminal convictions to be unreliable and, therefore deemed to be unsafe.”

Michel lists key causes of wrongful convictions like False Confessions, like in case of Ian Lawless, who in 2001 was convicted and given a life sentence for a murdering Alf Wilkins. His conviction was quashed in 2009 after 8 years in prison after it was revealed that Ian suffered from personality disorder which made him create false confessions because of a pathological need for attention.

Incompetent Police investigation was a reason to convicting Warren Blackwell in 1999. The independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) revealed a series of errors by Northamptonshire Police that contributed to Blackwell's wrongful Conviction.

Example of Police Misconduct can be observed in case of Cardiff Newsagent Three where three innocent people were convicted in 1988 of killing and robbery of cardiff Newsagent Philip Sunders. Johny Kamara spent 20years in prison when “it was found that the police failed to disclosure over 200 statements taken during the course of investigation this injustice has been committed due to so called non-disclosure of Vital Evidence.

George Anderson and Margaret Hewitt were convicted in 2004 of child abuse, their convictions were quashed due to revealing false allegations by one of the complainants who admitted that he had lied.
In 1998, Tony Wild admitted in a BBCRough Justice documentary that he had fabricated the evidence against Reg Dudley and Bob Maynard who were convicted of murdering Billy Mosley and Micky Cornwall, to evade long prison sentence for armed robbery. Both Reg and Bob have served over 20 years of wrongful conviction due to so called Prison Informants.

Flawed Expert Evidence was a reason for creating misleading evidence by Professor Sir Roy Meadow who stated that odds of deaths of two children was 73,000,000 to 1 and Sally Clark and Angela Cannings were both given life sentences for murdering their children. In 2003 it was revealed that their children had most likely died of natural causes.

The conviction of Andrew Adams was overturned after he served 15years in prison due to a poor defence in 1993 in which numerous crucial evidence were overlooked.

“Thousands of people convicted of criminal offences seek to challenge their convictions in the Appeal Courts in England and Wales each year.” As Michael notices, there are various reasons why “alleged victims of wrongful conviction might maintain innocence when they are not innocent” like hope for successful appeal; ignorance of criminal law in which the convicted people do not know or understand that their behaviour is criminal. Other reasons can account for disagreement with Criminal law in which the convicted person is aware of the actions of criminal offence but disagree that they should be convicted; claims that there was a technical miscarriage of justice or even because of shame or even stigma of being associated with a criminal offender.

Striking to find out was for me to find out how the Parole Deal works. Looking at the cases like for example Paul Blackburn and Robert Brown, each of them spent 25 years in prison being innocent and maintaining their innocence, had they acknowledged guilt and had they “confronted their offending behaviour and, thus, demonstrated a reduced risk of reoffending in eyes of the Parole Board, they would, probably, have served around half that time.”

“An appellant challenging a conviction given in a magistrates' Court who fails his/her appeal in the High Court might apply to have the case heard at the Supreme Court.” Which only hears cases from the High Court, what is more it happens in a very limited circumstances where “the case involves arguable points of law and is deemed to be of general public importance.”

“The latest available figures from the Ministry of Justice show that between 2004-2008 (inclusive), the CACD [Court of Appeal, Criminal Devision]received an annual average of 1,627 applicants for leave to appeal against conviction” of which “24% on almost a quarter of all whose made an application to single Judge were successful in having their case referred to the Full Court for an Appeal. “

“Under s.2 of the Criminal Appeal act 1995 the role of the CACD is solely to adjudicate the safety of the conviction and quash a conviction if it decides that the conviction is 'unsafe':
Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Court of Appeal:
a)Shall allow an appeal against conviction if they think that the conviction is unsafe; and,
b) shall dismiss such an appeal in any other case. “

“An appelant to the Supreme Court may only be brought with the permission of the CACD or of the Supreme Court and, if refused, to The Supreme Court.”

All quotes and information from:
Claims of Innocence, An Introduction to wrongful convictions and how they might be challenged
Michael Naughton with Gabe Tan (2010)

Criminal Law– Smith and Hogan, studying Investigative Journalism

2011-03-30T17:54:00.000-07:00
“The Law Commission recently described murder as a ‘rickety structure set upon shaky foundations. Law Commission Consultation Paper No 177, New Homicide Act for England and Wales (2005) (LCCP 177), para 1.4. See below, p 633. (...) Murder is when a man of sound memory, and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killed within any county of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the king’s peace, with malice aforethought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, [so as the party wounded, or hurt, etc die of the wound or hurt, etc within a year and a duty after the same]. (Coke 3 Inst 47)” (ref.1)

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) sates in Article 2 that everyone has a right to live, murder breaks this law directly.

The Smith and Hogan’s Criminal Law states that, “it must be proved that the defendant caused the death of the deceased person.” (ref.1)

“The starting point is that we are concerned with proof of real state of mind. The mens rea for murder is that D must have malice aforethought, that is, D must have intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.” (ref.1)

“The mental element required for the crime of murder, as for the crime of manslaughter, has varied over the centuries. From Coke’s time (...) there has been a steady contradiction of definition of murder but for the unfortunate decision in DPP v Smith. Reporting in 1953 the Royal Commission on Capital punishment (RCCP) (Cmd 8932) found it ‘impractical’ to form a satisfactory definition of murder but it did recommend that the reach of murder be curtailed by abolition of the doctrine of ‘constructive’ murder. Under the doctrine a person was guilty of murder if he caused death during the commission of felony involving violence (eg, rape, robbery) or if he caused death while resisting an officer of justice.” (ref.1)

Further on the book explains the concept of abolition of ‘constructive malice’:

“1. Where a person kills another in the course of furtherance of some other offence, the killing shall not amount to murder unless done with the same malice aforethought (express or implied) as it is required for killing to amount to murder when not done in the course of furtherance of another offence.

2. For purposes of the foregoing subsection, a killing done in the course or for the purpose of resisting an officer of justice, or of resisting or avoiding or preventing a lawful arrest, or of effecting or assisting an escape or rescue from legal custody, shall be treated as a killing in the course or furtherance of an offence.” (ref.1)

Studying elements of crime it is essential to have a look into actus reus and mens rea which are components of crime. “Lawyers have long found it convenient to distinguish the mental element from the other elements for the purposes of exposition of the law and have called it ‘mens rea’. This phrase derives from a maximum quoted by Coke in his Institutes (Ch 1, fo 1o) ‘ Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea’, an act does not make a man guilty of a crime unless his mind also be guilty. (...) The elements of the actus reus include elements of conduct, circumstances, and in some offences, consequences. (...)

Most crimes require proof of a mental element of some sort. It has to be proved with the same degree of strictness as the other elements of the crime as the case of Woolminghton (...). It is possible for the courts to dispense with mens rea in whole or in part with offences of strict or absolute liability (...), but, except in the anomalous case of an intoxication offender (...) they can never dispense with the actus reus. There are no ‘thought crimes’. (...)

Above all it is essential to emphasise that “these expressions – mens rea and actus reus – are only analytical tools: they help us to identify which elements of the offence are in dispute etc. The only thing that exists in law is the crime.” (ref.1)

There are two points of controversy in a description of the two concepts. “The actus reus generally requires proof that the defendant did an act. It is argued that since an act is essentially a voluntary movement and not a spasm or convulsion, ‘voluntariness’, though a mental element, is part of actus reus. (...) Some of writers and judges have described these mental elements as part of the mens rea. However, the only thing that really matters is whether they area elements in the crime. If they are, it is immaterial whether they are assigned to the actus reus or to the mens rea.”

All these concepts I already explored in my previous post, by reading a different book I wanted to compare and find if the definitions would differ and bring a new meaning into answers that I am looking for in aspect of murder and finding certain defences and understanding judgment through criminal law.

Again, it is clear that "all the elements of crime charged must be proved" and this is what is very important in understanding how prosecution has to act in order to persuade the jury to their side of arguments.

Other aspect on my research involves speculation and suspicion that leads to a suspect and how a suspect becomes a defendant. studying these concepts is crucial in understanding what would have had to be proved or investigated by the prosecution so that the legal guilt could be found and effectively the suspect turned into convicted person.

"There are may serious offences with law level mensrea requirements such as 'suspiction' and ' having reasonable grounds to suspect'. "

"In Da Silva [2006] EWCA Crim 1654, 'supicion' was held to impose a subjective test: D's suspicion need no be based on 'reasonable grounds'. D must think that there is a possibility, which is more than fanciful, that the relevant facts exist. Use of words like 'fleeting thought' and 'inkling' [vague idea of suspiction] is apt to mislead.(...) the court held that the essential element in the word 'suspect' and its affiliates, in this content, is that the defendant must think that there is a possibility, which is more than fanciful, that the relevant facts exist. A vague feeling of unease would not suffice. But the statue does not require the suspicion to be 'clear' or 'firmlygrounded and targeted on specific facts', or based upon 'reasonable grounds'." (ref.1)

Lord Devlin in Hussien v Chang Fook Kam [1970] AC 942 at 948 defined suspicion as its common meaning to be "in state of conjecture or surmise where proof is lacking: 'I suspect but I cannot prove'. Susption arises at or near the starting point of an investigation of which the obtaining of prima facie prof is the end." (ref.1)

The presumption of innocence is measured within the necessity for the Crown to establish every element of the offence to the standard of proof which will be measured on the balance of probabilities or beyond reasonable doubt depending what sort of offence did the person commit. As mentioned in my previous post the side of the argument that berries the burden of proof does not satisfy the jury/court they lose the case. The defendant on the other hand is not obliged to prove the particular defence in order to be not guilty. However, the defendant still needs to 'raise evidence' of the "defence in order get it on its feet". (ref.1)
As soon as he does so the Crown will have to disprove it, if it fails to do so the defendant is acquitted.

"In a criminal trial, the prosecution will have to satisfy the court of defendant's guilt to 'criminal standard': that is beyond reasonable doubt." (ref.1) which is what I have already learnt from the previous reading, in here there comes another aspect of exception in which "the defence bears the burden of proof the defendant must satisfy the court on the balance of probabilities - that is that it more likely than not. Crudely, that equates to 51 per cent. There is no standard of proof in relation to evidential burdens of proof. The requirement is that the party adduces enough evidence to raise the issue."

"The presumption of innocence is found in all international instruments of human rights and the constitutions of many states throughout the world. It is rightly perceived as a fundamental principle; many would say that it is foundational principle of criminal process.
...
It is submitted that when a challenge is made to the compatibility of a reverse onus the present law requires a three-stage process of decision-making.

1. interpretation of the statue: does the provision in question, interpreted in accordance with the ordinary principles of construction, place a burden on the accused? If so, is it a legal or an evidential burden? If it is evidential no further inquiry need [to] be made about compatibility with Art. 6 (2). If it is a legal burden, the court must move to stage 2 to assess the question of compatibility.

2. Justification of the reverse onus: does the provision in question serve a legitimate aim and is it proportionate to that aim? If the answer is Yes, the provision is an acceptable qualification to the presumption of innocence. The defendant will then bear the burden of proof on the matter in question, although to a lower standard of proof than the prosecution (namely the balance of probabilities), if the answer is No the court must move to stage 3.

3. Reading down the provision: if the reverse legal burden cannot be justified can the court 'read down' the burden to an evidential one, using s.3 of the HRA? If it can it should do so. If it cannot the court should make a declaration of incompatibility of the provision under s.4 of the HRA. (ref.1)

All the above is essential in understanding processes of conviction and at the same time learning the ways that Criminal law works.

Reference:
1. Smith and Hogan, Ormerod. D (2009) Criminal Law, Cases and Materials, 10th Edition

Criminal Law by Alan Reed and Ben Fitzpatrick, chosen aspects- studying Investigative Journalism

2011-03-30T12:49:00.000-07:00
" Throughout the web of the English criminal Law one golden thread is always to be seen, that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner's guilt, subject to... the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exception... No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained". Woolmington v DPP, Viscount Sankey L.C.

Investigative Journalists are probably experts in this part of law or just as well informed as they know their Media Law. Main focus of Criminal Law turns into facts of the case, "on what happened, rather than on the criminal law itself."(ref.1) And investigating facts and finding the factual innocence rather tan only looking at legal innocence or guilt.

"However, underpinning any discussion, factual or fictitious, of the criminal justice process, is the possibility more mundane question of what behaviour amounts to a criminal offence. Thus, if the question in a television drama is whether a suspect has committed murder, somebody needs to know what, at law, constitutes the offence of murder." (ref.1)

"Criminal Law operates in the area in which the interests of citizens conflict with each other, and where the state claims a legitimate stake in people's behaviour. It is therefore one of many ideal subjects for developing an understanding of how society fits together, and is regulated." (ref.1)

Looking into the burden of proof and standard of proof. "The basic rule of criminal evidence is that the prosecution must prove the case against the defendant. Thus, if a defendant is charged with murder, the prosecution must prove that all the elements of murder are present - that is, that the defendant unlawfully caused the death of human being, with the intention to kill or to grievous bodily hard. The requirement for the prosecution to prove the case reflects what is known as the presumption f innocence." (ref.1) Which in other words means 'innocent until proven guilty'. Essentially it is only prosecution that has to prove the case.

There are also situations where the prosecution does not bear the burden of proof in case that the defendant wants to claim that they are insane, in order to avoid conviction and this is when the defendant will have to prove that they are insane. Further more it is important to know how much proof is needed (the standard proof), " the prosecution must prove their case beyond reasonable doubt" (ref.1), however "it does not mean with absolute certainty". (ref .1)

The meaning of the 'reasonable' in there means that the prosecution has to make you to be sure of it, so strength of persuasion of the prosecution is crucial in presenting the evidence in that case as from what it looks like even though the defence' stand and evidence were factually correct and the person would be factually innocent if the defence doesn't have a strong persuasion and skill to present it, prosecution can win still win the case. It seems like this phrase, 'beyond reasonable doubt' all of the sudden brings up hesitation in fair judgement and it looks like there is room for doubt.

"If after considering all the evidence you are sure that the defendant is guilty, you must return a verdict of 'Guilty'. If you are not sure, your verdict must be 'Not Guilty'." This is what the Judicial Studies Board (...) suggests that judges direct juries on so called standard of proof.

"If the evidence is so strong against a man as to leave only a remote possibility in his favour which can be dismissed with the sentence 'of course it is possible, but not in the least probable.' the case is proved, but nothing short of that will suffice." (Miller v Minister of Pensions, Denning J,) (ref.1)

However, “if the burden of proof is on the defendant, it need never be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt. Rather, the required standard is 'the balance of probabilities'. This means, effectively, more likely than not.” (ref.1)

“The … degree of cogency... required... is well settled. It must carry a reasonable degree of probability … If the evidence is discharged, but, if the probabilities are equal, it is not.” (ref.1) In other words the burden of proof in a criminal trial lies in hands of the prosecution not for the accused to prove his innocence, as long defendant pleas 'not guilty' (nothing is admitted) every argument of the prosecution is questionable and will have to prove his guilt.

External element of the offence (actus reus) is guilty act of the crime, and the so called internal elements (mens rea) are in other words guilty mind, meaning that a guilty person committed the crime with intention of doing so. These two main ingredients of crime.

“As a general rule the larger the penalty the less likely the court is to treat it as a crime involving strict liability. The reasoning behind this is that a heavy maximum penalty is an indication of Parliament's intention that the accused should be shown to be blameworthy. “ (ref.1)

In light of the above rule it appears that the question should be asked, what about these who have been wrongly accused. Why this judgement which is supposed to be beyond reasonable doubt can still be within a level of doubt that can allow for an innocent person to be convicted of crime that they did not commit. It does happen, and again looking at the rule above it would make 'in eyes' of law and 'Parliament's intention' that an innocent person can be judged to be blameworthy and convicted and imprisoned while being innocent.

Within the aspect of so called 'mentally abnormal offender (insanity and unfitness to plead) it is very interestingly stated that “the defence of insanity is raised by a defendant who is claiming that at the time he was alleged to have committed the offence he was suffering from a mental condition which would excuse him from criminal responsibility.” (ref.1) This would lead to verdict 'not guilty by a reason of insanity'. Going further into the phrase above, how about if a defendant's mind and skill wasn't sharp enough, 'equipped' in knowledge and skill to commit presumably premeditated crime that would involve from could be classed as a high skill as well as knowledge to cover the evidence so that there is close to none on the crime scene. Would this classify as “a mental condition which would excuse him from criminal responsibility”?

“ The law is not concerned with the brain but with the mind, in the same sense that 'mind' is ordinarily used, the mental faculties of reason, memory and understanding. If one read for 'disease of mind' 'disease of the brain', it would follow that in many cases pleas of insanity would not be established because it could not be proved that the brain had been affected in any way, either by degeneration of cells orin any other way. “ This judgement was said Davlin J. in Kemp (ref.1, page 190), it was also added that “the condition of brain is irrelevant and so is the question whether the condition of the mind is curable or incurable, transitory or permanent.” (ref.1, page 190)

In case of Podola (ref.1, page 181), “ where D sought to rely on hysterical amnesia preventing him from remembering events material to the commission of the crime which involved the murder of a police officer. This emphasises that it is the state of the person's mind at the time of the trial that in in issue. By the time of the trial Padola was clearly able to understand the charges that had been brought against him and knew difference between pleading 'guilty' or 'not guilty'. In this case, if his claims as to hysterical amnesia were true, his difficulty lay in knowing whether to plead' guilty' or 'not guilty' since he could not recall what happened.

Where the issue is raised by the defendant he has burden of proving on a balance of probabilities that he is unfit to plead; where it is raised by the judge or prosecution, the prosecution bears the burden of proving beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is unfit.” (ref.1) (All the aspects of levels of the defendant to be 'unfit' are understandably to be explored in depth with attendant medical evidence.)

“ The 1991 Act provides that no jury may make a finding that the accused is insane or unfit to plead unless they have received evidence from at least two qualified medical practitioners, at least one of whom must be approved by the Home Secretary as having special experience in the diagnosis or treatment of mental disorder. (…) Once a jury have returned a finding that the defendant is unclear a disability and hence unfit to plead, the jury will then determine, on the evidence already received or now adduced, whether they are satisfied that the defendant did in fact do the act or make the omission charged against him.” (ref.1, page 184)

Insanity as a defence today is seen as a wider range of conditions and "in theory, it could be raised as a defence to even the most trivial assault. However, the result of a successful defence of insanity may be committed to a mental institution for an indeterminate length of time. In effect, therefore, insanity will rarely be raised by the accused on anything but a charge of murder and even there a plea of diminished responsibility would normally be preferred which could lead there a plea of diminished responsibility would normally be preferred which could lead to a determinate prison sentence. " (ref.1) Insanity may be raised indirectly as a defence today. "This could occur because the accused has attempted to plead that he did not possess the necessary mens rea for the offence only to find that the judge has ruled that as a matter of law reason he is advancing amounts to a disease of the mind." (ref.1)

This could partly answer my question from earlier on, for example in Clarke case (ref.1, page 193), "the accused was charged with stealing from a shop. She pleaded that she had taken the items from the shelf absent-mindedly as a result of the depression that she was suffering. If Mrs Clarke had simply rested her case on absent-mindedness, all would probably have been well. Unfortunately, medical evidence was called to support her statements and it was the effect of this evidence which led the trial judge to decide she was raising the defence of insanity." (ref.1)

From what it looks the aspect of the defendant to be not capable of the crime because of not high level of intelligence with dyslexia for example and therefore I can clarify this state of mind to any of the particular of being unfit or call it 'disease of the mind' or example of a non-insane automatism, question is whether it could be defined under any of the mentioned states of mind?

Moving into other aspects of my interest in here, intoxication. As it is given in Criminal Law by Alan Reed and Ben Fitzpatric is that there is posible argument for questioning the mens rea in situstion when defendant is intoxicated, occasion when "he will be so drunk that he does not form the necessary mens rea." (ref.1)

Good question to ask here is whether a certain level of intoxication could give a defendant some sort of alibi that he couldn't commit the crime because of certain level of the intoxication in other words could it be used as a defence?

Alan Reed & Ben Fitzpatrick give this general rule, " intoxication will provide a defence only when it negatives the required mens rea, and even here the defence is severely restricted. We can say that where the effect of intoxication is simply to remove the inhibitions, it will be no defence (...). The defendant will have a defence in these circumstances only if he can bring himself within a defence such as diminished responsibility. "(ref.1)

"Lord Birkenhead took murder as an example. If the accused did not form intention to kill or cause greviou bodily harm bacause he was intoxicated , he could not be convicted of murder (...). The positon would appear to be that voluntary intoxication is a defence only to crimes requiring a specific intent (...)." Could this parts of statements answer my question about having intoxication as part of the defence of being incapable of commiting a crime? Well eventhough it may sound like it is, journalistic nature some aspects that I am questioning doesnt allow me to satisfy myelf with that answer untill I see direct an factual answer as above was in different context and so it may answer it indirectly which is not enough to make it a fact.

Looking at the offences against the person, "murder for example, requires proof that the accused caused death and the offence under s.47 of the Offence Against the Person act 1861 requires proof that the accused caused bodily harm." (ref.1) Further on attempt of definig a murder was "murder is when a man of sound memory, and of age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any country of realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's peace, with malice aforethought, ... " (ref.1)

"Historicaly, when an offender was convicted of murder, they would be required to serve a minimum term of imprisonment - known as 'tarif' - which was fixed by the House secretary, after which they become eligable for release on license. " (ref.1) However, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 placed the sentencing regime for murder on a "stautory footing". (ref.1) To prove Unlawful killing prosecution needs to prove that defendant killed the victim and that the killing was unlawful and the proof must be beyound reasonable doubt. To establish a charge of murder the prosecution also has to prove that "the defendant possessed the necessary mens rea on each element of the actus reus." (ref.1)

References:
1. Criminal Law by Alan Reed and Ben Fitzpatric, (2009) 4th Edition

'Conviction' an amazing true story about ultimate sacrifice and real victory of justice - it should have received higher rating!

2011-03-23T13:49:00.000-07:00
I completely do not agree with the rating of the film which I saw was even given 3/5 on some websites or newspaper reviews. This film's value and narrative story has something very special to offer, this film was one of the most valuable and significant films I have ever watched in my life and if films of this type do not deserve a high rating then all the rating system may be thrown out of the window.

