1 August 1995 Murder case sisters lose fight against tabloid press By Terence Shaw, Legal Correspondent Two sisters, whose murder convictions were quashed partly on grounds of prejudicial reporting of their trial, yesterday lost their attempt to have the offending newspapers prosecuted for contempt of court. Two Divisional Court judges ruled that the decision last year by the Solicitor General, Sir Derek Spencer, QC, not to bring contempt proceedings against the newspapers was not open to legal challenge by judicial review. Lord Justice Stuart Smith, sitting with Mr Justice Butterfield, said that even if they had the jurisdiction to intervene they would not have done so as the decision by the law officers was neither "irrational nor unlawful". But Mr Justice Butterfield said he had been "considerably troubled" by newspaper coverage of the trial which seemed to him to have "crossed the acceptable limits of fair and accurate reporting by a substantial margin". It was the first case in which victims of prejudicial trial reporting had sought to challenge the refusal of the law officers to bring contempt proceedings against newspapers. Sensational and inaccurate reporting of their Old Bailey trial The two judges said their ruling that the Divisional Court had no jurisdiction to intervene and review the law officers' decision raised an issue of general public importance but they refused to grant the two sisters, Michelle Taylor, 25, and Lisa Taylor, 22, leave to appeal to the House of Lords. Sensational and inaccurate