One first comments underneath this film's trailer follows: " Someone please tell me what is wrong with Hollywood and why this movie was not awarded an Oscar or Golden Globe? This movie was the best I have ever seen. (...) I hope this movie inspires you to do the same for your family if God forbid something like this should happen. I wish Hollywood would have reconsidered. I say it was better then Black Swan and deserved an award. Hillary Swank was awesome as was Sam Rockwell who played Kenny." (Ref. 5)

"Conviction is a 2010 drama film directed by Tony Goldwyn. It stars Hilary Swank as Betty Anne Waters and Sam Rockwell as her brother Kenneth Waters. The film premiered on September 11, 2010, at the Toronto Film Festival and was released on October 15, 2010." (Ref.1)

The film is based on the true story of Betty Anne Waters, an unemployed single mother who, with the help of attorney Barry Scheck from the Innocence Project, exonerated her wrongfully convicted brother. In order to do this she earned her GED, then her bachelor's, a master's in education, and eventually a law degree from Roger Williams University in Rhode Island. She accomplished this while raising two boys alone and working as a waitress part-time. While in law school, she began investigating her brother's case.

The story of a true murder and real conviction of Kenny who was so fantastically acted as by Sam Rockwell took place in1983.

The murder of Katharina Brow in Ayer, Massachusetts in 1980 led the investigation to a completely wrong source and an innocent man was imprisoned.

This story also brings the significance of the Innocence Project to our cinema screens. Winchester University is currently a member of the project and I am proud of it.

Betty Anne (played by Hilary Swank),  single mother spends a decade earning a law degree so she can represent her brother at court. She managed to locate biological evidence and then worked with the Innocence Project, to obtain DNA testing on the evidence. Her love, faith and devotion led to proving Waters' innocence and his exoneration on June 19, 2001.

Betty crushes the conviction by revealing the corruption of the police officer Nancy Taylor played by Melissa Leo, a cop who pins the murder on Kenny.

The story is deeply moving and shows heroic actions of Betty, who from a just an average citizen living peacefully with her family and enjoying her life became an extraordinary hero, fearless and unbreakable even when her whole world stood against her. She did not give in and never lost her faith in her brother's innocence.

The fact that the film was based on this extraordinary story shows a great taste and idea for film played by award winning actors.

Bearing all above in mind I was unpleasantly surprised by the lack of audience in the cinema and some of the reviews in the cinema I happened to be watching it at.

Reading comments and reviews on the film like for example one of popular websites, has only given Conviction "generally positive reviews" with an average score of 6.2/10 which I completely disagree with. Further on I read "he critical consensus is: Less compelling -- and more manipulative -- than it should be, Conviction benefits from its compelling true story and a pair of solid performances from Swank and Rockwell. Another review aggregator Metacritic assigned the film a weighted average score of 59 out of 100, indicating "mixed or average reviews".

True stories like this should be rated in it's own individual and category. The play of actors perhaps can be judged performance wise (which I would give 9/10) but the story is real, we can not judge the reality in which someone's life has nearly been wasted in prison for a wrongful conviction. The answer to that is quite simple. We can not.

References:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_(film)
2. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1244754/
3. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/filmreviews/8070463/Conviction-London-Film-Festival-review.html
4. http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jan/13/conviction-review
5. shttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrPtr0aQx3s

Last WINOL of the year 2010 (Week 12-15th December 2010)

2010-12-15T20:50:00.000-08:00
This week was one of the most exciting ones for our team as Maria Melano was meant to be our special guest on the sofa at Winol Life last sow of the year. And in fact the last show I would do for WINOL as after Christmas third years are not going to be working for WINOL anymore. Final Year Project is going to take over! So this will be my last post ever on Winchester News Online.

Looking at our audience penetration, we were informed on Monday WINOL is just about to overtake the University's website! We are 165,000 website in the world and our university is 145, 000, in comparison, Southampton University is lower in readership ranking than our WINOL! Fantastic!

All that means that we are not only targeting our audience well but also developing our study of the market.

There was no WINOL news bulletin this week, only WINOL Life and sports.We found out that BJTC will be announcing the resoults around January time. We were also told that there are plans to have channel36 - analouge to broadcast our work.

Within this week it was important for us to make sure that we understand the concept of the factual entartanment, it is more about showing rather than telling. In preparation for the show with maria Melano, Paul and I looked into work of hers. Maria specialies in the design ainly, layout. Her magazine is all about fashion and big names being interviewed/photographed. In the world of fashion things have to be looked at from many different angles (her films/interviews). The magazine trully represents multimedia journalism with its interactive and video/picture led website.

For the running order of the show we have decided to have:
1. Autumn Fashion
2. Christmas dresses
3. alistair steward feature interview
4. Phil Jupitus feature interview (by Joey)
5. Atacama dessert race
6. News review of the semester by Joey

We are planning rehearsing 1/2 pm on Wednesday, we will be aiming athalf hour again and the same set up in the studion with two sofas (The ONe Show). We will have to have the script done by 1pm, and I will have to check and collect all the features onto my hard drive for the show. Every thing seemed to be well organised until... Wednesday
Charlotte, managing editor promised to help out in organising the production team and promote our show -she didn't even turn up
- studion was not ready for the morning
- Maria Melano unfortunately couldn't come in at the end and so we had to go plan b:
- have Chris and Brian as guests - We changed the script
- I still attempted to contact head of fashion at the Winchester school of arts and soem other people but noone could do it in such short notice.
- there was hardly anyone in and our production team was lacking in man power- noone seemed to be willing to help. Which was very frustrating. We had no camera people, floor manager, editor and Josh effectively had to be our director and producer during the recording of the show. I was still running as the feature editor, was in charge of delivering VTS, help in stiudio set etc and at the same time was presenting. Paul and I were in the same uncomfortable situation.
Tomek was a huge help, Rob, Jason and few other students have helped majourly for which i am very grateful.
As you can imagine lack of rehearsals and constant script chanes were very unhelpful. Chris and Brian couldn't be our guests and we actualy had a privilege to have Ian Anderson as our guest, who was one of the best studio guestas that I have ever realt with.

Eventually we managed record the show. It was incredibly hard and very challenging in many aspects but we have overcomed the difficulties and produced the show. I have uploaded it in three parts for now but it will go as a life stream onto the website:
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMeOpB7TQLQ

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxnvxm5Akvg

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHj5dJtqrBA

UPDATE FROM THE FEATURES PROMISED LAST WEEK & NEW IDEAS FOR NEXT WEEK
1. Thom Hobbs:
- Akala concert review and a comment piece by Akala on Current Music Industry (completed)
- Adrian Howks - aliens in Winchester? Comment piece (completed)- Feature Interview with Alistair Steward from ITV- completed and used for the WINOL LIFE

2. Katie and Claire:
- Christmas Party deresses-completed-

- Autumn Fashion- is used in the WINOL LIFE

3. Behind the scenes for Katie and Claire feature making - made by Jake but not finished till this week so couldn't use it with the promo link, told him to make a version without promo at the end - he said he has finished it but has not showed it to me at the and (I have not seen him)

4. Andy:
- Feature Interview with lecturer who run through Atacama desert- completed (and used on the show)

- written piece - profile - not completed- short documentary - how were the police techniques changing across the student protests- not completed
- fashion - suits - not completed
5. Hanna (&Justina) Christmas Gifts on law budget - Hanna was meant to do this one and she didn't
6. Radical Fashion - Cara: text, Hanna & Justina : video - naither of them did it
7. Room make over - student acomodation - Cara: text, Jake;video - Jake didn't want to do it at the end so I gave this idea to Justina because her idea on Reading list challenge fell through - she completed room make over feature

8. Phil Jupitus feature interview by Joey - completed

Wales and Scotland photographed features - inspired by Laura Barton

2010-12-15T17:11:00.000-08:00
First I photographed views while being on holidays, then I decided to use the magic of Fianl Cut Pro and turn them into Photo-essays with the background music. Then I met Laura Barton and learnt about her style of feature making for the Guarian. Inspired by her work I eventually I decided to use poetic style of voice overs to go with the photoessays what has turned the two pieces into Panoramic features inspired by the beauty of UK views and Laura Barton't style of feature making.

SCOTLAND PHOTOGRAPHED FEATURE

WALES PHOTOGRAPHED FEATURE

Laura Barton is a guest at WINOL LIFE SHOW (Week 11)

2010-12-15T12:43:00.000-08:00
What a fantastic week it was, no matter how intense or hard organisationally wise it was but how rewarding. Laura Barton was certainly one of our biggest guests at WINOL for our Features team.

Paul and I have planned to produce a studio based feature show, presenting our best packages and having a guest to comment on the pieces. This week's special guest: Laura Barton, feature writer for the Guardian
WINOL Life with Laura Barton, Part 1

Most of my team members worked hard and delivered beautiful packages or redone the ones I requested.
Paul and I planned the show well, we chose the features we thought were the best so far, we set up a running order and communicate to the production about our plans. I gave Josh detailed requirements that will have to be curried out in order to have our show produced. It proved quite challenging in the matter of having the production team organised more than I expected but eventually we managed to pull out a good show performing a fantastic team effort.

We planned the show to be in style of The One Show on BBC, with Paul and I as main presenters.
It would take half an hour and our special guest was Laura Barton. Feature reporters to be on the sofas to talk about their work would be Katie and Claire (Wine tasting feature), Justyna (£20 Food challenge), Thom (Keats Anniversary) and Jake (Christmas in Winchester feature).

15 minutes of the show would account of the VTs and other 15 interviews and chats in the studio. We planned to record it on Wednesday as soon as Laura Barton comes in (around 12), then finish of with nice intro edited in and polished any technical glitches before uploading onto youtube.

As I mentioned before the most difficult was part organisation of the studio and the gallery. I had to be a big part of the production process, setting up the studio (sofas, camera angles etc.) as there was not enough people in the production team to do so. The few that were there tried their best but there was just not enough man power to have it run smoothly and that effected in lack of rehearsals. However as you can see on the film we show no sign of stress and the ending effect came out to be quite successful.

Paul and I researched into Laura Barton's work to be prepared and knowledgeable and make the script reacher for our special guest. On Wednesday Tomek and Paul polished and completed the script while I was finishing of preparation of the studio.

At the end we were overwhelmed with Laura's feedback at the end and I spoke to her after recording the WINOL Life on Wednesday:

Part of the editors role is to know how we can put it on the page and look out on the legal side of the stories or features, and it is really looking up for some of us as the WINOL as some of us are growing into great professionals. It is hard to believe that it is one week before last till I finish working for Winol and it will certainly be a sad moment for me to end the project.

Other things that I decided to do this week was to turn two of my photoessays into features Wales Photographed Feature and Scotland Photographed Feature (you can also click here to go to another post with these two features: Wales and Scotleand Photographed Features).

Going back to my weekly routine of Feature editor's job, Monday morning was not starting of well as not many members of my team was in. My concerns about commitment levels grew from the last few weeks. I spoke to Charlotte, managing editor at WINOL last week and said that I was going to have a chat with my whole group about the levels of involvement in my team and asked her to take part in the Monday's meeting. On the not so nice side of this week I had to give an unpleasant speech to my team regarding few points which were directed separately at different members of the team. The reason of me doing so was that I was trying to reming them that this is our chance to practice, learn and make mistakes and if we don't use it now there will be no more room for error or re-doing in the world of journalism. It is important that they realise that they do it for themselves not to impress me or our tutors, they have to realise that if they avoid doing work that will reflect in their lack of skill and knowledge, bad marks and eventually smaller chance to break through in the industry after finishing the degree.

The points are purely a constructive criticism that is meant to motivate some of the members of my team a little bit more and remind them that they are not letting themselves down but also the whole team. Winol is not only meant to develop individual's personal skills but teach working within a team as that will be mostly what we will be facing after leaving university. I already spoke to most of the members of the team that should only pick out the points of further improvements and the ones that were non present would understand that other points would be directed at them. So the individual points are directed at individual members if the group:
- absence on the de-briefs on Monday mornings
- missing out on days at winol - avoiding work
- lacking in bringing own ideas (most of the time I have to appoint them tasks and tell them ideas and how to do them)
- need to speed up with editing as the deadlines keep being extended
- when editing in two's or doing a film and article in twos try to have one person working on one thing and other on another thing to meet the deadline
- not all of the members come to the features meeting on which they are meant to 'sell' me their ideas, they text a brief description or not come at all which is not acceptable in the real world of journalism, there is no way the idea will be presented well through a brief text message for example 'oh I want to do this... do you like the idea?', no that is not good enough
- And finally, a reminder - do not upload onto youtube unless I have seen it and approved it!

Other points I made were reminding them on trying to get big names into their piece; keep a weekely log of what you do and learnt at winol for the critical reflection; communicate with Jason, our photographer to come with you and take pictures to your pieces.

The last reminder was also to have all the packages chosen for the Show completed and exported onto my hard drive - TUESDAY, the end of the day.

Features my team prepared features for the show for this week and continued working on the rest of the ideas that were planned for the following week. Prepared for this week's show:
1. Thomas Hobbs: John Keats 'To Autumn'
2. Whole team involved (edited by Katie and Claire) : Who's the Hostess with the Mostess?
3. My Students demo (can be viewed in my previous posts)
4. Jake Gable - Christmas in Winchester (requested to be redone after the show-awaiting new version)

My legal concern here and what I was aware of was using a lots of GVs and possibility of having under 16s in the film and so I made sure I went through the piece carefully looking out on above. And as I thought I found few moments that children were shown - I advised either not to use it in the package or to stretch the picture so that the children are not visible (not identified). Jake did well on getting rid them, he listened and made his GVs legally correct.

Other problem here was writing a voice over in a poetic style which I knew would be quite challenging but I was hoping for the best.

Eventually, unfortunately, I decided to cut this piece out of the show as there was a room for improvement in area of voice over and I advised to not do it in a poetic style but just normal informative voice over for the following week.

5. Student Finance- Eating for a week on £20 by Justina
Film that was already done and requested to be perfected. Justina did an excellent work on that and everyone was impressed.

UPDATE FROM THE FEATURES PROMISED LAST WEEK and NEW IDEAS FOR NEXT WEEK
1. Behind the scenes of feature making film, by Justyna – not completed
2. News feature article on a historic mansion that was going to be taken down, by Gareth from news - not completed
3. Student version of the come dine with me – Who is the Hostess with the Mostess - completed
4. Restaurant Review, places to eat out for students, by Claire and Katie - decided not to complete
5. Budget Cuts article- in depth analysis of the Browne’s review by Thomas Hobbs -not completed
6. Wine tasting show in London, gonzo style feature by Claire and Katie - completed
7. Richard Cheetam, Atacama race - to be completed for week 11
8. Katie and Claire are adding voice-overs on to their autumn fashion piece - completed (planned to be used in week 11 for when Maria Melano comes over)
9. Also Thom has transcribed his interview with bishop and I listened to the whole interview to check for accuracy and that Thom informed the bishop of the purposes of the interview. I also advised Thom that I would like to see the consent in writing via email from bishop’s site agreeing for publication of the transcribed text. - consent received - piece uploaded onto website
10. Anniversary of Keits poem which was significant for Winchester by Thom- completed
11. Thom is also planning to get Steve Bishalti (bbc sports ancor) to write a comment piece on strikes at NUJ. - not completed
12. Concert of Skinnyman (English rapper) - completed

13. Justina is redoing few parts of the £20 challenge - completed
14. Jake brought an idea of setting himself up a challenge of living with a baby-doll - not completed
NEW IDEAS:
15. Thom Hobbs:
- Akala concert review and a comment piece by Akala on Current Music Industry (Deadline Wednesday week 11)
- Feature Interview with Alistair Steward from ITV- to be done for Tuesday (for the Maria Melano show)
- Adrian Howks - aliens in Winchester? Comment piece (deadline - Wednesday week 11)
16. Jake:
- Winol's version of Apprentice - (idea sent by txt message only) - spiked- sports feature that is already being done by sports team - I spoke to the sports team and they said that they do not want to give away their own idea - they want to do it themselves - spiked for Jake (kept for sports)17. Katie and Claire: Christmas Party deresses-to be done for Tuesday the end of the day18* My idea to make a behind the scenes for Katie and Claire feature making - appointed Jake to do it as I spiked both of his (txt message) ideas- I advised him to finish it of by the end of this week including little promo introducing the fact that Maria Melano is meant to be in our next week's WINOL LIFE
19. Andy:
- Feature Interview with lecturer who run through Atacama desert- deadline Tuesday the end of the day- written piece - profile on the same lecture to go with the video
- short documentary - how were the police techniques changing across the student protests- fashion - suits20. Hanna (&Justina) Christmas Gifts on law budget21. Radical Fashion - Cara: text, Hanna & Justina : video
22. Room make over - student acomodation - Cara: text, Jake;video
23. Reading list challenge - Justina

Kayleigh also produced What's on for this week:

The legal concern of mine in this film was the question of consent from a guy that is skating behind Kayleigh, I noticed that while she was editing and made sure she was aware of that. She had the permission to film. However I was communicated to that the section on What's on belongs fully to Kayleigh and that she is editor herself so I should not be having that in control. I took it on board and spoke to Kayleigh about that.

On Thursday this week there was meant to be a decision made on the issue of the tuition fees in England, Maddie and I planned to go there in the morning to film and make another documentary. Even though we both managed to even to take our Law revision lecture on Monday instead of Thursday to be able to go to London unfortunately, Maddie found out she had to work on Thursday evening and I had a very little time to arrange another person go with me. Eventually, I didn't go as it would have been unsafe for me to go on my own especially with such a huge potential for the protests to go big. I was incredibly disappointed and felt that I failed myself in a way that I wasn't in the place of 'history making', on the other side it would have been extremely dangerous for me to cover it on mu own.

Next week's plans: WINOL LIFE with Maria MELANO, editor from the InStyle magazine.

In preparation for test - LAW REVISION (week 12)

2010-12-14T19:39:00.000-08:00
I. DEFAMATION
Malice
– intentional, reckless, untrue statement written down (permanent form) without checking

The public interest
- opposite of malice
- there is no specific definition of this concept in law – as it is not defined in the Code of Conduct but is journalistic context is seen as a valuable or potentially so information to the society - reported in the interest of the public
- the editors Code of Practice: defined it in three tings – reporting on threat of the safety of the community (e.g terrorism) to help and fight the corruption etc.and it is where we consider the information to be in advantage to make the public aware (Jameel vs Wall Street case, WSJ acted responsibly)

Malicious Falsehood
- a false statement made with malice and intention to damage or harm (also likely to cause financial damage to the claimant)

Innuendo
-implying something throughout pictures/things assuming (hidden/not only one meaning)
- it's malicious, you can't prove it (no justification – no defence)
- statement that may seem to be innocuous to some people, but can be seen as defamatory to people with special knowledge

Juxtaposition (libel)
- intentional/unintentional setting of two things- usually done through the pictures for example when two objects or texts are set next to each other but that oppose one another
- a statement innocuous when standing alone can acquire defamatory meaning when juxtaposed with other material
– most libel actions are misidentification (for example) or misspelling, there has to be identification next to a picture

LIBEL
Libel is a civil wrong doing resulting from a defamatory statement. The Libel takes place when it may apply to a person or a company; For the statement to be labelous it has to be: Published – in a permanent form to a third party
Identified- positive identification (group under 40 people – The Banbery Police station – officers – broad brush identification – to avoid it we use positive identification.
Defamed – damaging reputatin causing them to be shunned and avoided or exposed them to hatered, redicule or contempt

Defamation

the statement is defamatory if it tends to do any of the following:
- expose the person to hatred, ridicule or contempt
or
- cause the person to be shunned or avoided
or
- lower the person in the eyes of the right thinking members of the society
or
- disparage the person in his/her business, trade, office or profession

Action for Libel can be started up to 1 year after it has happened/ been published (Gilligan case – journalist tampered with his notes – evidence after making them)

Libel defences are:
Justification (it is true and I can prove it);
Fair Comment and honestly held opinion/comment (based on fact and made on a matter of public interest); recognisable as a comment
Absolute Privilege/ Qualified Privilege (on Press Conferences, public meetings – has to be fast, accurate, contemporaneous and without malice)

Slander
Is libel in spoken form (impermanent), and it has to involve a third party overhearing the two people.

2. How long has the plaintiff got before he/she can start on action for libel comment briefly with regard to evidence and techniques of newsgathering
- they can wait one year before starting the case so always keep all the tapes and notes (it used to be 3years Robert Maxwell – would sue after one year for example)
- judges would comment to juries that the notes you took are the evidence – your contemporary notes will be acccepted as evidence (shorthand)
- keep all your notes/shorthand, tapes, rushes of the tapes no edits as there is no forensic evidence in edited material you need original footage.
- digital cameras/pictures are less reliabele, analouge camera is actually better (the Gilligan's case – changed notes on the lapstop)

III. DEFENCES IN DEFAMATION
1. Justification
- it is true and we can prove it, it's a fact (if you can prove that the fact is true and is without malice it is fully defended- full on justification)

2. Qualified Privilege
- journalists have it in Parliament/Court/public meetings Reporting
- exception- you are above the law (the Quinn is the board of justice, she is above the law) - constitutional power is the monarch. R v 'whoever has been accused of the crime'. It is in reporting the courts, parliament (parliamentary privilege). Qualified Privilege in general is a distinction with/without explanation .
- Lee Clegg case, significant

Absolute Privilege
- judges, lawyers and MP’s have it
- is from the monarch- so far as it is to do with the trial they can't be prosecuted for that, also lawyers and judges have the Absolute Privilege.

Privilege is kept:
- so long as it is without Malice e.g. Dennis Skinner & Graham Ridic – questioning over cocaine, Dennis Skinner had Absolute Privilege in Parliament so he could ask this question once they were in there, they could say anything.
Your report has to be:
- Fast: published in the first available bulletin - contemporaneous
- Accurate: no spelling mistakes, checked with facts
- Fair: free of Malice (in court reporting it has to be written for example that person has denied/admitted to be guilty of the charges)

3. It has to be done in the Public Interest

II. CODES OF CONDUCT
1. Subterfuge definition - in which circumstances it may be used according to the PCC Code of Conduct. Subterfuge is gathering the information without telling people that you are a journalist (hiding the fact that you are journalist from people). Point 2 of the NUJ code of conduct says that you should always identify yourself and subterfuge is when you are hiding or pretending you are not a journalist.

You can do it if:
- it is in the public interest
- there is no other way to obtain the information
- and you have got to have a permission in advance – legally, formally (this is in the BBC code of Conduct as well) BBC guidelines give that you on subterfuge- you have to have permission in advance and show it is in the interest of the public as well as there is no other way to obtain that information but incognito.

*There are three main Codes of Practice for journalists:
PCC – self regulation (Codes of Conduct, NUJ)
OfCom – statutory power
BBC Code of Practice

2. *Examples and differences in regulations between print journalism and broadcast journalism in a matter of subterfuge:
To be completed
3. The way in which media is regulated in relation to political bias on preference again (references to the difference between print and broadcast journalism)

- time before that Election is a difficult period in broadcast as well as in print in the coverage because journalists have to be highly aware of avoidance of undue prominence - make sure to give equal air time/ attention to candidates of all parties taking part in the election.
- pre-election time, bio-election or on the day of election for example (no regulation on print media/newspapers – they can be bias wheras broadcast musn't)

- broadcast –even outside election there has to be balance over time in any of the political programs or radio shows (BBC Code of conduct)
- newspapers have to make sure they cover it fairly but they of course don’t have to worry about equal air time so this does not apply to newspapers at all.
- in case of bio election they have to give a reasonable amount of time to all the sides (keep the balance all the time) – balance over time has to be kept and avoidance of undue prominence again. Example The Question Time show – everyone given equal opportunity to express their stance – the output is balanced)

4. Regulations related on Codes of Conduct on children:
- must do nothing to harm children and always require consent for children under 16 from the parents.
*Section 49 Order – gives anonymity to U-18s in Youth Courts
*Section 39 Order – when someone under 18 has to give evidence in adult court– they are covered by anonymity.
* ‘Jigsaw identification’ - about anonymity to under 18s

5. Regulations related to taste and decency in relation to the following:
a) use of language such as ‘the F word’
- we always must not be gratuitous (Given freely; unearned; Not called for by the circumstances; uncalled for; without reason, cause, or proof; adopted or asserted without any good ground; unjustified )
b) use of profoundly offensive language such as ‘the C word’
- possibility of being punished by OfCom
- people will complain
- it is not gratuitous to use it
- F and C words you could probably use so long as it is after 10pm and it is not gratuitous and it is needed in the context of the content.
- never to be used on air of the record by presenters for example– never in the studio
c) Use of material that may be offensive to religious believers
- do not use it if it is gratuitous and it can be blasphemy ,
- you mustn’t use the word ‘occult’ in connection to sex and violence
d) Interviewing criminals – you mustn’t glorify the crime or encourage it in any way
e) Racial status, racial identification (e.g. in crime stories)
- not gratuitous
- especially in the crime story as it can create a racial innuendo
- you can express the honestly held opinion within the law even if it’s racial

III. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE and Contempt of Court

* Prejudice & Contempt
Prejudice appears when it is made hard to treat someone fairly, when the decision is influenced in any way and if you are prejudicing someone’s trial you are committing a crime – Contempt of Court

* Differences between the Civil and Criminal Law
Civil law deals disputes between citizens (Smith VS Smith) where the community is not much affected except by the need for finding the solution to resolve the dispute (divorces, libel actions, compensations etc) e.g. The Diane Blood case
Criminal Law deals with offences against society (murder, violence, blasphemy) or offences against another person that are abhorrent to the society as a whole (fraud, dangerous driving, robbery etc.)

* There are two types of crimes: indictable- ‘arrestable’ (more serious crimes) and non-indictable – accusations or crimes carrying less than five years sentence .

1. Functions of a magistrates Court
a) Committals (big murders)
b) Summary Justice
c) Injunctions in Civil cases

2. When is the case active? – as soon as the has been an arrest/ warrant/charged!
a) Helping police with the enquiries – when the crime is reported
- case not active - if case is inactive there is a danger of libel /defamation (identification)
- but no danger of the Contempt of Court YET!
- no risk of Prejudice
- no charges
- no identification

b) Arrest and charged
- after the arrest/ issue of warrant - the case becomes active
- the person is identified and charged
- there is no danger of libel anymore as the person has been charged by the court so our report would be factually accurate to say that person X has been charged with the offence without libelling them – it is stating legal facts
- danger of Contempt of Court
- now we are limited with our report – stick to allowed facts only, basic facts like who was arrested because of what, who was charged with what

* next stage is the Magistrates court – where the penalty can be up to 6months of prison or/and £5.000 fine,
*Conditional discharge – is in other words a conditional sentence dependant on the good behaviour which may make the sentence shorter.

c) Magistrates’ Court (summary cases) – court hearing
- summary cases are minor cases
- at this stage case is continuously active so - no danger of libel but there is a danger of Contempt of Court
- we are limited in our report to write 7points only:
1. Names of defendants, ages, addresses, occupations
2. Charges faced
3. Courts name and magistrates names
4. Names of solicitors or barristers present
5. Date and place to where case is adjured
6. Bail (only whether it is or not) and bail arrangements
7. Whether legal aid was granted

d) Magistrates Court (Committal)
- the defendant may be hold on remand

e) Magistrates (Bail)- on remand- awaiting trial
- non violent, defendant will be put on bail
- danger of Contempt of Court as the judge can object the bail – and we cannot report the reasons not to prejudice the jury
- but no danger of libel

f) if on Remand
- Do not report the reasons

g) In Crown courts :
- when jury is not present there is no danger of Contempt of Court; there is danger of libel and the case is active; if the jury isn’t there, there are chances are that you can’t report it.
- when jury is present case is also active and journalists are covered with full protection (QP) - Privilege reporting (Fast , accurate, contemporaneous and balanced throughout the trial)
- a person shouting in the court from the gallery – you can report what was shouted out so long as it is non defamatory

so the danger is when:
- when in courtroom jury is not present – this is when there is no danger of Contempt of Court but there is danger of libel
- the minute the jury is sworn in and present we have Qualified Privilege

h) It is not permitted to interview members of jury during the case
i) it is not permitted to interview witnesses during the case because of the risk of intimidating the witness, contempt of court but it is allowed to interview witnesses after the case is closed (no longer active)

j) After the conviction – before the sentencing – the case is no longer active
- we have no more Qualified Privilege and there is no danger of the Contempt of court
- there is defence of justification here

k) There is no danger or restrictions before the Appeal

IV) PRIVACY & CONFIDENTIALITY- Impact of Article 8, European Convention of Human Rights Act
1. Princess Caroline of Monaco case – after her case there has been significant change recognised within the area of Privacy- journalists have permission only to take pictures when the photographed person is on public duty but there is allowance to do so if there is explicit or implied consent to do so.

2. Definition of Confidentiality- it’s simply a secret and depends on expectation that is given in circumstances that imply that there is a need for keeping that secret (Confidentially)
- it’s all about expectations and circumstances of passing the information
- Breach of Confidence – Bill Goodwin case
* recent case – Wikileaks
* other cases: Naomi Campbell – drug addiction case – which she won as she had an expectation privacy when talking about her matter- story published about her treated at Narcotics Anonymous, there were photographs taken of her emerging from treatment session; paper argued it was in the public interest; she responded it to have a significant level of circumstances implying confidence and that there was no justification of publishing it for public interest as it was not within interest of the public and there was no consent given. (Clive Porting – Official Secreats Act; Max Mosley vs The News of The World)

* There are three areas of concern here:
- revealing state secrets or official secrets
- revealing commercial secrets
- revealing facts about a person that would be expected to remain private

*The Official Secrets Act
* What’s the purpose of the law of confidence – and injunctions – to have people like for example celebrities away from breaching into their private lives/ family lives or in public people to draw a line for where press or public should be informed about their activities and to what extent (Caroline of Monaco- public duty).

3. Human Rights Act and trespassing
- journalists have to take practical measures
- always leave when being asked to do so if there is the sign on Section 8 official Secrecy Act
- you can film from the public place
- do not force entry
- and do it within reasonable judgment of the courtesy

V. OTHER ASPECTS
1. FOI stands for Freedom of Information Act

2. Provisions of the representation of the people Act that affect journalism are:
- it’s a crime to falsely represent the opinions of politicians - misrepresentation and libel

3. Circumstances that an editor might write a ‘without prejudice letter’:
- without the prejudice – on attempt to correct the error without allowing it to be used as evidence but to solve the issue.

4. Standards of proof in civil and criminal law – Principle of avoidance of double jeopardy –affect the practice of investigative journalism
- beyond reasonable doubt
-balance of probability
-can’t try do the same thing twice
- example: Steven Lawrence killer – The Daily Mail

5. In terms of statutory QP “subject to refutation”
- local government
- one councillor says something bad about something and we repeat it - we have to put a balance from that person accused of wrongdoing at the same article (bane & antidote)
- industrial tribunals, cricket club etc

* COPYRIGHT – protection of intellectual property (definition and purpose, Fair Dealing-‘lifting’- taking abstracts from other pieces- we can’t pass it off as our own, we have to make it clear it isn’t ours.
* Reporting Election – Phil Woolis case

VI. Raynolds 10 Points TEST

Qualified Privilege is available as a defence where it is considered important that the facts should be freely known in the public interest. ALBERT REYNOLDS vs SUNDAY TIMES is a United Kingdom legal case in the House of Lords concerning qualified privilege for publication of defamatory statements in the public interest. (Ref.4)

Reynolds v The Sunday Times, Jameel v Wall Street Journal and The Oryx Company v BBC here.
THE REYNOLDS CASE and the 10 POINT TEST

Lord Nicholls, the judge in the appeal stage of Albert Reynolds vs Sunday Times (1999), seemed to further define/extend QP-type protection against defamation, so long as the reporter was working without malice (as always with QP – you need lack of malice, accuracy and timeliness), had taken reasonable steps (not reckless) and so long as it was a matter of ‘public interest’ (ie not just a purely private matter).*Reynolds Defence can be implied when the facts are in public interest and is the product of reasonable journalism, and as given above it is a subject to Lord Nicholls’ list of criteria which must be satisfied. (Ref.4)

His ten point test of responsible journalism is well worth dwelling on because it forms a curriculum really for journalism of the highest quality which (quiet rightly) should enjoy a degree of legal protection.

1. The seriousness of the allegation
the more serious the allegation, the more protection will be applied.
2. The nature of the information
and the extent to which the subject matter is a matter of public concern. This follows from schedules I or II of 1996 act - essentially anything related to matters that would be discussed in forums listed in schedule I would be protected and almost certainly matters that would come up in forums detailed in schedule II would also be covered. Again, allegations of a private nature are excluded.
3. The source of the information
The more authoritative the source, the more you are entitled to report their allegations, even if those allegations cannot be proved or even if they turn out to be incorrect. So obviously chequebook journalism is not very safe, and would have less protection than allegations made by a responsible person with no axe to grind, and with a reputation for honesty. Sources ‘on the record’ are more protected than anonymous sources.
4. The steps taken to verify the information
There must be a reasonable attempt in the time available. The crucial thing is to try and put the allegations to the person being accused in order to get their side of the story. But you must either get to the person and make the allegation or, at the very least, be able to show a whole log of e-mails and phone calls where you make determined efforts to get their side of the story.
5. The status of the information
You need to check that this is not an old allegation which has previously been denied. If the allegation had been previously dismissed by “an investigation which commands respect” then it would have no protection.
6. The urgency of the matter
The judge recognised that news is “a perishable commodity” and that papers must compete to be first with the news. If the matter genuinely is urgent (eg to bring something like corruption to the attention of voters before polling day) then the other checks in the code might be less stringent and might still enjoy protection.
7. Whether comment was sought from the claimant
together with point 4 above and point 8 below, although the judge did say that putting allegations to the claimant was not necessary in every single case, if the case for protection on other counts was strong enough. As a practical point it is always wise to get the other side of the story and have them point out how or why the allegations might be untrue, then incorporate this in your report. Such a statement might also provide you with a ‘consent’ type defence to a libel action.
8. Whether the article contained the gist of the claimant’s side of the story
(see above, points 4 and 7)
9. The tone of the article
If the angle of a piece is along the lines of allegations of X have raised concerns… this would probably more protected than a straightforward assertion that the allegations are fact. It is always important to attribute the allegations to a named source (‘on the record’) if possible. If the source is not named there must be a genuine and obvious reason for this.
10. The circumstances of the publication
including the timing. The allegations should be brought to public attention as quickly as possible. They should not be ‘saved up’ for commercial motives by the paper or broadcaster. This is similar to the need to publish/broadcast quickly in ordinary QP of court and parliamentary reports. (Ref.4)

* Overall – learn how to recognise risks and seek advice!

References:
Ref.1) McNae’s essential law for journalists (Twentieth Edition) Banks, D. Hanna, M. (2009)
Ref.2) Notes from the Media Law section on Winchester Journalism site for third year ba students (updates, year 3, BA Journalism 2010) weeks 1-11 http://journalism.winchester.ac.uk/?page=102
3) Media Law Lectures throughout the whole semester and Law revision in week 11, ba Journalism, year 3
4) My blog posts on Media law, year3, 2010

Recent legal changes that matter to journalists with examples of recent cases (week 10 & 11)

2010-12-13T18:02:00.000-08:00
From the latest news and legal developments it is definitely worth mentioning that there has been some significant developments in certain areas that matter to journalists.

As McNae’s gives, the Coroners & Justice Bill 2009, for example (May 2009), the decision has been made that Home secretary can now decide that an inquest can be held without jury, with the reason being to try to stop ‘national security’ matters becoming public. “The Bill had proposed that such non-jury inquest would be presided over by a High Court Justice, not by a coroner, with wide discretion to exclude public reporters." (Ref.1) Critics didn’t like the idea but the Government insisted that “sensitive material” (Ref.1) should be protected from “being made public in inquests” (Ref.1).

Secondly, in February 2009 in High Court Justice decided that a man convicted of three notorious murders some decades ago should not be identified in media reports.

Thirdly, in April 2009 Jack Straw laid statutory instruments before Parliament to amend procedural rules governing family cases in the High Court. County Courts and Magistrate Courts. Reporters can gain admission to family cases in courts, but there is still a power to exclude them (journalists will need an identity card accredited in the UK Press card Scheme). (Ref.1)

Further on, significant change happened on the grounds of Public Order Act from 1986. The House of Lords the Criminal Justice & Immigration Act 2008 amended the 1986 Act to “create the offence of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.” (Ref.1)

More developments saw Section 46 order prevented, Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 “Barrister who was a witness should have anonymity in reports of an assault case (David Graham, head of Lancashire based freelance agency Watsons, barrister was assaulted by a client).

Breach of Section 8 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (Confidentiality of jury deliberations), by The Times newspaper (fined £15,000) for reporting in 2007 that a man who was questioning the majority ‘guilty’ verdict, which he had opposed. The man had approached the paper himself. The times quoted him on how jurors took an early vote, as well as on the role played by complicated, medical evidence. He said the disclosures ‘offended against the secrecy of the jury room.’ (The Times, 13&23 May 2009). (Ref.1)

Also from Justice Ministry – libel & internet, what is very important for journalists to remember is that each download of an article accounts for a fresh publication and each publication can give rise to a separate action which should warn all the journalists that also online archives containing defamatory articles leave publishers open to a libel action for much longer if that material is downloaded. (Ref.1) (e.g. Internet Libel Yachting News - publisher not liable for chatroom content)

On the subject of privacy, Home Office have some guidance to aid photography in public places to help to ensure that people are not unnecessary stopped from taking photographs in public places, from recent cases on Privacy, Lilly Allen, singer and the celebrity, to secure a High Court injunction to prevent harassment by photographs or famous and very significant case on Max Mosley libel action against The News of The World, which also represents breach of Privacy. (Ref.1) Also Press Complaints Commission warned that “media reproduction of pictures found on social networking sites-such as facebook could breach the Editor’s Code of Practice, used by the PPC to adjudicate on ethics as well as possible copyright issue and privacy concerning the photographs.

On the subject of Confidentiality/privacy (see also PCC complaints re: privacy) recent cases are for example:
Elton John fails in privacy case against Daily MailEffect is to weaken Caroline ruling and strengthen ability of press to take photos of celebs in public without permission/payment. “A bid by Sir Elton John to prevent the Daily Mail publishing a photograph of him walking with his driver from his car to his London home was rejected by the High Court. If Sir Elton had been successful in obtaining this injunction, it would have completely revolutionised British newspaper and magazine practice. (Ref.1)

Sir Elton had his picture taken by a freelance photographer whilst walking from his Rolls Royce to the front gate of his West London home. He then heard that the Daily Mail was planning to publish the picture, and he applied for an injunction to prevent publication on the ground that it was an unwarranted infringement of his privacy. The picture merely showed him casually dressed, but he complained that it showed his baldness was returning. (Ref.1)

In his application, Sir Elton argued that the photo in question, which was surreptitiously acquired, was taken without consent, made no contribution to any matter of public interest, and its publication would be a breach of the Press Complaints Commission code. He supported his bid with the decision in the European Court of Human Rights case of Von Hannover v Germany [2004] ECHR, which involved Princess Caroline of Monaco. It was held in this case that her right to a private family life had been violated by sustained paparazzi photography of her and her children.” (Ref.4)

Beckham Nanny/ 'gagging clause' in contract/ confidentiality
“David and Victoria Beckham HAVE failed in a sensational legal attempt to gag the News of the World from publishing accounts of their marriage by former nanny Abbie Gibson.

The Beckhams launched a court bid to prevent the newspaper from publishing revelations from Ms. Abbie Gibson, 27. Lawyers of the showbiz couple applied for an emergency injunction from High Court judge Mr Justice Langley on the grounds of confidentiality. They argued that Abbie had signed a contract guaranteeing that she would not speak out about their lives. But lawyers acting for Abbie Gibson and the News of the World convinced the judge that out story was manifestly in the public interest. The court decided the News of the World IS entitled to publish Abbie's account about the real state of the Beckhams' marriage and David's affairs. The News of the World, represented by Richard Spearman QC, was given the green light to publish.” (Ref.5)

Other cases like: Section 10 HRA gives no protection to censorship effect of huge Naomi Campbell legal costs (10/05) Naomi Campbell drugs case/ conditional fee agreement/ costs; Caroline ruling strengthened by gay parade case, Hello! wins back £1million damages/ latest in Zeta-Jones saga; Zeta-Jones case - full set of reports from the Guardian' . Naomi Campbell: Law Lords find in her favour : Naomi Campbell case - full coverage from The Guardian

Princess Caroline of Monaco - significant in area of Confidentiality that I write about in my other blog post titled: Max Mosley, Catherine Zeta Jones and other cases - celebrities and privacy – see more here http://veronicafryd.blogspot.com/2010/11/max-mosley-catherine-zeta-jones-and.html (Ref.3)

Following cases on Privacy PCC released a report ON SUBTERFUGE AND NEWSGATHERING (Phone taps 'completely unacceptable' - PCC (08/06)) The Press Complaints Commission has conducted an investigation into the use of subterfuge by the British newspaper and magazine industry, with particular reference to phone message tapping and compliance with the Editors’ Code of Practice and the Data Protection Act” (ref.6) following the convictions in January 2007 of News of the World.

Journalist Clive Goodman and inquiry agent Glenn Mulcaire case on offences under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and Criminal Law Act (1977). They had speculatively tapped into private mobile phone messages and used the information they discovered for stories in the News of the World.” (Ref.6) This type of snooping has no place in journalism, and the Chairman of the Commission has publicly deplored it on a number of occasions. The Commission as a whole condemns such behaviour. (Ref.6). Despite the police inquiry, court case and convictions, the Commission considered that there were a number of outstanding questions that arose under the Code of Practice, which sets out the required professional standards for UK journalists and, as such, supplements the law (...) .(Ref.6)

“On January 26 2007, Mulcaire and Goodman were sentenced to 6 and 4 months in prison. Mr Coulson resigned his post, saying that he had “decided that the time has come for me to take ultimate responsibility for the events around the Clive Goodman case”. Mr Colin Myler was appointed editor in his place.” (Ref.6)

“Despite Mr Myler’s appointment, the question arose whether the PCC should ask Mr Coulson to give an account of what had gone wrong. The PCC decided not to do so. Given that the PCC does not - and should not - have statutory powers of investigation and prosecution, there could be no question of trying to duplicate the lengthy police investigation. Furthermore, Mr Coulson was, following his resignation, no longer answerable to the PCC, whose jurisdiction covers journalists working for publications that subscribe to the self-regulatory system through the Press Standards Board of Finance.” (...) This report is therefore concerned with two main subjects: events at the News of the World in relation to Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire, how the situation developed and how repetition will be avoided; and what the industry as a whole is doing to ensure that lessons have been learned from this incident so that British journalism is not brought into similar disrepute in the future. “ (Ref.6)

New rule on reporting suicide, Journalists are to be issued with new rules governing reporting of suicides, in an attempt to prevent "copycat" deaths prompted by publicity, the article was published on 29 June 2006 (Ref.7)

The Press Complaints Commission has changed its code of practice to warn against printing "excessive" detail about the method used for a suicide. The commission's regulations already demanded cases were reported with sympathy and discretion. The latest move came after consultation with the charity Samaritans. “(Ref.7) In that article, ‘Mr Hinton said excessive detail would be avoided "unless it is in the wider public interest to give the information". (...) Mr King said sensationalised reporting could be "genuinely harmful". ‘(Ref.7)

In the area of Libel and defamation:
Britney Spears fails in $10 million libel claim (case in USA), the article, published on October 17th, 2005 in the magazine's "Hot Stuff" column, claimed that Spears and her husband, fearing the repercussions of the release of a secret sex tape, went to their estate planning lawyers. Spears then allegedly gave a copy of the tape to the lawyers on September 30th, 2005. US Weekly claimed that the lawyers who watched the tape reported that Spears and her husband were "acting goofy the whole time" during the video. Spears, after requesting a redaction that was subsequently refused, filed the lawsuit, stating:"There was no laughter, disgust or goofy behavior while watching the video in the company of lawyers because they did not watch any video, and because there is no such video.” Her lawsuit was subsequently struck down by California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which US Weekly invoked to defend the publication. US Weekly’s successful use anti-SLAPP, claiming that Spears filed the lawsuit as a method of intimidation, has been the source of much criticism. (...) Indeed, with the anti-SLAPP defense in their back 3 pockets, tabloid publishers may feel empowered to publish articles whose content straddles the line of malicious.

Tabloids, a multi-million dollar industry, should not be authorized to seek recourse through California’s anti-SLAPP statute. Affording tabloids the opportunity to raise anti-SLAPP as a defense can disturb the relational agreements between celebrities and tabloids, whose function can serve to stifle litigation at the onset of disputes through an unspoken understanding of each party’s interests. Furthermore, a defamation claim against such prosperous corporate defendants, who publish stories based on public curiosity rather than political debate, does not have a “chilling” affect on their First Amendment rights within the meaning of the statute.

Finally, by effectively freezing the discovery process, celebrities may be unable to prove the element of malice. By outlining the origin and intended scope of California’s anti-SLAPP statute, these declarations become apparent.” (Ref.8)

Sheridan v News International
“Thomas Sheridan v News Group Newspapers Ltd. is a civil court case brought by Tommy Sheridan against the publishers of the News of the World, which began in the Court of Session in Edinburgh, Scotland, on 4 July 2006. He alleged that the News of the World defamed his character through a series of articles in their publication.” (Ref.9)

“The jury heard allegations that Sheridan had visited "swingers'" clubs in Sheffield and Manchester and had engaged in an adulterous affair with another woman. Sheridan, who claims to be teetotal was also alleged to have drunk champagne during an extramarital liaison. Sheridan denied these allegations.” (Ref.9)

On 28 July, the News of the World editor, in evidence, confessed that the newspaper had changed parts of their story. This followed earlier evidence where the newspaper's journalist Anvar Khan admitted that parts of her story had been sensationalised to help sell her book. She altered her story admitting that the alcohol, drugs and spanking had been added.

National Union of Journalists Scottish Organiser Paul Holleran admitted advising both Anvar Khan and Tommy Sheridan, both of whom were NUJ members on opposing sides during the case, though only Khan was primarily a journalist. Under questioning, Holleran admitted to having passed on details of confidential discussions with Ms Khan - also an NUJ member - to Sheridan to assist Sheridan's case against the News of the World. The verdict was, that Tommy Sheridan had been defamed. The News of the World was ordered to pay damages of £200,000. However, this was not paid to Sheridan as the News of the World's editor Bob Bird immediately announced the newspaper intended to appeal the verdict on the basis it implied "eighteen independent witnesses came to this court and committed monstrous acts of perjury". (Ref.9) On August 2006 article “Tommy Sheridan has won his defamation case against the News of the World” was published on the BBC website. (...) Speaking outside the Court of Session after the verdict was delivered on Friday, the Glasgow MSP delivered an emotional and political speech. He said: "We have over the last five weeks taken on one of the biggest organisations on the planet with the biggest amount of resources to pay for the most expensive legal teams to throw nothing but muck against me, my wife and my family. "Today's verdict proves working class people can differentiate the truth from the muck. “ ‘ (Ref.10)

McKenna case - cross examination (good detail about the type of arguments used in these cases) BBC published an article, ‘A Daily Mirror newspaper article claimed hypnotist Paul McKenna was a fraud had made him a "laughing stock"’, that was what was heard by the High Court was told. The 42-year-old TV hypnotist disputes an October 2003 article, which mentioned his "bogus degree" from Lasalle University, Louisiana. McKenna's self-help business now has an annual turnover of £2.5 million. (...) McKenna was cross-examined on Wednesday by John Kelsey-Fry QC for the newspaper, which denies libel and pleads justification. (...).’ (Ref.11)

Eventually, has been cleared by the High Court of turning a man who took part in his live stage performance into an "aggressive schizophrenic". The High Court in London ruled that Christopher Gates, who sued Mr McKenna for £200,000 in damages, had not proved that he was affected by the experience of acting as a volunteer from the audience.(...) ” (Ref.12)

McKenna has also won damages from Mirror over claims of faked degree. Hypnotist Paul McKenna has won his High Court libel action over a newspaper claim that he bought a fake degree. ‘This time he “disputed a Daily Mirror article in October 2003 which said he had a "bogus degree" from La Salle University, Louisiana. McKenna, who also runs a self-help business, claimed he was "pilloried" by journalist Victor Lewis-Smith on around 10 occasions from 1997.’ (Ref.13)

As a result, McKenna ‘was awarded his costs in the action and the judge ordered the newspaper to pay interim costs of £75,000. (...) "Whether it is appropriate to characterise it as scholarship worthy of academic recognition is another matter. No doubt many would think not. "But one thing which is entirely clear to me is that Mr McKenna to this day does not believe it was bogus or that he misled anyone in allowing himself to be referred to as a PhD."’ (Ref.13)

Ashley Cole wins libel (jigsaw type identification) in 'gay orgy' case
News of World. Pink news published an article: The Sun apologises for Ashley Cole “gay orgy” stories. (Ref.14) “A second newspaper has apologised regarding reports wrongly claiming England and Arsenal defender Ashley Cole and Choice FM’s DJ Mastertepz were involved in a gay orgy. The Sun echoed its sister paper, The News of the World, with a retraction today after publishing a series of articles between the 12th and 19th of February 2006 accompanied with pixelated photographs of Mr Cole and the radio DJ Masterstepz (Ian Thompson) although neither party was named.

The Sun also ran a picture of Cole and his fiancée, Girls Aloud singer Cheryl Tweedy, with the headline, “Ashley’s got a good taste in rings,” alluding to alleged sex acts using vibrating mobile phones. (...) “ (Ref.14) As it is given further in the same article,’“There is no truth whatever in these allegations. Ashley Cole will not tolerate this kind of cowardly journalism or let it go unchallenged.” (Ref.14)

The apology: “We are happy to make clear that Mr Cole and Masterstepz were not involved in any such activities.“We apologise to them for any distress caused and we will be paying them each a sum by way of damages.”’ (Ref.14) “It follows an apology from the Daily Star last March, in a case which showed how the internet can be used for jigsaw identification and provided a landmark example of the use of libel laws when an individual is unnamed.” (Ref.14)

Galloway wins Saddam libel case - Daily Telegraph's Reynold's type defence fails
MP George Galloway has won £150,000 in libel damages from the Daily Telegraph over claims he received money from Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.

“The Glasgow Kelvin MP had denied ever seeking or receiving money from Saddam Hussein's government, which he said he had long opposed. The newspaper said it was in the public interest to publish the claims, based on documents found in Baghdad. A Telegraph spokesman said the judgment was "a blow to the principle of freedom of expression in this country". The newspaper was refused permission to appeal although it can apply to the Court of Appeal direct to take the case further. Following publication in April 2003, an investigation was begun by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.

He added: "When we published the documents we did so believing that their contents were important, should be made public and would in due course be investigated by the proper authorities." (Ref.14)

The judge said that although Mr Galloway was interviewed by telephone on 21 April, he was not given an opportunity to read the Iraqi documents beforehand, and neither were they read to him. The reporter who contacted him, Andrew Sparrow, only summarised the claims relating to funding of the Mariam Appeal, but did not tell him the newspaper was planning to publish claims about personal enrichment, the judge said. "[Mr Galloway] did not therefore have a fair or reasonable opportunity to make inquiries or meaningful comment upon them before they were published." ‘ Ref.14

And finally - Freedom of expression/ criminal libel:
Roman Polanski vs Vanity Fair magazine
The Oscar-winning film director Roman Polanski has won £50,000 in libel damages after successfully suing Vanity Fair magazine over an allegation he said made him appear "callously indifferent" to the memory of his murdered wife Sharon Tate.

A high court jury today found in favour of the director of Rosemary's Baby, Tess and The Pianist, who sued over an article in the glossy magazine alleging he tried to seduce a Scandinavian model on his way to Tate's funeral by claiming he could make her "another Sharon Tate". (Ref.15)

The article claimed Polanski had tried to seduce a "Swedish beauty" in the fashionable New York restaurant bar Elaine's, delivering a "honeyed spiel" as he slid his hand between her thighs and promised to turn her into "another Sharon Tate". (Ref.15)

Giving evidence by videolink from Paris at the start of the four-day libel trial, Polanski said the Vanity Fair allegation was an "abominable lie" that made him appear "callously indifferent" to his wife's memory.

Polanski won permission from the House of Lords to testify from France because he feared he that if he set foot in Britain he would be arrested and extradited to the US, where he has been wanted since 1977 for having sex with an underage girl. (...) becoming the first claimant in a libel trial to give evidence by videolink. Costs in the case are estimated at around £1.5m and today the judge made an interim costs award of £175,000 to Polanski.(Ref.15)

References:

Ref.1) McNae’s essential law for journalists (Twentieth Edition) Banks, D. Hanna, M. (2009)
Ref.2) Notes from the Media Law section on Winchester Journalism site for third year ba students (updates, year 3, BA Journalism 2010) week 9 http://journalism.winchester.ac.uk/?page=102 & and with the assistance of the Periodical Publishers' Association's public domain website. The Media Law database at Guardian Unlimited
Ref.3) Media Law Lecture ba Journalism, year 3, week 10 & 11
Ref.4) http://www.asklawyers.info/media-law--privacy--elton-john--failed-injunction-296911.html
Ref.5) http://www.gambling911.com/Beckham-Nanny-Abbie-Gibson.html
Ref.6) http://www.pcc.org.uk/assets/218/PCC_subterfuge_report.pdf
Ref.7) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5126024.stm
Ref.8) http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=amanda_searle
Ref.9) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheridan_v_News_International
Ref.10) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/5246378.stm
Ref.11) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5175958.stm
Ref.12) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/150850.stm
Ref.13) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5223454.stm
Ref.14) http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-1812.html/
Ref.15 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4061165.stm

Codes of Practice for Journalists and my role as Features Editor at WINOL, week 9

2010-12-12T13:08:00.000-08:00
When talking about codes of practice the main two points are to be considered, to stay ethical and professional. The key areas focused on within the journalistic codes of practice are: - ethical behaviour
- fair treatment – respect for privacy
- they are a requirement for accuracy and impartiality
- protecting vulnerable groups (children)

Also something important to be aware of as a journalist is that sanction and weight for regulating broadcasting are heavier than print.

Media Ethics

There are three main codes:

1. Press Complaints Commission (PCC) – covering Newspapers and magazines.
PCC is a self regulated body- they make the laws and reinforce them. The Press Complaints Commission is charged with enforcing the following Code of Practice which was framed by the newspaper and periodical industry and was ratified by the PCC in September 2009.

National Union of Journalists (NUJ) is one of the self regulating bodies and sets the ethical and professional Code of conduct. “The NUJ's Code of Conduct has set out the main principles of British and Irish journalism since 1936. It is part of the rules and all journalists joining the union must sign that they will strive to adhere to it. “

According to the NUJ's Code of Conduct members of the National Union of Journalists are expected to abide by the following professional principles: "a journalist:
1. At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed
2. Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair
3. Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies
4. Differentiates between fact and opinion
5. Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means
6. Does nothing to intrude into anybody’s private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest
7. Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence and material gathered in the course of her/his work
8. Resists threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information
9. Takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his duties before the information is public knowledge
10. Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person’s age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation
11. Does not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any commercial product or service save for the promotion of her/his own work or of the medium by which she/he is employed
12. Avoids plagiarism.
The NUJ believes a journalist has the right to refuse an assignment or be identified as the author of editorial that would break the letter or spirit of the code. The NUJ will fully support any journalist disciplined for asserting her/his right to act according to the code.” (Ref.10)

Apart from the NUJ Code of Practice there is also another code that also explores above aspects of journalistic profession but this one has been created to be directed at a specific role the Editors' Code of Practice. Apart from other codes this one was specifically in the area of my interest over that last few months as I have been put into a role of Feature Editor for our online magazine Winchester News Online (WINOL).

“This section also includes an Introduction to the Code, which explains the function of the Code and who is responsible for its development; and a history of the Code, which provides a comprehensive summary of all changes made to the Code since 1991.

The Press Complaints Commission is charged with enforcing the following Code of Practice which was framed by the newspaper and periodical industry and was ratified by the PCC in September 2009.

According to THE editors' CODE “all members of the press have a duty to maintain the highest professional standards. The Code, which includes this preamble and the public interest exceptions below, sets the benchmark for those ethical standards, protecting both the rights of the individual and the public's right to know. It is the cornerstone of the system of self-regulation to which the industry has made a binding commitment.

It is essential that an agreed code be honoured not only to the letter but in the full spirit. It should not be interpreted so narrowly as to compromise its commitment to respect the rights of the individual, nor so broadly that it constitutes an unnecessary interference with freedom of expression or prevents publication in the public interest.

It is the responsibility of editors and publishers to apply the Code to editorial material in both printed and online versions of publications. They should take care to ensure it is observed rigorously by all editorial staff and external contributors, including non-journalists, in printed and online versions of publications.

Editors should co-operate swiftly with the PCC in the resolution of complaints. Any publication judged to have breached the Code must print the adjudication in full and with due prominence, including headline reference to the PCC.” (Ref.5)

All this tips I have explored and implied in my best efforts into my work practice while studying the role of the editor, some of the points below I have used directly to fulfil my editorial position and took responsibility to deal with any of the problems that might have arose during our WINOL experience (Feature). I will give examples below the following points of the code.

“1 Accuracy
i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published.
iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.” (Ref.5)

Here I found it quite challenging at first as comment articles or debates that we organised proved problematic in many aspects. We have our own comment/reader response editor that works within the team of feature section but it still had to be fully supervised by me as a main editor. Comment articles started off pretty badly, and being so inexperienced we had to learn the hard way what actually the comment feature format is. Sometimes reading articles in the newspaper or online doesn’t give away techniques and principles behind writing it. In the section “a newspaper says...”/”a financial expert correspondent says”, experienced and knowledgeable journalists are allowed to express their fair comment which is based on facts (it’s accurate), done without malice and within the public interest of course, it also has to be placed clearly and accurately in the Comment section and that is how the content is covered by its defences. The main thing that our comment editor had to understand was that because we are not experts on anything just yet we should not be acting/ pretending to be ones. And even though the name of the format implies so it is not for a journalist at our stage to express our personal opinion, it has to be a fair comment based on fact not our personal view. It took good few attempts for all of us to understand how to go about writing comment pieces when not being expert as of yet – the answer was to keep finding people that ‘matter and whose view/opinion’ is valuable to the public interest. Meaning get these people to write the comment pieces for us and then fit it within the format of for example “bishops view on single sex marriage”. Other way was so called ‘ghosting’ which was useful if a person was not willing to write an article for us but would rather be interviewed; the interview would be recorded and then transcribed into words. The interviewee has to give consent for such method to be used and be clearly informed of the purposes of the interview and for it to be transcribed and used as an article and published. Great practice was when Thom ghosted the bishop of Winchester; I made sure the whole process was well executed. I listened through the interview and checked accuracy of the transcribed text as well as made sure that Thom made the bishop aware of the purposes of the interview and got consent on email for the transcribed article to be published. Thom did really well with that article and executed it well. The article was published and is still within the front page of the features of WINOL.

The unsuccessful attempt to have weekly debates was a fantastic case study. At first our content of debates was not so much of a concern it was the visual aspect of it, our production team didn’t seem to be putting enough efforts in having it organised to the standard that i would have wanted it too and because they were always lacking in people filling the production roles I had to fill the gaps which resulted that there was not enough supervision over the content of the debates.

One of the debates that brought us the biggest case study was the political debate that Thom organised which seemed to have a great potential and the idea (fees and budget cuts). It was on current issues and if executed accurately it would have been great, the project was ambitious and was a great study touching my legal aspects of media law like fair dealing within the program, impartiality, need to keep fair political balance etc. I asked Thom to keep it under ten minutes and it was meant to be ‘as life’ but it went well over that time limit and despite the fact that even Chris tried to direct Thom from the studio floor it was difficult to control the length of the program. I should have been the one controlling the output content and we should have been better prepared within the aspect of the amount of questions and the potential length of the answers. And had more attention been put into giving equal air time the debate would have been broadcast able. As I already gave away a hint of what the issue was we had our first complaint from one of the participants of the debate, Michael Jardine. I write about how I dealt with that issue in blog on WINOL experience here: Solving Hot Topics debate issue & bulletin week 6

“iv) A publication must report fairly and accurately the outcome of an action for defamation to which it has been a party, unless an agreed settlement states otherwise, or an agreed statement is published.” (Ref.5)

Once I accepted an idea for a feature I have to discuss all possible risks, picture or content wise that would have to be applied within the package, article, debate, studio based shows etc. As I gave an example above and from the post on dealing with the complaint you can see that I put my best efforts to deal with the complaint as quick as possible and the article with an apology to Mick is still on the features part of WINOL. I also applied the next point on ‘opportunity to reply’ ; even though our complainant did not use this opportunity it was given to him along with the apology and the debate remains unpublished for my request.

“2 Opportunity to reply
A fair opportunity for reply to inaccuracies must be given when reasonably called for.
3 *Privacy
i) Everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private and family life, home, health and correspondence, including digital communications.
ii) Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any individual's private life without consent. Account will be taken of the complainant's own public disclosures of information.
iii) It is unacceptable to photograph individuals in private places without their consent.
Note - Private places are public or private property where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.” (Ref.5)

This point was always the aspect that all the reporters were reminded of especially in the case of filming GVs. We didn’t have any specific issues with this one everyone seemed to remember about the need for implied or explicit consent while filming and every time I looked through the film I paid attention on the aspect of breach of confidentiality (privacy).

“4 *Harassment
i) Journalists must not engage in intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit.
ii) They must not persist in questioning, telephoning, pursuing or photographing individuals once asked to desist; nor remain on their property when asked to leave and must not follow them. If requested, they must identify themselves and whom they represent.
iii) Editors must ensure these principles are observed by those working for them and take care not to use non-compliant material from other sources.” (Ref.5)

This issue has not appeared in any stage of our work, common courtesy as well as good ethical practice when pursuing contacting people or sources has been kept within reasonable level of frequency and intensity. The reporters were reminded to identify themselves and whom they represent.

“5 Intrusion into grief or shock
i) In cases involving personal grief or shock, enquiries and approaches must be made with sympathy and discretion and publication handled sensitively. This should not restrict the right to report legal proceedings, such as inquests.
*ii) When reporting suicide, care should be taken to avoid excessive detail about the method used.

6 *Children
i) Young people should be free to complete their time at school without unnecessary intrusion.
ii) A child under 16 must not be interviewed or photographed on issues involving their own or another child’s welfare unless a custodial parent or similarly responsible adult consents.
iii) Pupils must not be approached or photographed at school without the permission of the school authorities.
iv) Minors must not be paid for material involving children’s welfare, nor parents or guardians for material about their children or wards, unless it is clearly in the child's interest.
v) Editors must not use the fame, notoriety or position of a parent or guardian as sole justification for publishing details of a child’s private life.

7 *Children in sex cases
1. The press must not, even if legally free to do so, identify children under 16 who are victims or witnesses in cases involving sex offences.
2. In any press report of a case involving a sexual offence against a child -
i) The child must not be identified.
ii) The adult may be identified.
iii) The word "incest" must not be used where a child victim might be identified.
iv) Care must be taken that nothing in the report implies the relationship between the accused and the child.” (Ref.5)

Underage participants were kept out of our films, and my VJs did not have to deal with any issues of the points 5, 6 or 7. The only situation that arose for point 6 to be applied was when I went to cover the student protests in London on 10/11/10 and few of my interviewees looked like under the age of 16 but I made sure I asked all my interviewees about their age and have their implied consent by agreeing to be interviewed and informed of it to be published on WINOL.

“8 *Hospitals
i) Journalists must identify themselves and obtain permission from a responsible executive before entering non-public areas of hospitals or similar institutions to pursue enquiries.
ii) The restrictions on intruding into privacy are particularly relevant to enquiries about individuals in hospitals or similar institutions.” (Ref.5)

All the reporters always identified themselves and obtained permission from relevant people for filming or entering/participating within the event. A good example of that was when Katie and Claire organised to go to London on The wine tasting show. They were advised to get permission on filming (press passes) and inform relevant people (organisers) of their participation and purpose of it.

“9 *Reporting of Crime
(i) Relatives or friends of persons convicted or accused of crime should not generally be identified without their consent, unless they are genuinely relevant to the story.
(ii) Particular regard should be paid to the potentially vulnerable position of children who witness, or are victims of, crime. This should not restrict the right to report legal proceedings.

10 *Clandestine devices and subterfuge
i) The press must not seek to obtain or publish material acquired by using hidden cameras or clandestine listening devices; or by intercepting private or mobile telephone calls, messages or emails; or by the unauthorised removal of documents or photographs; or by accessing digitally-held private information without consent.
ii) Engaging in misrepresentation or subterfuge, including by agents or intermediaries, can generally be justified only in the public interest and then only when the material cannot be obtained by other means.

11. Victims of sexual assault
The press must not identify victims of sexual assault or publish material likely to contribute to such identification unless there is adequate justification and they are legally free to do so.

12. Discrimination
i) The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual's race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability.
ii) Details of an individual's race, colour, religion, sexual orientation, physical or mental illness or disability must be avoided unless genuinely relevant to the story.

13. Financial journalism
i) Even where the law does not prohibit it, journalists must not use for their own profit financial information they receive in advance of its general publication, nor should they pass such information to others.
ii) They must not write about shares or securities in whose performance they know that they or their close families have a significant financial interest without disclosing the interest to the editor or financial editor.
iii) They must not buy or sell, either directly or through nominees or agents, shares or securities about which they have written recently or about which they intend to write in the near future.

14. Confidential sources
Journalists have a moral obligation to protect confidential sources of information.

15. Witness payments in criminal trials
i) No payment or offer of payment to a witness - or any person who may reasonably be expected to be called as a witness - should be made in any case once proceedings are active as defined by the Contempt of Court Act 1981.
This prohibition lasts until the suspect has been freed unconditionally by police without charge or bail or the proceedings are otherwise discontinued; or has entered a guilty plea to the court; or, in the event of a not guilty plea, the court has announced its verdict.
*ii) Where proceedings are not yet active but are likely and foreseeable, editors must not make or offer payment to any person who may reasonably be expected to be called as a witness, unless the information concerned ought demonstrably to be published in the public interest and there is an over-riding need to make or promise payment for this to be done; and all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure no financial dealings influence the evidence those witnesses give. In no circumstances should such payment be conditional on the outcome of a trial.

*iii) Any payment or offer of payment made to a person later cited to give evidence in proceedings must be disclosed to the prosecution and defence. The witness must be advised of this requirement.

16. *Payment to criminals
i) Payment or offers of payment for stories, pictures or information, which seek to exploit a particular crime or to glorify or glamorise crime in general, must not be made directly or via agents to convicted or confessed criminals or to their associates – who may include family, friends and colleagues.
ii) Editors invoking the public interest to justify payment or offers would need to demonstrate that there was good reason to believe the public interest would be served. If, despite payment, no public interest emerged, then the material should not be published.” (Ref.5)

None of the above 9-16 points were of our issue but I stayed aware of their importance and need to be supervised and checked.

“The public interest
There may be exceptions to the clauses marked * where they can be demonstrated to be in the public interest.
1. The public interest includes, but is not confined to:
i) Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety.
ii) Protecting public health and safety.
iii) Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement of an individual or organisation.
2. There is a public interest in freedom of expression itself.
3. Whenever the public interest is invoked, the PCC will require editors to demonstrate fully that they reasonably believed that publication, or journalistic activity undertaken with a view to publication, would be in the public interest.
4. The PCC will consider the extent to which material is already in the public domain, or will become so.
5. In cases involving children under 16, editors must demonstrate an exceptional public interest to over-ride the normally paramount interest of the child.” (Ref.5)

The public interest has always stayed at the back of the intentions and when thinking of our audience we also kept in mind the potential need of them to see or read the content of our choice. When covering the London protests I stayed fully in the position of the observer and have not got involved in any chanting or demonstrating my personal point of view. When filming and them editing we focused on showing events of that day “ What happened in London on 10/11/10” and showed the extracts consecutively that we were observant of throughout the day. We didn’t focus only on the trouble at the Millbank nor did we show only peaceful marches from earlier on that day. It was a Gonzo style short documentary with intention to share with the public of what happened that day. It was an excellent practice and gave us also an opportunity to imply the skills of working in a hostile environmen which was an excellent experience.

Student protests in London Demo and Rob Kirk from Sky visits WINOL (week 7) here
Student protests documentary reaches over 7,000 hits on youtube! (Using the LiveStreem) (Week 8) here

2. OfCom – broadcasting statutory body regulating broadcasting
It stands for a little bit of ‘a different beast’ as our tutor said, as it has statutory powers (cases: Blue Peter BBC – comic relie).
- Corrections or findings must be broadcast
- It can impose fines- are counted in terms of % of the revenue.
- It can revoke broadcast licence

PRACTICAL JOURNALISM: OFCOM CODE

Meaning of “due impartiality” is not favouring one side or another, Evan Davies on BBC college of journalism website says that it’s all about context – it will vary according to circumstances.

Impartiality
- required for broadcasters
- not for newspapers – hence Sun or Mail
- absence of bias or preconception
- considers ‘axis of debate’
- mediating within the conflict

3. BBC - (staff and licence payers) for BBC

New BBC editorial Guidelines, BBC (BBC complaints)
- violence in news
- secret recording
- electoral law
- reporting of war/terror – no need to be sensationalist
- examples – look up in papers/online
- BBC fines
- Itv fines

They are important because breaching any of the above brings severe consequences; they are guides through ethical issues stating not only how far can we go to get a story but also when do circumstances become morally or ethically uncertain.

Should bloggers follow a professional code of ethics?

References:
Ref.1) McNae’s essential law for journalists (Twentieth Edition) Banks, D. Hanna, M. (2009)
Ref.2) Notes from the Media Law section on Winchester Journalism site for third year ba students (updates, year 3, BA Journalism 2010) week 9 http://journalism.winchester.ac.uk/?page=102
Ref.3) Media Law Lecture ba Journalism, year 3, week 9
Ref.4) The NUJ's Code of Conduct http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqGwAMI5TqU&feature=related
Ref.5) Editor’s Code of Practice: http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html
Ref.6) PRACTICAL JOURNALISM: OFCOM CODE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF6xyoSa49g&feature=related
Ref.7) Should bloggers follow a professional code of ethics? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3QEgox2cCE&feature=related
Ref.8) Ethical Journalism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzB0zwiyFzM&feature=related
Ref.9) WINOL experience of being a Features Editor as well as produce my own films/features (September-December 2010)
Ref.10) NUJ Code of Practice http://www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=174

Freedom of Information - studying media law from McNae’s - week 8

2010-12-09T07:31:00.000-08:00
“For the democracy to work, citizens must have information to help them plan for the future and to choose which politicians to vote for. The Freedom of Information (2000) Act, which came into effect in 2005, created the UK’s first general right to access to information held by government departments and other public authorities in the United Kingdom.” (Ref.1)
The FOI (2000) Act gives public and journalists TWO key powers, it makes it mandatory on a public authority to disclose whether or not it has the information requested and the public authority must communicate that information. (Ref.2)

There are around 130 000 different organisations and bodies covered by the Act, it is estimated that there are around 1000 000 requests a year (cast £34m) of which journalism is thought to account for only 12% of it, Hard to believe, is it not?

Freedom of Information - Masterclass

FOI was a New Labour policy objective, Journalists also feel that this is the high water mark of FOI requests as you can always request something that has been published or uploaded. "Unnecessary secrecy in government leads to arrogance in government and defective policy decisions"- Tony Blair 1995 (Ref.2) The Freedom of Information Act covers the basic principle that any person making request for information to a public authority is entitled to have that information given to.

Exceptions: FOI gives you legal right of access to any piece of information held by most public authorities, unless there’s a valid reason. Also “if a request costs too much, then the department does not have to supply the information, even if you are willing to pay. Previously the cost of providing an answer was a common reason why ministers would not respond to PQs.” (Ref.2)

Politicians tend to claim the FOI Act has a “chilling effect" on the government as they tend to step back and don’t feel free just to say or discuss issues openly in any way they would like as they are afraid that it would be put into a document and requested by someone to find out.

Tony Blair interview by Andrew Marr Best Bits on youtube

Matthew Davies – King of FOI requests
Matt Davis made a very profitable career just out of selling FOI stories to the national papers, he said the act was not perfect - too many exemptions, too many delays and the new ruling on 'prohibitive cost' can give bureaucrats an effective veto but as we know FOI can prove a good tool for journalists. He says that all journos had to become FOI evangelists. (Ref.2) One of his succesfull stories obtained thanks to request of FOI was when he got a set of national front pages with THE WORST HOSPITALS IN BRITAIN – by doing FOI on an obscure body called the NHS litigation authority. He asked for a breakdown of spending by hospital and also for the insurance the hospitals needed. He identified the worst hospitals on the basis of how much the insurance companies charged to cover them for negligence. (Ref.2)

Other of his researches was on BORAT - two years ago when a massive start - he sent off an FOI to the Foreign Office asking for ALL documents from UK ambassador to Kazakstan. Revealed that the Kazak government had threatened action against Britain - maybe even military attack on Britain - because of BORAT - was a big story. (Ref.2)

As our tutor Chris Horrie outlines in his notes “good authorities to go for are the quangos - eg NHS litigation authority (how much paid in compensation this year for medical cock-ups) - his eyes actually lit up with an evil glint at the thought of the Olympic Delivery Authority. (Ref.2)

What are the public authorities?
“In total, around 100,000 major and minor bodies in the public sector are covered by the Act.”(Ref.1) Why can they say NO - If it costs more than £600 (or £450 for smaller authorities) or if the information is exempt (not included), but you do not have to accept this decision.

Organisations that are believed to be covered by it account for more than 1,000 public bodies, Central and local government, Health, Education, other public bodies throughout England, Wales and Northern Ireland (all local councils; Parish & Town councils; Hospitals; Health trusts; GPs; Dentists; Pharmacists; Government departments; Schools, colleges, universities). (Ref.2)

“Public authorities are requested by ection 16 of the Act to give someone proposing to make a request, or someone who has already made one, ‘advice and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable to expect the authority to do so’.” (Ref.1)

The act also allows the same authorities to refuse to supply the requested information “given various grounds” (Ref.1) which we call exemptions.

EXEMPTIONS are given to organisations that are not required to respond to FOI requests like Security & Intelligence services; Special forces – SAS / SBS; NCIS; GCHQ ; ALL OF WHO have NO DUTY to CONFIRM or DENY that ANY INFO EXISTS. (Ref.2)
“Information must be released UNLESS it is judged that the public interest in NOT disclosing it is greater than the public interest in releasing it”. (Ref.2) Public authorities must disclose if info that will allow public better understanding of decisions affecting individual lives and assists challenges to such decisions. (Ref.1)

GOVERNMENT VETO POWERS are available only to Cabinet ministers which mean that the notices issued by the Commissioner can be vetoed by them. Anyone else such power derogated to can block Information Commissioner Disclosure on Public Interest grounds BUT CANNOT be used against an order NOT covered by EXEMPTION. (Ref.2)

How do you make an FOI request?
Under the 2000 FOIA more than 100,000 public authorities were not only required to give a legal right to the public, they must also help process inquiries within certain time limits. “The whole process is overseen by a national Information Commissioner to whom appeals can be made. Public bodies which do not help the public exercise their rights under the act could, in theory, lose their right to keep records at all which, in practice. (Ref.2)

An FOI request should be in writing (emails, letters); there should be enclosed enough info for authority to reply on and 3) we can even specify how the reply should be formatted to us e.g. by post, e-mail, fax etc You can use the website and choose the public authorities that you would like your request to be directed at and you send the request).

The operational part of the act is any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it hold information of the description specified in the request, and if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him. (Ref.2) It is important to frame the requests in bureaucratic language, and keep it vague. If you are specific and categorical (journo language) then they can wriggle. It is also important to think which particular authority will have what sort of information. (Ref.2)

Also within F.O.I – PROTOCOLS there is no need to disclose WHY info sought; response must be within 20 working days; there is no distinction between media requests and others; there are statutory duty to assist inquiries; info refusal only citing clause of Act and must outline complaints procedure. (Ref.2) But a large part of the act is taken up with a long list of exemptions – cases or circumstances where a public body does not have to provide information.

There are two kinds of exemption. There is an absolute exemption that covers court records, trade secrets, security matters. ABSOLUTE exemption can be faced with refusal if no PUBLIC INTEREST TEST is applied. And a qualified exemption (subject to “Public interest” test 23 such criteria spelt out in Act which covers ministerial communications or commercial confidentiality (government policy formulation; info “prejudicial” to effective conduct of public affairs; law enforcemen; the economy; legal professional privilege). (Ref.2)

The main danger is asking for anything that might identify anyone in particular - because of section 8 HRA and Data Protection Act, “they can turn you down if the request will identify anyone, even by accident. Avoid that in the way you from the question. (Ref.2)

“The first potential hurdle is the definition of “information” itself. The Act specifies that only information, or records of decisions, which have been written down or electronically recorded, counts as information available to the public under the meaning of the Act. The danger is that once public officials realise that decisions they record will be open to public scrutiny, they will be more circumspect in creating accessible records in the first place. (...) Records of decisions made in cabinet or other official bodies did not exist, because t they had been made in advance and in private. (...) (The Lord Chancellor office issued a Code of Practice on Management of Records which establishes standards in this area.(Ref.2)

References:
Ref.1) McNae’s essential law for journalists (Twentieth Edition) Banks, D. Hanna, M. (2009)
Ref.2) Notes from the Media Law section on Winchester Journalism site for third year ba students (updates, year 3, BA Journalism 2010) week 8 http://journalism.winchester.ac.uk/?page=102
Ref.3) Media Law Lecture ba Journalism, year 3, week 8
Ref.4) Freedom of Information - Masterclass http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPp_HEFJoHE&feature=player_embedded
Ref.5) Tony Blair interview by Andrew Marr Best Bits http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6PQTUU0eh4&feature=related

Innocence Project in Winchester & Investigative Journalism

2010-12-08T19:50:00.000-08:00
Bringing the Innocence Project as the aspect of studying Investigative Journalism, as mentioned in my previous posts since 2005, universities across England, Wales and Scotland have established innocence projects to investigate cases of alleged wrongful convictions. (Ref.4)

“We have now about 30 innocence projects in the UK of which more than 20 are members of the innocence Network UK (INUK). Innocence project movement emerged in response to growing concerns that the criminal justice systems cannot guarantee innocent victims of wrongful conviction will be able to have their convictions overturned. “ (Ref.4)

“INUk’ innocence projects do not offer campaigning or victim-support services, they undertake free, impartial casework investigations to alleged factually innocent victims of wrongful conviction who exhausted the normal appeals process.” (Ref.4)

“ To date, the INUK and its network of member innocence projects are collectively working on over 80 cases of alleged wrongful convictions. Most of these cases involve prisoner serving life long term sentences for serious offences, over half of whom have already been refused by the CCRC” (ref.4)

“ The investigations undertaken by the innocence projects generally involve going through all available unused material, conducting research on forms of evidence and areas of law relevant to the case, following up on any leads that could assist in the case, interviewing witnesses and finding new methods such us forensic science technologies that could help to establish whether a claim of innocence is valid. “(Ref.4)

There are currently 8 cases under review by the CCRC and 1 case under review at the SCCRC that were referred to a member innocence projects. (Ref.4) The Innocence Project http://www.innocenceproject.org/

An idea of supporting wrongly convicted prisoners has started from one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in the British law. The times that have been famously remembered that have exercised the legal system investigating miscarriages of justice are shown in a short film called: Reeling in the Years 1974-3, which shows two of the cases that I would like to talk about. The case of The Birmingham Six and the case of The Guilford Four:

(Ref.1)

In 1974, in Ireland, The Guildford four was wrongly accused and imprisoned for many years for the crime they did not commit. Gerry Carole, Paddy Hill, Padd Armstrong and Carole Richardson, their conviction has come to the history of British law as one of the worst miscarriages of Justice.

The Guildford four: “In the name of the father final scene” (Ref.2)

And here is the real footage from youtube of Gerry Conlon who had been to be released after spending 15 years in prison:

They were released in 2005, after they had spent 14 years in prison, even British Prime Minister, Tony Blair apologised to them.

Then, after other cases like The Birmingham six, in seventies

See more in my article: Investigative Journalism & article on Miscarriages of Justice - Birmingham Six and Guildford Four.

After the course of miscarriages of justice in seventies the Government created The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), formally established in 1st January 1997 to review cases with possible grounds to appeal.

Innocence Project steps in when mistakes are being made in the process to appeal, and when the process for rectifying them is flawed. The idea of The Innocence Project stands on side of wrongly imprisoned people giving them their last chance for appeal. As its name indicates, Innocence Project concentrates on prisoners maintaining innocence, and its leading idea is to work towards gathering new evidence that could allow for an appeal. INUK is university based initiative and was launched in 2014.

INUK founder and creator, Michael Naughton says that “it may as well be called the guilty projects” as it is often that the project have to communicate to the client that their claim of innocence is wrong and that they are in fact guilty as there are numerous occasions that the clients need to be made aware of their guilt and explained of why they are guilty in light of Criminal law.

For group of students it is as successful to discover either factual guilt or even better - factual innocence, as that will take the student’s re-investigation to its end and make it easier in the process of reconciliation and acceptance of the cause of verdict way to improve as a human being.

Even if the client is found factually guilty at the end of the student’s re-investigation, the idea of promoting the idea of questioning and having a hunger for justice and helping people not even mentioning investigative skills which will definitely help in journalistic/law/medical profession. It will all benefit all the students involved, strengthen the character and develop their personality in any different areas.

Winchester University has joined the Innocence Network and BA Journalism students at The University of Winchester are now working within the Innocence Network UK and have undertaken reexamining of couple of cases.

Journalists “have the curiosity and persistence, a strong sense of purpose, a feeling of outage about wrongdoing and a moral conviction to find the truth.” (Sparks, D.1999)

One of the core functions that Winchester journalism students have taken upon themselves by joining the Innocence Project is undertaking a “full investigations into alleged cases of wrongful conviction that meet the eligibility criteria, seeking to determine whether claims of innocence are valid and overturn convictions given to factually innocent people.” (http://www.innocencenetwork.org.uk/)

Innocence Project gets involved when legally guilty people claim their factual innocence. After careful consideration, if the decision is that there are possible grounds for appeal, and this is when universities get involved. The case is passed over to a member university, which then will be working towards “gathering new evidence that will allow convicted criminal’s cases to be taken to appeal”. (Kenyon J.)

And therefore, students of Journalism will be working either towards proving factual innocence of our clients and try their best to reach beyond reasonable doubt of our clients’ conviction to either prove their factual innocence or prove the legal system right and make the client aware why was the verdict right, both factually and legally.

As one of our students rightly emphasized, “despite limited law background a journalist is used to researching unfamiliar subjects and being placed outside our comfort zones”. (Kenyon J.) Skills of an investigative journalist serve very well in searching for new evidence, witnesses and searching through the case files for the millionth time to find something that could have potentially been missed out on or misunderstood.

Journalists have the confidence “to pick up the phone and ask questions where others might not” (Kenyon J.) and our student journalists will certainly get to the bottom of the case to find the missing link.

Other responsibilities as members of INUK that journalism students from Winchester will have to fulfil, as stated in the INUK’s core functions are to conduct and facilitate research into, among other related things like ” the cause of wrongful conviction of the innocent; the barriers to attempt to overturn these convictions that are presented by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) and the respective courts appeal; the associated harmful consequences of wrongful conviction on victims, their families, friends and society as a whole. ” (http://www.innocencenetwork.org.uk/)

What is also essential is communication, informing “the public debates about wrongful conviction and imprisonment of factually innocent people, the INUK will communicate the findings from research and the practical work of its member innocence projects with the objective of improving the criminal justice system and preventing future wrongful convictions.” (http://www.innocencenetwork.org.uk/)

References:

Ref.1) Reeling in years 1974-3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_OFo7Crigs&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Ref.2) The Guilford Four, In the name of the father : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgUWn0gVpq0&feature=related
Ref.3) http://www.innocencenetwork.org.uk/
Ref.4) Claims of Innocence, An Introduction to wrongful convictions and how they might be challenged by Michael Naughton with Gabe Tan (2010)

Miscarriages of justice and Investigative Journalism (Birmingham Six & Guilford four)

2010-12-08T19:28:00.000-08:00
The times that have been famously remembered that have exercise the legal system by miscarriages of justice are shown in a short film called: Reeling in the Years 1974-3, which shows two of the cases that I would like to talk about. The case of The Birmingham Six and the case of The Guilford Four:

(Ref.12)

Who Bombed Birmingham (Part 1-11)?

Six men were arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment after the bombing in Birmingham in 1970s. IRA seemed to be the instigator but what the IRA insisted was that none of the sentenced six were their members. 21st November 1974 two of the public houses were bombed by the IRA, 21 people were killed and 162 injured, 6 people were convicted and had been in prison since 1974. A Granada film is a reconstruction of examining of their case by three journalists since 1985 giving the story of the Birmingham six.

Part 2:

The journalists kept on knocking on the doors. Forensic scientists made some sort of method of DNA testing and few of the results showed positive. The journalists noticed inaccuracies to do with the times of interrogation by the police and started questioning the course of the investigation that had put the six men into prison.

Part 3:

As we can see on the film, the men were brutally beaten and assaulted. As the journalists found out (suggestion that due to the interrogation they were forced the six to sign the confessions.) Journalists find a clue in ‘playing cards’ and interview men in prison.

Part 4:

The journalists decide to run a simple DNA test that proves that the test carried out on the Birmingham six may have been misleading (playing cards in the train-test turning red in the DNA test bowl when one of the journalists played with card and then had the DNA sample taken” ). Men in prison were very severely mistreated. The journalists see a clue in the fact that the men are severely beaten up on their faces as they can see from the pictures, all six men were bruised and abused in prison, the journalists were looking into that aspect. Looking into the bombing routine - bombings were tightened up with the funeral?).

Part 6 is the next one given on youtube (there is no part 5)

Chris comes to the conclusion that there were four people responsible for the bombing, 2makers two planters and “we have agreed that you are one of them” says the journalist to one of his interviewees. There is also an assumption about the guy in the van to be another. The film ‘Word In Action’ is made and broadcasted, men in prison re watching it (possibility of an appeal? New evidence?) “Two makers, two planters, not six, four” – Chris now needs the planters to make the application for an appeal stronger.

Part 7:

Chris finds the guy who put the suitcase with the bomb under the table in the pub. ‘Error of judgment’ book by Chris was published, it doesn’t get men out of the prison but it makes the governing bodies start to question things again (Home office 1986). The police who is under the eye of the home secretary requests to interview Chris.

Part 8:

During the questioning Chris keeps his sources covered fulfilling his journalistic code of Conduct. Police says to him that they never said that the imprisoned 6 were members of IRA even though that he knows that in evidence they said that the Birmingham 6 was. Chris meets the policeman who gives the evidence about the mistreating in prison (shotguns) saying that he personally saw it. Further material is being broadcasted, possibility of the DNA judgment to be wrong and mistreating by the looks of the prisoner’s faces. In court again, stage; after two programs had been published and book by Chris Muller, 1987 the case goes into the court of Appeal!

Part 9:

The Birmingham six has met and get to study the timings of them being questioned, the case is investigated again as the case has been taken to the court of appeal. 1987 in court.

Part 10: (my favourite part of the film! “they didn’t know where the bombs were, it was you! I challenge you to deny it! “)

While being questioned in court, the police officer denies all the allegation on violence used on the Birmingham six and inaccuracies within the schedule of questioning them but the turning point is when the police woman who has previously given a false statement (because she was being threatened) came back to court and said in front of the judge and jury how she witnessed one of the defendants to be physically assaulted, she also heard what was said “This is what we do to the fucking murdering bustards”(Ref.10). Then the forensic scientist who examined the original samples of the defendants’ DNA is called a witness and his statement proves that his judgment then was wrong. In the meantime Chris Mullin goes to the house of the man who he believes to be ‘the young planter of the bomb’ and challenges him to deny what Chris believes to be true.
Part 11:

The appeal fails but Chris does not give in, he keeps exercising the justice system. It took until the 1991 for the court to admit that they had the wrong men The Birmingham Six spent 16 years in prison before found not guilty and was released.

Other case mentioned in the that has come to the history as miscarriage of Justice is the case of the Guildford four: “In the name of the father final scene” (Ref.13)

And here is the real footage of Gerry Conlon who had been to be released after spending 15 years in prison:

See more on:
INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM (Media Law week 7) here

INNOCENCE PROJECT IN WINCHESTER &  INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM here
References:
Ref.11) Who bombed Birmingham?
Part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbTqTbmMgkQ
Part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNCGyaS3oPk&feature=related
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpPW2LjkYnE&feature=related
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXMUuyEgbb8&NR=1
Part 6 (which is the following part after part 4 on youtube): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XstdO1PY5gQ&feature=related
Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu9isCmV-rs&NR=1
Part 8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YBqyYOjCcQ&NR=1
Part 9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIO0lClllzI&NR=1
Part 10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nY70XT_Muo&NR=1
Part 11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WhtXQo5EC4&feature=related
Ref.12) Reeling in years 1974-3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_OFo7Crigs&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Ref.13) The Guilford Four, In the name of the father : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgUWn0gVpq0&feature=related

Investigative journalism- J’Accuse (studying Media law week 7)

2010-12-08T19:16:00.000-08:00
De Burgh in his book Investigative Journalism defines Investigative Journalism: as an act leading to “discover the truth and to identify lapses from it in whatever media may be available… distinct from apparently similar work done by police, lawyers, auditors and regulatory bodies in that it is not limited as to target, not legally founded and it is closely connected to publicity”. (Ref.2)

In the chapter about ‘globalising media agendas (The production of journalism)’ De Burgh also mentions that “because investigative journalism upholds people’s right to know about controversial issues and events through media exposure, it is central to debates about the public sphere.” (Ref.4)

In other words investigative journalism is closely related to ‘Gonzo’ journalism and performance journalism. Ordinary ‘news’ journalism is just telling the news which determined by the public agenda whereas investigative journalism is where journalists decide the agenda for themselves. Unlike De Burgh definition this could include subject matter on a lightweight or TV or even entertainment-led agenda. The classic ‘investigations’ however are on heavy subjects like for example Harry Evans and the Insight Team. A lot of the serious IJ these days is financial, fraud and money laundering for example. (Ref.2)

De Burgh also says that the principle of publicity coincides with the principle of investigative journalism, the principle of reason and truth to be more important than a personal profit intentions and therefore it is within for public good to make sure of exposing corruption and domination. (Ref.4) He also rightly notices that the “role of journalism in upholding democratic communication are increasingly taking place in a global concept.” (Ref.4) The features that define the globalisation process through “intensification of global interconnectness and media networks, financial systems, the expansion of transnational corporate activity (...) and so on bring up the question on “the nature of information and news and practices of investigative journalism at an international level”(Ref.4) as one of the arguments given is that transnational media business can lead to the “homogenisation of culture and may erode distinctive national and local cultures across the world through an ‘Americanisation’ of other cultures, particularly poorer and weaker Third World nations.” (Ref.4) However, what we should take into consideration is the fact that many broadcasting organisations in America have the materials that they use more available and convenient (cheaper) if obtainable from their own country or even England than other countries. The broadcasts are made out of specific country and so they will be covered in a particular way representing the culture they are in. I think it is safe to say that America or England have more financial potential to produce/print materials to the world that yes, can be about other countries or events happening elsewhere but it is understandable it will be shown to the world in a specific cultural style that is representing their own country. Whereas broadcasts from the Third World countries for example is probable not as frequent and not as reachable (sometimes restriction wise or financially not as advanced technically for example) to other countries and so majority of people is likely to watch programs from let’s say America than from any other poorer country.

MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE

The classic ‘off agenda’ for investigative journalism is miscarriage of justice – where innocent people go to jail and if it is the case that it is the criminal justice system that is corrupt then the last hope is the journalists which brings up the concept of the journalism fulfilling the role of The Fourth Estate. (Ref.2) The Fourth Estate also hits when there is a need for exposing a political manipulation (Watergate, “All the president’s men”- when the legendary power of the press is shown during the famous Watergate case which inspired generation of journalists. , to see more go to post “All the president’s men” Watergate exposed- power of the fourth estate)

The times that have been famously remembered that have exercised the legal system by re-examining miscarriages of justice are shown in a short film called: Reeling in the Years 1974-3, which shows two of the cases that I would like to talk about. The case of The Birmingham Six and the case of The Guilford Four:

(Ref.11)

Who Bombed Birmingham- Parts 1-11 (Ref.10)

Six men were arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment after the bombing in Birmingham in 1970s. IRA seemed to be the instigator but what the IRA insisted was that none of the sentenced six were their members. 21st November 1974 two of the public houses were bombed by the IRA, 21 people were killed and 162 injured, 6 people were convicted and had been in prison since 1974. A Granada film is a reconstruction of examining of their case by three journalists since 1985 giving the story of the Birmingham six.
See article on Miscarriages of Justice –Investigative Journalism (The Birmingham Six and The Guilford four. )

The journalists who were re-examining their case noticed inaccuracies to do with the times of interrogation by the police, methods and possible fault in the DNA testing; they started questioning the course of the investigation that had put the six men into prison. As we can see on the film, the men were brutally beaten and assaulted (the interrogation forced the Six to sign the confessions).They were also looking into the bombing routine. In part 6 Chris Muller, one of the journalists comes to the conclusion that there were four people responsible for the bombing, two makers and two planters and there is also an assumption about the guy in the van to be another. The film ‘Word In Action’ is made and broadcasted as a result of the investigative journalism of the re-examining of the case (possibility of an appeal? New evidence?). Chris finds the man who put the suitcase with the bomb under the table in the pub and shortly his ‘Error of judgment’ book was published. It didn’t get men out of the prison but it made the governing bodies start to question things again (Home office 1986). The police was under the eye of the home secretary. During the questioning by the police Chris kept his sources covered fulfilling his journalistic code of Conduct. Police says to him that they never said that the imprisoned Six were members of IRA. Eventually Chris found the police officer who decided to give the evidence about the mistreating in prison (shotguns). Further material is being broadcasted, possibility of the DNA judgment to be wrong and mistreating (looks of the prisoner’s faces). The case goes to court of Appeal after two programs had been done and book by Chris Muller published, 1987. Once the Appeal started The Birmingham Six got to study the schedule of the timings produced by the police of them being questioned, the case is investigated again (1987).

Part 10 is my favourite part of the film when Chris says to the ‘young bomber’: “They didn’t know where the bombs were, it was you! I challenge you to deny it! “. In the meantime, while being questioned in court, the police officer unfortunately denies all the allegation on violence used on the Birmingham Six and inaccuracies within the schedule of questioning them but the turning point is when the police woman who had previously given a false statement came back to the court and admitted how she had witnessed one of the defendants to had been physically assaulted, she had also heard what was said “This is what we do to the fucking murdering bustards”(Ref.10). Then the forensic scientist who examined the original samples of the defendants’ DNA is called as a witness and his statement implies that his judgment then could have been faulty but neither that or any other allegations put forward in the court of Appeal convinced the judge and in the last part of the film the appeal fails. Chris does not give in; he keeps exercising the justice system. It took until the 1991 for the court to admit that they had the wrong men The Birmingham Six spent 16 years in prison before found not guilty and was released.

Other case mentioned in the that has come to the history as miscarriage of Justice is the case of the Guildford four: “In the name of the father final scene” (Ref.12)

The Innocence Project (The Innocence Network UK) http://www.innocenceproject.org/
An idea of supporting wrongly convicted prisoners has started from one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in the British law. After cases like The Birmingham six, in seventies, and the Guildford four the Government created The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), formally established in 1st January 1997 to review cases with possible grounds to appeal. The Innocence Project steps in when mistakes are being made in the process to appeal, and when the process for rectifying them is flawed. The idea of The Innocence Project stands on side of wrongly imprisoned people giving them their last chance for appeal. (Read more on Innocence Project here).

EXPOSING CORRUPTION (PEOPLE’S TRIBUNES) is certainly another fascinating aspect of investigative journalism. The work and story of Veronica Guerin brilliantly shows the risks that come with this dangerous subject. See the post on: Journalists resources and my Irish inspiration – Veronica Guerin here
which also explores aspects of protection of sources which is one of the most difficult aspects to cover by being a journalists.

The NUJ's Code of Conduct has set out the main principles of British and Irish journalism since 1936. It is part of the rules and all journalists joining the union must sign that they will strive to adhere to it. As the European Court reached conclusion over the Goodwin v United kingdom case from 1996, it said that “protection of journalistic sources was one of the basic conditions for press freedom, as was reflected in the laws and professional codes of conduct in a number of contracting states and was affirmed in several international instruments on journalistic freedoms.” (Ref.1)

Another great example of a journalist who was not afraid of sacrifices to curry out journalistic duty of keeping the source of his information safe is Bill Goodwin, I talk about Bill’s case in detail in a separate post: Max Mosley, Catherine Zeta Jones and other cases - celebrities and privacy here.

Police Act 1997, Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act 2000, the Terrorism Act 2000 and the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 and Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005... they all have now created more opportunities for lawful chance to ace the confidential information from citizens (including journalists). (Ref.1) And the European Court of Human Rights has stated that “an order to disclose the source of information cannot be compatible with the Article 10 of the Convention (freedom of expression) unless it is justified by overriding requirements in the public interest.” (Ref.1)

Protection of confidential sources of information is perhaps the key professional duty of the journalist. Refusal by journalists to reveal sources of confidential information can lead to prosecution for contempt of court if the journalist defies a court order to reveal those sources. (Ref.2)

“More recently the Attorney General threatened the deputy news editor of the Manchester Evening News, Steve Panter, with prosecution after he had refused to reveal protected sources who had helped him name suspects behind the 1996 IRA bombing of central Manchester. The case was dropped amid comment that it would have been politically unwise to turn Panter into an ‘instant martyr’”. (Ref.2)

Other aspect to be considered when talking about investigative journalism is the evidence gap - civil and criminal standards of proof. “The Daily Mail’s famous branding of five young men suspected of killing the London teenager Stephen Lawrence as “Murderers” is a highly illustrative example of the way in which journalism can operate in the ‘gap’ between the standards of proof in the civil and criminal law. After the collapse of the trial the Daily Mail printed front page pictures of the five youths beneath the block headline “MURDERERS” and the prominent strapline: “The Mail accuses these men of killing. If we are wrong, let them sue.” http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/02_04/paperDM2502_468x433.jpg

“Had the accused been facing trial the paper would have been guilty of the serious crime of contempt of court. But since it was now extremely unlikely that the accused would be facing trial in front of a jury in the near future the only legal risk was an action for libel. “ (Ref.2)

OMAGH BOMBING
“The BBC Panorama programme’s investigation into the Omagh bombing is another illustrative example of investigative journalists using persuasive and accurate, but legally inadmissible evidence, gathered by the police. The official investigation was largely based on then innovative methods of electronic tracking of patterns of mobile phone traffic. The evidence was highly persuasive, but open to challenge as circumstantial and co-incidental. ‘The programme’s reporter, John Ware, defended his methods and commented: “Getting people out of jail who have been wrongly convicted has always been recognised as a journalistic pursuit very much in the public interest. “ (Ref.2)

The investigative work has to be of course practiced with absence of malice and keeping the Common Law Qualified Privilege (REYNOLD’S DEFENCE AND COMMON LAW QP). Central to the Reynolds ten-point test is the idea of the public good and “the public interest”, and “how this is to be balanced against the right of the individuals under investigation to maintain their reputation, as well as their HRA right to privacy (36). If it can be shown that there is a high level of public interest in making the allegations, and that they are free from malice, then there is a strong QP right to publish them (and perhaps, indeed, even a duty to publish), even if the allegations turn out to untrue, or are incapable of proof (37).” (Ref.20

"INVESTIGATION OF CELEB PRIVATE LIFE – FAR LESS PROTECTED thus ‘investigative journalism’ which has as its focus purely private concerns such as the state of health or interesting lifestyles of public figures may not enjoy protection even if the methods used to obtain and check information conform to the ten point test and are otherwise of the highest quality .” Read more on examples of celebrities and their privacy cases: ‘Max Mosley, Catherine Zeta Jones and other cases - CELEBRITIES AND PRIVACY, (CATHERINE ZETA JONES CASE; MAX MOSLEY CASE; PRINCESS CAROLINE OF MONACO; NAOMI AND DAILY MIRROR DRUG REHAB CASE )

The law says that a person who has obtained information in confidence must not take unfair advantage of it and therefore someone who believes his/her confidence is to be breached can get an injunction preventing this. Such injunction will prevent all media from publishing it. The right to privacy is guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention of Human Rights. Section 12 of the Human Rights Act is intended to provide some protection against injunctions in matters involving freedom of expression but in absence of a cause of action for privacy, courts use breach of confidence actions to prevent ‘the unjustified publication of private information’. (Ref.9)

See the details on Breach of Confidence and secrecy – studying media law week 5 post in here.

SUBTERFUGE, usually, you must ALWAYS clearly identify that you are a reporter and that anything said to you COULD be published. You have no choice but to honour an ‘off record’ undertaking, because of the general obligation in the first place to protect sources and possibility of denial. TAPE RECORDERS and SECRET RECORDING are not allowed in radio/TV without specific prior permission from regulatory bodies or BBC editorial policy. If there’s no consent you can’t use the material at all as evidence, but you can quote it. (Ref.2)

HEAVY INVESTIGATIVE STUFF (electronic surveillance)
Some of the law are more relevant to photographer, journalists using video cameras, and TV crews than the print reporters (PPS Code of practice and Photo-journalism). (Ref.1) in Clause 3: Privacy, states that “everyone is entitled to respect for his or her private and family life, home, health and correspondence, including digital communications. Editors will be expected to justify intrusions into any individual’s private life without consent.”(Ref.1) And that “it is unacceptable to photograph individuals in a private place without their consent.” (Ref.1)

Journalistic infiltration of far right, far left can be perfectly legitimate, so long on matters of public interest, and no entrapment (Infiltration (eg Gunther Wal lraff) of Bild – he’s the German Fake Shiek), The Secret Policeman (BBC)
In Clause 4 of the Privacy Act it is stated that “Journalists must not engage in intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit. They must not persist in questioning, telephoning, pursuing photographing individuals once asked to desist; not remain on their property when asked to leave and must not follow them. Editors must ensure these principles are observed by those working for them and take care not to use non-compliant material from other sources.” (Ref.1)

Electronic surveillance by private persons (and journalists) was made illegal by the 1997 Criminal Law Act, and the prohibition was strengthened by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), 2000. There was concern at the time of the RIPA’s passage that it would constrain certain types of legitimate journalistic investigation. January 2007 saw the first prosecution of an investigate journalist using RIPA - News of the World investigative reporter Clive Goodman was sentenced to four months in jail after being discovered using an electronic ‘bug’ to record telephone calls made by the British royal princes. (Ref.2)

“Photographers, to avoid the arrest, need to know law on aggravated trespass, and the general powers police have to arrest those ‘obstructing’ them or the highway.”(Ref.1) Moreover, the law of trespasses forbids an unlawful entry to a land or property and if failed to do so the result can be “an injunction to prevent further trespasses, or damages.”(Ref.1)

Police have also “issued guidelines to their officers about the need to help the media, and about controversial ‘stop and search’ powers in section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.” (Ref.1) It should be well known for journalists that publishing of a wrong photograph or juxtaposing it results in action for libel and so the editors have to be careful when “deciding whether to use ‘user-generated content’ (...)” (Ref.1) which is essentially the materials (pictures/footage) that is supplied by the members of the public because their “publication may breach someone’s privacy or copyright” (Ref.1) or even defame a someone.

Laws are clearly against terrorism and even the UK citizens now are legally obliged to communicate with the police about any information about actual terrorist activity anywhere in the world. Terrorism in UK is defined as “the use or threat of action where the threat is designed to influence the government, or an international government organisation, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause. (Ref.13)

(Read more on terrorism and Counter Terrorism in the post: Terrorism and the effect of counter-terrorism law- studying McNae’s).

References:
Ref.1) McNae’s essential law for journalists (Twentieth Edition) Banks, D. Hanna, M. (2009)
Ref.2) Notes from the Media Law section on Winchester Journalism site for third year ba students (updates, year 3, BA Journalism 2010) week 7 http://journalism.winchester.ac.uk/?page=102
Ref.3) Media Law Lecture ba Journalism, year 3, week 7
Ref.4) Investigative Journalism, Context and Practice (2nd Edition) Hugo de Burgh (edited) Routledge, chapter 6
Ref.5) Emile Zola and J’Accuse – Dreyfus http://www.lawsch.uga.edu/academics/profiles/dwilkes_more/his9_jaccuse.html
Ref.6) My blog on Breach of Confidence and Secrecy (to Privacy) http://veronicafryd.blogspot.com/2010/11/breach-of-confidence-and-secrecy.html
Ref.7) My blog on terrorism and effects of counter terrorism: http://veronicafryd.blogspot.com/2010/12/terrorism-and-effect-of-counter_02.html
Ref.8) My blog on protecting the sources ( and my Irish inspiration: Veronica Guerin): http://veronicafryd.blogspot.com/2010/11/journalists-sources-and-my-irish.html
Ref.9) My blog on recent cases on Privacy: Max Mosley, Catherine Zeta Jones and other cases - celebrities and privacy http://veronicafryd.blogspot.com/2010/11/max-mosley-catherine-zeta-jones-and.html
Ref.10) Who bombed Birmingham?
Part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbTqTbmMgkQ
Part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNCGyaS3oPk&feature=related
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpPW2LjkYnE&feature=related
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXMUuyEgbb8&NR=1
Part 6 (which is the following part after part 4 on youtube): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XstdO1PY5gQ&feature=related
Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu9isCmV-rs&NR=1
Part 8: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YBqyYOjCcQ&NR=1
Part 9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIO0lClllzI&NR=1
Part 10: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nY70XT_Muo&NR=1
Part 11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WhtXQo5EC4&feature=related
Ref.11) Reeling in years 1974-3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_OFo7Crigs&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Ref.12) The Guilford Four, In the name of the father : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgUWn0gVpq0&feature=related
Ref.13) Terrorism and the effect of counter-terrorism law- studying McNae’s http://veronicafryd.blogspot.com/2010/12/terrorism-and-effect-of-counter_02.html

Copyright – understanding the media law (week 6)

2010-12-06T18:51:00.000-08:00
Journalism is the business of turning information into money and the “copyright is the branch of law that enables journalism to exist as a business. Development of effective copyright law is the key to the entire industry. Without copyright law there could be no profit, since giving up rights to copyright is the way in which we are able to charge money for our work, as individuals and as an industry as a whole.” (Ref.2)

As McNae’s essential law for journalists edition 20th gives ‘ Copyright is a branch of intellectual property law and it protects the products of people’s skill, creativity, labour, or time.’ (Ref.1)

Copyright has existed in the UK and US in common law since the early18th century. In common law breach of copyright is similar to theft – it is the act of making beneficial use of somebody else’s intellectual WORK without permission. If a person can prove that their intellectual property has been stolen they can sue for compensation. (Ref.2) And so breach of infringement of copy rights is ‘making beneficial use’ or exploiting someone else’s intellectual work without permission. “The statutes are the 1911 Copyright Act, which made breach of copyright a crime, and the 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. This gave extended rights to the makers of certain types of ‘intellectual property’ which didn’t really exist in 1911 to make their work protected. “(Ref.2)

According to Intellectual Property Office Copyright applies to: Original works- (most works) must be original to have copyright protection.Websites and the internet- the same rules apply on the internet as with other medium. Written work including software and databases- software and databases can be protected as written work. Theatre- dance and mime can receive protection too. Music- can have numerous types of work capable of protection. Artistic works including photographs- photographs are also artistic works. Spoken word and performers- performers of spoken word may receive protection. And finally, TV and Film - numerous types of work can be protected in the case of TV and film. (Ref.9)

An interesting challenge set by one of our tutors that exercised the rules of Copyright thing was described in an article on BBC News on Friday, August 200, titled ‘How to Copyright Yourself’, written by Chris Horrie (also our director for Journalism course) gives that “film stars are being encouraged to patent their own DNA to stop anyone stealing their identity to make a clone. BBC News Online's Chris Horrie - worried about a similar threat to himself - tried to register himself. (...)” (Ref.7) Chris attempts to see how hard/easy would it be to protect himself from having his genes copied. Chris then writes, ‘there must be millions of people around the globe, I therefore reasoned, who are gagging for my genes and so urgent steps were needed to protect them. (...) “ (Ref.7) First of all Chris had to try to get a print out of his personal DNA an after a number of organisations that Chris had to go through NHS: St Mark's Hospital in Harrow (one of the leading centres for genetic diagnosis and analysis in the country), Human Genome Project and then Patent Office, he says in the article that he was trying to make sure that he would be able to register himself once he had persuaded the Scientists of the Genome to scan him or whatever it was. (Ref.7)

Then he came across ‘more problems’ as he says. He goes onto saying ‘ spokesperson doubted that my DNA would be accepted as unique, since as much as 90% of the pattern was shared with monkeys - if anything it could be argued that I had stolen my persona from them, and so I might end up having to mount a massive class action against the population of London Zoo.

Also, to get my patent, I would have show a clear "technological application" - such as evidence that by throwing myself into a vat of deadly chemicals, I could catalyse some sort of useful chemical reaction.

Another difficulty was that I would have to prove that I was "novel at the time of making the application" - meaning that nobody had ever heard of me or seen me doing whatever result of being Chris Horrie it was that was worth copyrighting. ‘ (Ref.7)

Then Chris tried to put his genes in aspect of being off as a ‘work of art, literature, drama or sculpture but as he says in the article ‘it could only apply to any documents on which my gene pattern was written and not the genes themselves. ‘ (Ref.7)

Chris goes onto writing that ‘ it would be hard to copyright a sheet of computer print-out possibly several miles long if it represented a complete, unique DNA print out.‘ (Ref.7) He then turns to the Copyright Licensing Agency but as he soon finds out ‘the authority mainly deals with the law on photocopying books’ (Ref.7).

His conclusion out of that challenge was that ‘for the time being at least, anyone thinking of surreptitiously obtaining a sample of genetic Chris Horrie material (...) and then producing an army of super-intelligent zombie-clones (...) can do so with legal impunity. “ (Ref.7)

After this witty and interestingly executed challenge we can see that there are probably gaps within the law on the Copyrights that for some reason, essentially allow within a law to copy a sample of someone else’s DNA as they are copyright free (funny, but quite surprising conclusion). Let’s hope that as our technology develops the copyright laws will adjusts to it making sure that at some point we ‘will be lawful owners of our own copy of genes’.

As we found out from Chris’s quest personal DNA is not copyright covered but what we know for sure is that Copyright protects intellectual property as mentioned earlier and the intellectual property – “is a residual right that every citizen has” (Ref.2) and it is protected as. Any work you do belongs to you (you own it– it is a residual right) until you sell it to somebody else. (Ref.2)

The Intellectual Property Office states that things protected by copyright are:
• literary works, including novels, instruction manuals, computer programs, song lyrics, newspaper articles and some types of database
• dramatic works, including dance or mime
• musical works
• artistic works, including paintings, engravings, photographs, sculptures, collages, architecture, technical drawings, diagrams, maps and logos
• layouts or typographical arrangements used to publish a work, for a book for instance
• recordings of a work, including sound and film
• broadcasts of a work (Ref. 8)

Also, ‘under 1988 Act, there is copyright in spoken words, even if they are not delivered from a script, as soon as they are recorded, with or without the speaker’s permission. The speaker, as the author of a literary work, owes the copyright in his/her words, unless he she is speaking in the course of his/her employment.’ (Ref.1) Of course the speaker that reads from the manuscript is also covered by the copyright (e.g. sending the copies of the Quinn’s Christmas day message that was sent to The Sun and other newspapers).

Copyright free things:
Things that are not protected by copyright (no copyright) are for example undeveloped ideas, slogans or catchphrases as the copyright only applies to things that had already been done. For example if you reproduce a film which is copyrighted (or any part of it, with the exception of pieces of the film for purpose of review) then you are in breach of copyright. There is no copyright in facts or information, or in particular numbers or particular words.

Why do we care as journalists:
We care as journalists because without copyright protection, journalism would never have flourished, copyright materials exclusively. Copyright gives our product a value and so we should always respect other people’s copyright in the hope they respect ours. Also we care for self representation as we have a lot to lose like money for example, reputation or even being left with embarrassment. “In the entertainment industry the compensation claims can be massive – eg Napster and unsuspecting parents who suddenly get massive bills from record companies because their children have been stealing lots of music using Limewire or similar. “ (Ref.2)

Selling the rights to use intellectual work
You can sell the rights to use your intellectual work but you are more likely to license the use of your work in return for payment. “There are three ways this would normally work.
1. If on the staff (fully employed with legal employment protection) of a broadcaster or newspaper or website almost always your contract of employment (...) will either state that you surrender the rights to commercial exploitation of your work. (...)You have been paid wages (...) and the employer then re-sells that article for a lot of money; you will not be paid any more. However, since the 1988 Copyright Act, you do retain ‘moral rights’ – you must be identified as the author of the work, and you have a right to prevent the article being altered in such a way that you would be denigrated if identified as author of the work.
2. Therefore as a journalist/photographer/author, etc, you can negotiate a different contract of employment, which gives you some rights to money if your work is re-sold. (...) More likely you can be a ‘freelance’ journalist (...) you retain the rights to your work, and license the use to publishers or broadcasters – either exclusively (...) or non-exclusively (...). You then retain the copyright so that after an agreed period of time the copyright in the work will return to you. (...)” (Ref.2)

There are also a specific durations that pieces of work can be can be potentially used. The duration: For literary, dramatic, music (scores), films or artistic works (1988 statute) for example is 70 years after the death of the author; for sound recordings and broadcasts is 50 years from the year in which the work was created (compilation CDs of songs from the World War II which are all non copyright). (Ref.2) Also before a release of a film there is a two/three week gap when there is a possibility of access to film footage through the trailer (bond film and car package example). (Ref.3)

Generally speaking, before using any material it is important to always carry out copyright checks and recognise if there is a risk or issue of copyright matter (think about how to go about it if needed) and remember that contacting right holders takes time and you should tell others you cleared the issue.

“LIFTING” (fair dealing)
There is no copyright in the facts of a news story, though the actual words (especially quotes and even more especially bits of video, or clips of interviews) are protected by copyright. The reason is that the actual way in which the news story is written is the work of the journalist, as are the actual words in the quotes and as is the interview which may have been captured on film. (Ref.2)

“There is a very strong defense to breach of copyright when reporting the news and writing about matters in the public interest. This is the defence of ‘fair dealing’ which covers the old journalistic practice of “lifting” quotes from a newspaper report carried by a rival paper.” (Ref.2) Papers have been ‘lifting’ each others’ stories for years in very constrict criteria as you can ‘lift’ stuff as long as you obey certain principles of ‘fair dealing’. The fair dealing is for the purpose of reporting current events. As long as we follow these rules we "can safely lift” a short, sound-bite type quote from another newspaper or from a broadcast news bulletin and include it in your report under fair dealing so long as you give proper attribution to the source, and that you do not “pass off” the quote as your own work’ (Ref.2) ; we also have to do it in public interest and the usage must be fair (this is how newspapers have been ‘sharing’ things and there is legal underpinning for it).

"You do not have to name the rival title, but you must NOT give the impression that the quote was given exclusively to you. You have not heard the actual quote yourself, so you should not give the impression that you have as that would be malice. (Ref.2)

THE DA VINCI CODE CASE
“The point that there is no copyright in ideas, concepts, plot outlines, etc and only in the actual work was strengthened in a 2007 High Court appeal case where Dan Brown was sued by two authors who claimed that they had already published the gist of lot in the The Da Vinci Code some years before in a non-fiction book called The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail (essentially that Jesus had children who escaped the middle east ruled as monarchs in the South of France in the middle ages, protected by secret societies and secret knowledge – or at least that such a thing was believed). The two books are in fact very similar in what they allege. But The Holy blood people lost their case, because there was no copyright in an idea of this sort; and it had not been proven that Dan Brown had lifted anything substantial from the earlier book.” (Ref.2)

When talking about the ‘FAIR DEALING you can use copyrighted materials only in the following ways: (from the statute)
* Private and research study purposes.
* Performance, copies or lending for educational purposes.
* Criticism and news reporting.
* Incidental inclusion.
* Copies and lending by librarians.
* Acts for the purposes of royal commissions, statutory enquiries, judicial proceedings and parliamentary purposes.
* Recording of broadcasts for the purposes of listening to or viewing at a more convenient time, this is known as "time shifting".
* Producing a back up copy for personal use of a computer program.
* Playing sound recording for a non profit making organisation, club or society.
Most of these rights are lost if you are doing it for profit (eg, journalism).‘ (Ref.2)

Fair dealing allows wider reporting of stories in public interest; criticism and review of copyright material; broadcast news or even bits of film (stars can use famous movie clips for free).

CREATIVE COMMONS MOVEMENT is a way of using copyrighted material for free with permission. You must respect moral rights, and share profits if they arise. The license is usually time limited. You must inform the license holder (Ref.2)

Photography and film footage
‘Where a photograph is commissioned from a freelance or commercial photographer today, the copyright is owe by the photographer (or his employer) unless there is an agreement to the contrary. ‘(Ref.1)

Photographs (stills and video) are never a subject to fair dealing and therefore it is of our concern as journalists, which are now also so easily available on the internet. “Until 1988 the copyright in a photograph belong to the person who supplied the original photographic plate, or photographic film. The 1988 Act changed that so that photographers had “moral rights” over their own photography. “ (Ref.2) ‘If the photograph was taken before the 1988 Act came to force, however, the copyright will be owed by the person or company who commissioned it, even thought the photographer or his employer will own the negatives or film.’ (Ref.1)

To use someone’s photograph just as it is with video footage we have to have a permission for it (license) or sometimes even pay for it. ‘The reason for the 1988 act was the outdated copyright law as it applied to photography. But it also applies to all “intellectual property” including ‘literary’ work, dramatic work, drawings, works of art, sound recordings, video, design, etc.’ (Ref.2)

COPYRIGHT USED BY BUREAUCRATS TO PREVENT INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM
If you get a leaked document from a government department, then they may allege breach of confidence and seek an injunction to stop you publishing the story (Goodwin case look in here: Breach of Confidence and secrecy – studying media law week 5 (part I)). They may also allege theft both of the actual document (Sarah Tisdall case), and also infringement of copyrighted words in the document. They may also prosecute for theft of electricity (even a minute amount) if you hack into a computer remotely to obtain copyrighted information (or any information for that matter). (Ref.2)

Sarah Tisdall case:
In 1983, the The Guardian newspaper “was at the centre of a controversy surrounding documents regarding the stationing of cruise missiles in Britain that were leaked to The Guardian by civil servant Sarah Tisdall. The paper eventually complied with a court order to hand over the documents to the authorities, which resulted in a six month prison sentence for Tisdall. “(Ref.6) she served only four. Peter Preston who was the editor of The Guardian at the time, argued that ‘the paper had no choice because it "believed in the rule of law". ‘(Ref.6)

The right of freedom of expression under the Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights was held by Sir Andrew Morrit, Vice Chancellor, in 2001 to provide no defence for infringement of copyright over and above the defences provided by the Copyright act 1988. The decision was upheld in the Court of Appeal. (Ref.1)

References:

Ref.1) McNae’s, Essential law for journalists, D.Banks, M.Hanna (20th Edition 2009)
Ref.2) Notes from the Media Law section on Winchester Journalism site for third year ba students (updates, year 3, BA Journalism 2010) week 5 http://journalism.winchester.ac.uk/?page=102
Ref.3) Media Law Lecture ba Journalism, year 3, week 6
Ref.4) Breach of Confidence and secrecy – studying media law week 5 (part I) http://veronicafryd.blogspot.com/2010/11/breach-of-confidence-and-secrecy.html
Ref.5) Preston, Peter (5 September 2005). "A source of great regret". The Guardian (London) http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2005/sep/05/pressandpublishing.politicsandthemedia
Ref.6) Wikipedia: The Guardian http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian#cite_note-33
Ref.7) ‘How to copyright yourself’ by Chris Horrie for BBC News online http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1494746.stm
Ref.8) Intellectual Property Office: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-about.htm
Ref.9) Intellectual Property Office: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-applies.htm

How I went to cover London student protests and trouble at the Millbank on 10/11/10

2010-12-02T16:42:00.000-08:00
... From the streets of Horse Guards Avenue to the corridors of Parliament: ‘NO IFS NO BUTS NO EDUCATION CUTS’...
London Demo 10/11/10, produced and edited by Veronica Frydel and Madeleine Klippel

It was the biggest student protest since 1998. They say about 50,000 people took part in a march through Westminster earlier on that day. The protests were the reaction of the Lord Brown’s proposed education cuts which also forced the tuition fee cap to rise to £9.000.

The proposal is that the tuition fees would rise from 2012. The funding is planned to be cut by 40%, teaching grants are meant to be got rid of except science and maths and the costs of teaching other courses is expected to be funded only by these tuition fees. As it was written in the article on BBC on tht day Universities Minister David Willetts said the new system would be fairer than the present one, offering more help to the poorest students and the students would only have to pay back their tuition fee loans once they were earning £21,000 or more.

Intentions of the protests were peaceful and music of the drums singing and chanting spread along the street uniting students from all over UK against the proposal.

Aaron Porter National Union of Students President spoke at the meeting earlier on that morning:

“We are here today to send out a clear message about how devastating the cuts to the Higher education will be really troubling and how some of the students I think, will find themselves priced out of higher education (...) This is a government that runs its election campaign, the Tory half at least, saying that we cannot sustain an economy on debt while simultaneously passing on a record level of debt onto the next adult generation (...) “It’s right that we continue to focus on the issue of the fee cup because I don’t think it is right that we will sit back and watch the student contribution to treble in from of our eyes whilst state funding is just simply withdrawn.
(...) The Liberal Democrats need to stick to their word they made a promise at the general election to vote against the higher fees. They had election broadcast where Nick Clegg said ‘no more broken promises’, the students are laughing at their faces right now, and they face wipe out unless they reverse what they are doing.(...) “ said Aaron Porter, National Union of students president.

A group of students fro the University of Winchester decided to tke upon themselves a challenge to cover the student demonstrations that took place in London on 10/11/10. The film we made was produced by Madeleine Klippel and I, filmed by Madeleine, Andrew Giddings, William Cooper and myself. Will's voice appears as the voice over.
Couple of our reporters Madeleine and Andrew went to the press conference and filmed it.
Aaron also said that they wanted it to be peaceful protest as that was what they have signed up for and if students go violent that would be what will be a matter for the police and they would have to hand it over to them.
After the conference they video interviewed Aaron as well as Alan Whitaker, University and College Union President, who said that if we end up with the riots on the street the press will focus on that, that is not what my union want the press to focus on, we want the press to focus on not increasing fees, not scrubbing the educational maintenance, those are the messages we want to get across.

While Andy and Maddie focused on sending the materials over to the studio William and I were already among the crowd filming the demonstrations. ‘No ifs no buts, no education cuts’ was the students’ leading chanting phrase. Millions of different banners were raised into air and demonstrated with a strong feeling and determination to represent what the demonstrators felt.

“Education is a right not a privilege”
“Who nicked our Education”
“Don’t cut a child’s future”
“Death of Education”
“We miss Gordon”
“RIP Education”

Trumpets, drums and significant phrases flooded the streets. Students were trying their best to have their voices heard. Will and I decided to speak to few of the participants to get the genuine feeling and intentions from the Protestants. We spoke to number of people while marching along with them trying to capture an amazing feeling of higher purpose and unity of the crowd that stood out and marched to make a difference.

We spoke to students from universities and colleges all around UK. Head teachers, unions who said that they were there because they think that the costs of education are unfair and they will not stand back, and they are against it. College students were saying that if the fees go up they won’t be able to afford to go to university and they don’t want the ones who will go to university to be paying their debts till the rest of their lives. Head of school teacher came along to the demonstration to support the cause. Our interviewees were saying that it should be a principle of our society that we should all be there, not only as parents supporting our children but also to politicise the younger generation. Most of our interviewees were full of hope for a significant and decision breaking outcomes of the demonstration and others admitted that they were there to have their voices heard but they were not sure if they would be listened to.

We even managed to find a member of parliament in the crowds, Lisa Nandy, Labour MP for Wigan who was there to show the support for the young people in her constituency who won’t be able to go to the university as a result of the announcements. She has just come out from the inside of the house of Parliament and said that there was a real anger amongst the MPs in there about what’s happening and the demonstrations are fuelling it.

We were taking pictures at the same time and sending them over to the newsroom so that it could use it in the news bulletin. As the main protests wound down Will and I decided to head towards the coaches to head with our student union back over to Winchester around 3.30pm. We got to the coach sat and ready for the last students to join us we received a message that just across the bridge at the Millbank, Tory Head Quarters “are being trashed” from one of our colleagues Jason who was at the protests photographing it.

Jason Curtis is our WINOL’s photographer and was covering it for the website, whereas Will (sports deputy editor for WINOL) and I (Feature Editor for WINOL) were filming it for the Feature section of the website. Will and I had a big dilemma in that we had only few minutes to solve. It was around 4pm and we had only 1min left on our tape and the coach was just about to head back to Winchester.

We stormed out of the coach and run across the bridge with only one minute left on the tape and run to 30 Millbank to capture at least minutes of footage of what was happening there. We made sure we stayed together and safe in the crowd and when our last tape run out we started filming with our mobiles. We informed our tutors and editor where we were and kept them updated of what was happening constantly sending the pictures over to the newsroom.

We could not get hold of Maddie and Andy throughout the demonstrations until later on that day. We bumped into them while filming the fireplace, banners burning on the pavement right in front of the Millbank. They happened to have a spare tape! From now on the four of us were filming the events at the Millbank with two cameras and had no concern of tapes running out.

The atmosphere was filled with a lot more anger and attitudes ready for action rather than just peaceful drumming and marching. It felt as if all the peaceful demonstrators wend back on the coaches and deferent intentions were pushed the people in front the Tory HQ to put their words into action. When we got there the windows were already broken and the police started forming a wall trying to push people away from the building. Lots of journalists around trying to do their’ piece to camera’ from the heart of the situation at that stage... and we, observing and filming trying to paint the whole picture of the day.

We were scared but excited at the same time we were at the right middle of the history happening. We were determined not to leave until it all finishes... or our tapes run out.

There were objects flying above our heads, police and media helicopters above and fire places below and crowd trying to sustain not movable from the place. Swearwords and people with their faces covered only showing eyes could not mean anything good in their intentions. Where some of the people there were only observing and the ongoing phrase ‘no ifs no buts no education cuts’ was still coming out of part of the crowd just standing there and manifesting with their presence there were also those who decided to climb up the roof and throw things from up above and these on the ground kept pushing trying to get into the building.

We decided to interview with some students at the place. We managed to find few. They said that they only just got there. We were trying to get the feeling whether the remaining students there though that this part of the protests was planned. As you can see on the film and from interviews with union presidents earlier on that day, it was all not part of the plan the fact that it turned into a trouble for the police and that the police looked to be outnumbered made it quite dangerous for some.

Unfortunately at that stage press was not focusing on the message that was meant to be the main message of the day but on the ‘violence’ that it turned to at the 30 Millbank House.

BBC news published an article at 8pm‘Violence at Tory HQ overshadows student fees protest’, starting the report with words , ‘there have been violent scenes as tens of thousands of people protested against plans to treble tuition fees and cut university funding in England.” Then it went to ‘demonstrators stormed a building in Westminster housing the Conservative Party headquarters, smashed windows and got on to the roof. Outside, a crowd of thousands surged as placards and banners were set on fire and missiles were thrown.” And then it looks like they tried to make a balance saying: ‘student leaders condemned the violence as "despicable".’

A stand-off is still taking place between about two dozen demonstrators and the police, with 32 people having been arrested so far.”

On of their Educational Correspondents, Sean Coughlan at the scenedescribed in the BBC article that “This siege of Millbank Tower was a violent break-away from what had been a noisy but good-natured march.

As demonstrators crowded around the building, some masked and hooded, the mood began to turn ugly. Missiles began flying towards the large plate glass windows, with only a thin line of police, with metal truncheons raised, guarding the building's entrance.

Outnumbered and overwhelmed, they were slowly but relentlessly hemmed against the front of the building.

As protesters surged, a succession of windows were smashed and then demonstrators flooded into the building entrance. Security guards scattered and the handful of police inside were completely overrun. A few yards away, in surreal calm, guests carried on eating in the adjacent Pizza Express.

Inside the building, demonstrators wearing police hats danced on tables. A protester ripped a security camera from the ceiling and danced in triumph, slogans were spray-painted on walls. (...)” He also said in his report that according to Scotland Yard, 14 people have been injured, including seven police officers but no-one was seriously hurt.

Will and I heard that some people got hurt and at that stage we also heard that some also got arrested. As we were doing our last interview with a girl who summarised the situation saying that it was a disgusting that the press was only focusing on ‘the riots’ of the protests rather than the facts that thousands of students turned up this day to disagree with the coalition. She also said that it would be a waste if the group of people that did what they did have made the point of that day overshadowed.

After that interview Will and I felt that we have had enough footage for our film and Maddie and Andy also agreed that it was time to head back to Waterloo. I think it was around 5pm when we decided to leave however to our surprise the police surrounded the area and said that we cannot get out.

We explained that we were there acting as journalist and were there to film events of that day purely observing but they did not let us out. When Maddie and Andy who are at the same year studying Journalism at Winchester University with us were standing next to us and had the same camera. They were let out because they had press passes and Will and I did not have one as we did not expect to be there at the first place. We tried to explain to the police that we were studying at the same course acting as journalists but they did not take that for an answer. In front of our eyes two of our classmates were let through and we were kept back because we didn’t have press passes.

Hours went by and we were standing there in cold waiting and frustrated to be kept for such a long time.

BBC report from 1700 GMT said that the police had "largely taken control" of the building, some protesters were escorted out by officers and the crowds outside were gradually dispersing.

Well, there could have been around hundred of us standing there surrounded by the police I think, and every now and again the huge ‘police wall’ was getting closer and closer. We figured that it was part of the system to tackle the crowd but we could not believe that we were kept with that crowd. I heard in a distance a young guy speaking to a police officer, the guy mentioned the word ‘kettling’, which I felt fitted well description to what was happening around us.

I remembered a definition of Kettling from Wikipedia, which is simply a police tactic for the management of large crowds during demonstrations or protests... large cordons of police officers who then move to contain a crowd within a limited area- was exactly what was happening.

We heard from someone that we were being kept there for breach of public piece.

When kittling, protesters are usually left only one choice of exit, determined by the police, or are completely prevented from leaving, detainees can be denied access to food, water and toilet facilities for a long period- yes, this part was of my big concern as unluckily we happened to be in that ‘doomed circle of kettled people accused of breach of piece’ and could do nothing about it.

The part of the definition that was of my biggest concern was that sometimes all or some of those kettled are mass-arrested and that was the least thing that we wanted.

Well, there was nothing else that we could do but wait for the police to let us out.

About four hours later on our ‘way out’ we were searched ‘for sharp objects’ and requested to have our pictures taken and then let out.

Other posts related to this one:
Studen Protests in London Demo week and Rob Kirk visits Winchester University
Student Protests documentary reaches over 7,000 hits over two weeks!

Terrorism and the effect of counter-terrorism - studying media law from McNae's

2010-12-02T16:33:00.000-08:00
“The heightened threat of terrorism has in recent years led to further wide-ranging prohibitions in the UK’s legislation. Some counter-terrorism laws ban the gathering of certain information. Others restrict what can be published, inhibiting freedom of expression.” (Ref.1)

Laws are clearly against terrorism and even the UK citizens now are legally obliged to communicate with the police about any information about actual terrorist activity anywhere in the world. Terrorism in UK is defined as “the use or threat of action where the threat is designed to influence the government, or an international government organisation, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.” Terrorism Act 2000, section 1, as amended by the Terrorism Act 2006 and the counter-terrorism Act 2008 (Ref.1) Under the 2000 Act action also “falls within this subsection if it:

1. involves serious violence against a person
2. involves serious damage to property
3. endangers a person's life, other than that of the person committing the action
4. creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public
5. is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system” (Ref.2)

It is also illegal to be involved in any way in terroristic organisation or prompt it. “Act 2006 bans dissemination of terrorist publications and specifically prohibits encouragement through ‘glorification’ of it” (Ref.1) Glorification offence is classed as an encouragement towards the terrorism and it can be punished by up to 7years in prison.

From recent examples of successful prosecution:
Abu Hamza. “On Tuesday 7th February 2006, Abu Hamza was convicted of six counts of soliciting to murder, two counts of using threatening words or behaviour likely to stir up racial hatred, one count of possessing threatening recordings and one count of possession of a document likely to be useful to a terrorist.” (Ref.3) (sentenced to 7 years imprisonment)

“On 24th February 2003, Abdullah El-Faisal was convicted of two counts of soliciting to murder, two counts of using threatening words and behaviour and one count of distributing threatening, abusive or insulting recordings of sound.

He was sentenced to a total of nine years' imprisonment (reduced to seven on appeal)

The defendant is a cleric who in his sermons solicited others to murder. These sermons were recorded onto audiotapes and videotapes, which were then distributed to specialist shops and were available for sale to members of the public.

From the vast quantity of tapes seized by the Police, eight of the most graphic and offensive were the subject of the Public Order Act prosecution. (Ref.3)

It is also “an offence to ‘elicit’ or publish information about someone who is or has been a member of Her majesty’s forces, of the UK intelligence services, or a police officer, if the information ‘is of kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.”(Ref.1) Journalists should be careful if for any reason e.g. researching for the story they look into or research any information (like terrorism manuals on internet for example) from sources to do with terrorism as it is an offence to “‘collect or make a record of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’ or possesses a document or record containing information of that kind.’ “(Ref.1)

Terrorism Act 2000, section 5 empowers the police in assisting in investigation into terrorism and that makes it legally lawful for them to request any materials from media that could be of any use for the investigation.

For example in 1992, Channel 4 and the independent production company Box Productions were fined £75,000 for contempt of Court after refusing to comply with a court requesting to disclose to the police the identity of a source used in a television programme The Committee (part of the Dispatchers series) which investigated into killings in Northern Ireland. (Director of Public Prosecutions v Channel Four Television Company Limited and another [1993] 2 All ER 517) (Ref.1)

It is also prohibited to fail to disclose any person or activity that is involved in terrorism to the police, if failed to do so the maximum penalty would be either imprisonment or a fine or even both.

Relevantly recent example in which a journalist was classed to have got involved into the terrorism activity by making a research was when in 2008, Malik a freelance journalist was required to hand in his materials from the research he had done for his book ‘Leaving Al-Qaeda: Inside the Mind of British Jihadist’. The book was about “Hassan Butt who when co-operating with Malik for the book – had claimed to have been in some way involved, before renouncing terrorism, with an attack in Pakistan which killed 11 people and with recruiting people to a ‘proscribed’ group, (...) “ (Ref.1)

The prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 authorises the system of ‘control orders’ to restrict the liberty of people suspected of involvement in terrorism but who have not been prosecuted.

References:

Ref.1) Banks, D., Hanna, M. (2009) McNae’s essential law for journalists, (Twentieth Edition), ch.33
Ref.2) Home Office website: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/about-us/home-office-circulars/circulars-2006/008-2006/
Ref.3) CPS site on ‘violent extremism’ – recent terrorism cases: http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/violent_extremism.html

Veronica's photography - UK photographed

2010-12-01T19:11:00.000-08:00
Wales Photographed- photoessay

Scotland Photographed – photoessay

I made the two films for the Winchester News Online Features site, they are not hitting the targeted audience directly but will find the interest in these that like travelling and photography and therefore I believe it will find its potential group of our audience anyway. I think that we should not limit ourselves to reach for stereotypical themes for young students, we should remember that there are many interests to be covered and even students from abroad as well as 23 plus group of age too. Also I believe that if I was also to justify my choice of these two films was also that it could actually even fit the stereotypical young group of age students on the campus to be inteested in it also as many students do travelling or is planning travelling, it would be good to create more films like the two above (perhaps with voice-overs too) that could show potential beautiful places that they could visit while travelling. Also it is worth for academic people to see and be interested in other parts of their country than just England. It would be a great waste thinking about the stereotypical young student interests, we should also think: travelling, photography, art, hobbies and soo on, as we know may do plan to travel at some point, explore the world, discover new interests and get to know the world. The theme that would be connecting all the films with the travelling/exploring/nature admiring concept would be the fact that all the photography used will be our very own taken by winol team members. And films made by our feature team.

Week 10 Safety tips on hostile situation and preparing for the BJTC competition

2010-12-01T19:03:00.000-08:00
Week 9 of the first semester started of training on safety tips on hostile enviroment while out and filming and preparing our London demo documentary for the BJTC competition. I also spent most of my time also making panoramic photoessays for winol features alongsite managing the team. Also band Dave performed for WINOl in the studio, our feature team and production produced the film featuring one of their songs 'I keep my heart locked up' . Additionally, I helped with the prodction of bulletin for primary school children on Tuesday (Autoqueue, cameras, studio floor managing etc).

First thing on Monday morning we were reminded of the safety tips in hostile environment.

Completing a Risk Assessment form and having it signed of by an authorised person is essential. We should always remember to have a good plan put in place before going filming. Plan of action can save your lives and we should be prepared for the worst, in that way there will be nothing to surprise us. The safety root (root of exit) has to be memorised and seen to be available at all times. We should always stay in communication with the relevant people. On the aspect of good communication it is also worth taking a mobile charger with in case our battery runs out. Moreover, it’s good if we have a number for the landline written down (for the newsroom) in case we are in the situation where we could only use a landline to contact relevant people. We should also have a so called ‘fixer’ (minder) – someone who sets things up prior to our arrival). If we are threatened, we should give everything up (filming equipment or wallet) and if there is possibility for us to be arrested do not resist it, go on the ground and do not tense yourself. It is important we stick with someone knowledgeable who we can trust and rely on. It’s good to have established meeting up points and also know where the closest hospital is. Further point would also be to know or be aware whether we have a friendly solicitor that we could rely on in case we happen to be in a complicated situation.

This week our WINOL team was advised to prepare the packages/films that we would like to send off for the BJTC – re-edited version as well as experiences described in the post here

This week’s news bulletin: 24/11/10

Updates on reporters’ work and new ideas:

1. I made couple of photo-essays in final cut pro to made our website look more attractive and to practice my editing skills as well as use photographs I collected from my travelling, I’m planning to do it on Wales, Scotland and Cornwall. I also asked Jason if he could do one on England views and in that way we would cover the whole UK views – UK photographed by Winchester students.

Wales Photographed- photoessay by Veronica Frydel

Scotland Photographed – photoessay by Veronica Frydel

I photographed views of Wales, Scotland and Carnwall during my holidays and transferred them into photoessays using Final Cut Pro.

More on this hee: Veronica's photography - UK Photographed: http://veronicafryd.blogspot.com/2010/12/veronicas-photo-essays-uk-photographed.html

2. Behind the scenes of feature making film, by Justyna – was finished, however after I had gone through it, I decided that it should still be worked on before it is uploaded onto the website. The footage was quite good and had good pictures, but audio was pretty week and the editing needed more tightening. It has a good potential and I like the idea but I decided to give it a little but more time to be re-edited. (to be re-edited for week 9- not completed-promised to complete for week 11)

3. News feature article on a historic mansion that was going to be taken down, by Gareth from news (his idea was more suitable for features and so I suggested he does an article for me with lots of good pictures. (not completed yet-to be chased- promised to have it completed by week 10, I will chase it up)

4. Student version of the come dine with me – Who is the Hostess with the Mostess - to be finished edited and uploaded in week 10

5. Restaurant Review, places to eat out for students, by Claire and Katie - planed for week 10

6. Comment piece by Bishop of Winchester on last week’s bible ripping incident at the student union, by Thomas Hobbs (completed and uploaded to winol)

7. Budget Cuts article- in depth analysis of the Browne’s review by Thomas Hobbs (not completed yet- to be chased after, awaiting the decision on the fees)

8. Wine tasting show in London, gonzo style feature by Claire and Katie covered on 11th November has been started on editing but not finished for this week (to be finished and uploaded in week 10).

9. Dating websites review by Hanna Keegan – Hanna has been ill (decided not to go with it- not completed)

10. Andy brought few good ideas into our team. Richard Cheetam, programme leader and Development at our university has attempted to cross the desert Atacama and agreed to give him an interview. It will be Feature interview using the photographs from Richard’s expedition and race throughout the desert.

He also wanted to do an investigative piece on whether the Christmas decoration is being put to early, I advised not to go with that idea because we were relevantly close to Christmas already and it could be classed as out of date. (Spiked idea)

10. Katie and Claire are adding voice-overs on to their autumn fashion piece, editing the wine show and editing the restaurant review

11. Thom Hobbs - Akala’s concert played at the Railway Tavern (completed and uploaded nto website)

12. Also Thom has transcribed his interview with bishop and I listened to the whole interview to check for accuracy and that Thom informed the bishop of the purposes of the interview. I also advised Thom that I would like to see the consent in writing via email from bishop’s site agreeing for publication of the transcribed text.
He also brought an idea of covering Anniversary of Keits poem which was significant for Winchester. Thom already arrange the interviews and I liked the idea. (to be done for week 10)

Thom is also planning to get Steve Bishalti (bbc sports ancor) to write a comment piece on strikes at NUJ.

Thom said he would also cover concert of Skinnyman (English rapper) - to be done for week 10

13. Win With Winol and What’s on is planned and will be resented by Kayleigh James
Kaileigh will be in charge of what’s on and Thom Hobbs has been continuously been writing script for Win with WINOL and Paul editing. Every time, the feature team have been present during recording helping within the production.

Win with what’s on presented by Kayleigh James and Lucy Piligrim as well as band Dave performing in our studio and Kayleigh interviewing them after the song:

Our features team and production team made sure we prepared the studio for this week’s band playing in our studio. We filmed band Dave who performed for us on Tuesday evening this week. Kayleigh interviewed the band after the performance and edited the film.

18. Justina is redoing few parts of the £20 challenge and reedited it to make it ready for the BJTC

19. Jake brought an idea of setting himself up a challenge of living with a baby-doll that he would have to look after as if that was a real baby and film his experiences (to be done for week 10)

I have mentioned to everyone about the opening of the Christmas market and ice ring as well other attractions that are here in Winchester worth covering. Jake agreed to take up that idea (Justina and Kaileigh wanted also to get involved)

This week’s Tuesday I spent pretty much all in the studio helping with the production. Win with What’s and kids from primary school bulletin an dthen Dave band performing in the studio.

I also focused on the layout of the website, i requested to have the column done on the right hand site, upload the films and add links of what’s popular and the latest. I also wanted the gonzo journalism – shadowing film that glenn and I have done last year to be there. I wanted to make sure that whoever is responsible for the page layout works exceptionally hard to make sure of an attractive and also week functioning and neat website.

As I have noticed looking at the past few weeks some of the commitent levels in my team has loosen up unfortunately for some of them. I have prepared a list of reminders and a speach to give on Monday meeting in week 10 to try to keep the spirits up and remind my team about the importance of being consistant and delivering what's promissed. More on how it went in the post on WINOL week 10 which will also feature our very own WINOL LIFE show with a special guest LAURA BARTON from the guardian.

Student protests documentary reaches over 7,000 hits on youtube! (Week 9)

2010-12-01T16:30:00.000-08:00
This week was a training week for news and production – a lots of winol team members perfected packages and learnt new roles in the galery and the studio. By looking at the pieces we have done in the past some of us had a chance to work on last touches and even redoing parts to packages to make them better, having out tutors looking over our shoulder and advising on how to perfect them. My feature reporters were not only perfecting some of their packages but also had practiced in the studio.

My team also worked trying to perfect some of the work:
Justyna- redoinng the £20 food challenge
Claire and Katie - voiceover for the autumn fashion piece
Jake- did not perfect any of his packages said he would go to a concert at the weekend and along with Hanna will make a review on it for next week (not completed in week 10)
Hanna- did not perfect any of her work, I gave her idea on dating website review
Thom- continued working on the given ideas
This week we also gained one more feature reporter, Andy Giddings decided to join us and staart working for us from next week ( I have introduced him to the world of features, spoke about the formats, deadlines and meetings, on the weekend we also descussed some of the potential ideas he could staart researching on and possible formats that they couldbe executed as).
The film has reached astonishing number of hits 7, 306 !!! (29/11/10)
This is the version we played instead of the bulletin on 17th November 2010.

For Maddie and I it was a big week, she joined me on worki9ng on the documentary from the student protests demo filmed last Wednesday and after we combined powers and footages that our two teams managed to get we were ready for a great adventure with... very lengthy and tiring editing. And couple of full days and nights of editing our film was ready to be uploaded on Wednesday afternoon. The decision was that it was meant to go out instead of the winol bulletin as ‘Winol special’ as 5pm

See more: How I went to cover London Student protests on 10/11/10
What’s on in Winchester 17th November 2010

Good tips that we have received this week from our guest from ITV, sports commentator:
We always need to remember that news/features stories are about people that are going to make an impact on other people's lives- people that are going to make a change. To be successful in this trade as journalists we have to find our passion within the profession. When using GVs/ pictures it is essential to write to the pictures as working on telly is very much about pictures. These days journalism is very much about film rather than print, pictures give more impact attract the attention quicker than a headline. Pictures are making the story and the content of voice-overs or PTC is like a cushion for it. When talking about the script we have to find the right words to say at the right time, key phrases that will reflect our pictures well. It’s also essential to think about our audience as the key to choosing the language lies in the type of audience we are directing our message at. If it if for print, good tip for features was to ‘paint our story with words’, whereas in broadcast simple impacting words and phrases are needed. For presenters, crucial tip was to always prepare and revise but stay open for improvisation. When presenting or writing we should not assume the knowledge of our audience we should treat every story as if it was told for the first time at all times. Never try to be bigger than the story while presenting or making a presenting led package, find the balance to be able to still have and take an opportunity to show the personality.

Industry wise, ‘passion will keep the drive going’ and bring the thoughts that this is what we have always wanted to do. Working within new media and fast moving industry is a challenge for everyone, power of mew technologies change face of journalism.

For a start we should get ourselves published, get ourselves noticed using all the up to dated social networking devices/ websites like facebook, blogging or tweeting. Stay on top with latest technologies. We should try to show our personality and uniqueness that will make our future employee to pick us.
And finally, always be sensitive as journalist or broadcaster as you are dealing with changes of people’s lives.

This week I decided for us to plan to do a winol show based in the studio, showing our selected packages and having Laura Barton from the Guardian as our guest on the sofa. The plan was ambitious but since she was meant to come over as our guest for winol we were half way through with our organisational part. I informed the team about the plans and Paul was very happy to get involved.

Updates on reporters’ work and new ideas:
1. Behind the scenes of feature making film, by Justyna – was finished, however after I had gone through it, I decided that it should still be worked on before it is uploaded onto the website. The footage was quite good and had good pictures, but audio was pretty week and the editing needed more tightening. It has a good potential and I like the idea but I decided to give it a little but more time to be re-edited. (to be re-edited for week 9- not completed-promised to complete for week 11)

2. Investigative article on depression because of being off work written by Stu- uploaded onto the site as a news article- I still have to chase it up to have an extended version of it for features from him. (completed but only in the news article not for features)

3. News feature article on a historic mansion that was going to be taken down, by Gareth from news (his idea was more suitable for features and so I suggested he does an article for me with lots of good pictures. (not completed yet-to be chased- promised to have it completed by week 10, failed, I will chase it up)

4. Student version of the come dine with me, in which the whole team was involved – last meal was filmed on Monday this week and Claire and Katie took a role of editing – their first deadline was going to be the end of Wednesday this week and so the feature would be ready to be published in next week (wk 8). (to be edited and uploaded in week 10)

5. Restaurant Review, places to eat out for students, by Claire and Katie – girls decided that their film was not ready to even show it to me, I appreciated self criticism however I decided that I would still like to see it and make a judgment myself whether it is worth working on and how could e improve it. (to be chased-filmed, editing in progress- still in week 10)

6. Comment piece by Bishop of Winchester on last week’s bible ripping incident at the student union, by Thomas Hobbs (completed- to be uploaded in week 9) after we have received the confirmation from the Bishop that all the transcribed text is ok for us to be used and published onto the website)

7. Budget Cuts article- in depth analysis of the Browne’s review by Thomas Hobbs (not completed yet-to be chased after, awaiting the decision on the fees)

8. Wine tasting show in London, gonzo style feature by Claire and Katie filmed on 11thNovember, which is this week. Girls had everything planned, organised permission for filming, press passes and even a possibility of a ticket fare claim back. (Filmed and to be finished and uploaded in week 10)

9. Dating websites review by Hanna Keegan

10. Katie and Claire are adding voice-overs on to their autumn fashion piece

11. I advised Thom Hobbs to cover Akala’s concert that will be played at the Railway Tavern- he agreed.

12. Jake and Hanna - concert at the Railway Tavern on the weekend- to be completed for week 9 (not completed in week 9, they didn't end up going)

This week I have also learnt how to use LiveStreem program while Paul and I were uploading Maddie’s and mine London Demo documentary onto winol website.

LiveStreeming
- Sign in (get an invite to be able to join the site- have to ask Chris about it)
- Get started
- Studio channel
- copy the link from the youtube that we want to import
Go to – MANAGE LIBRARY – then copy and paste the youtube’s link here
Go to- New story board (at the bottom – intro)
- import from youtube – IMPORT (on the right hand side)
drag and drop it onto the livestreem (this is the most fragile process as it can easily fail)
- at this stage the film will be converted
- Control Auto Pilot
- Restart Auto Pilot
Playlist
And from there it’ll be looping the film

Student protests in London Demo and Rob Kirk from Sky visits WINOL (week 8)

2010-11-30T17:58:00.000-08:00
First of all, concerning the update for our last weeks’ debate issue, Chris and I have worked on the letter of apology and uploaded it onto the website and so far I have not received any correspondence from Michael Jardine, I am hoping that he took our good intentions on board and accepted the apology and forgiven the mistake, I will take his lack of response as a sign of acceptance, however will still be looking out for any letters or emails from him.

Before going into this week's details there is this week's WIN WITH WINOL presented by Charlotte Clark

Our plans for this week were extremely ambitious and we were looking forward to our new guest editor Rob Kirk, coming in this Wednesday and watching us in action and give a feedback afterwards. It was important we come out our best and so the pressure was on like never before especially on the news side. My features team had also a fantastic ideas lined up and few features to be finished from last week. One big thing for both, features and news this week was going to students demo in London and film student’s protests in London on Wednesday. I have appointed that to be covered by Jake Gable, and as I found out from the news conference on Monday afternoon Will from sports team was going to go to the demo to help filming (and so potentially we had two cameras covering it to make a news/feature – or a documentary on the events from that day) as well as Maddie and Andy who were covering it for news (incl. Package, and live OB from London).

The news bulletin for this week 10/11/10

As most of my team was filming the last meal of the student version of Come dine with me on Monday afternoon I communicated with them over the phone and took updates and gave them my suggestions for mew features. I suggested few ideas for my team members, comment article written by the Bishop of Winchester (ghosting) and transcribed by Thomas Hobbs; date website review in form of a day to day calendar and finalised with going for a date- Hannah seemed to like that idea and agreed to do it, she is also single and so it is going to be a sort of reality date website comparison film and article that will done in a week. Also over the weekend I read an article about NUJ protests and felt that would be quite a relevant and interesting subject to cover as a comment piece, which I also suggested for Thom to work on for me. Also on the Winchester council’s website I found a concert that will take place at the Railway Tavern that would be excellent to be covered by Thom as he is interested in the type of music that will be played, on Saturday 13th Akala, MOBo Award winning UK rapper will perform this week. I advised Thom to try to get an interview with the artist and film it as well as film the concert which would make fantastic pictures as cut-aways for the interview, as well as write a review on the concert.

Another idea that I suggested was to write an article on chosen graduates from our university ‘where am I year after I have graduated’, Thom said that he would like to cover that.

I also asked jake to go to London and film student protests demo on Wednesday for either news feature or a short documentary. On Tuesday roles within the production changed around and they requested Jake from my team to be a presenter for the news bulletin on Wednesday I didn't want us to loose such opportunity and decided to do to London instead of Jake. I took over his permission for filming and a ticket to go on the coach on Wednesday morning. The trip turned ut to be not quite as we expected it... it was hundred times better! Madie and Andy went to the same event to cover it for news and put a package together for the bulletin and Will Cooper (from the sports team) came along with me to help out in filming for features. The four of us experienced something that we have not yet before!

See experiences from London Students protest on 11th November incl events at the Millbank on that day here !
Thursday morning I started editing and could not wait to see all the footagethat we have collected (I planned to have it finished for wk 8) and therefore I was commited to stay late after hours on Thursday and Friday night to make sure I hadenough time to perfect the film. More on the documentary in week 8 when it was played instead of the bulletin.From our plans for this week my team prepared number of ideas for me his week:

1. I have had my behind the scenes photo-essay from last week done and ready to go onto the website, which was uploaded at the beginning of this week. (completed and uploaded onto the webste this week)

I used my own photographyand practiced new editing techniques in Final Cut Pro, I learnt new techniques in photo editing and perfected photoshop.

2. Behind the scenes of feature making film, by Justyna – was finished, however after I had gone through it, I decided that it should still be worked on before it is uploaded onto the website. The footage was quite good and had good pictures, but audio was pretty week and the editing needed more tightening. It has a good potential and I like the idea but I decided to give it a little but more time to be re-edited. (to be re-edited for week 9- not completed-promised to complete for week 11)

3. Investigative article on depression because of being off work written by Stu- uploaded onto the site as a news article- I still have to chase it up to have an extended version of it for features from him. (not completed yet-to be chased week 10)

4. News feature article on a historic mansion that was going to be taken down, by Gareth from news (his idea was more suitable for features and so I suggested he does an article for me with lots of good pictures. (not completed yet-to be chased- promissed to have it completed by week 10, failed, I will chase it up)

5. Student version of the come dine with me, in which the whole team was involved – last meal was filmed on Monday this week and Claire and Katie took a role of editing – their first deadline was going to be the end of Wednesday this week and so the feature would be ready to be published in next week (wk 8). (to be edited and uploaded in week 10)

6. Restaurant Review, places to eat out for students, by Claire and Katie – girls decided that their film was not ready to even show it to me, I appreciated self criticism however I decided that I would still like to see it and make a judgment myself whether it is worth working on and how could e improve it. (to be chased-filmed, editing in progress- still in week 10)

7. Comment piece by Bishop of Winchester on last week’s bible ripping incident at the student union, by Thomas Hobbs (completed- to be uploaded in week 9 after we have received the confirmation from the Bishop that all the transcribed text is ok for us to be used and published onto the website)

8. Famous graduates from Winchester University article by Thomas Hobbs. He completed it this week. It will be published next week. (completed -and uploaded onto the website)

9. Budget Cuts article- in depth analysis of the Browne’s review by Thomas Hobbs (not completed yet-to be chased after, awaiting the decision on the fees)

10. The news feature about the graduation that was meant to be reedited by Jake Gable, unfortunately did not happen as Amy who filmed it and edited has not saved the scratch files and her tapes were corrupted and so even though we made quite a few attempts to make it work, we could not retrieve the footage and therefore the feature was not completed. (Not completed)

11. Wine tasting show in London, gonzo style feature by Claire and Katie to be covered on 11th November, which is this week. Girls had everything planned, organised permission for filming, press passes and even a possibility of a ticket fare claim back. (Filmed and to be finished and uploaded in week 10)

12. Christmas time fashion piece and signing of the Gok Won book in Southampton on 24th November- Katie and Claire are going to cover it (failed to cover- didn't manage to arrange meeting him)

13. All woman show, the ultimate ladies day out that I appointed to be covered on 7th November at Winchester guildhall- I have arranged to have covered (got the press passes and permission for filming)by Justina, Claire and Katie – unfortunately all three of the girls have backed out in the last minute and the event was not covered. The girls have not completed the task I gave them. (Not completed- team did not turn up on the event)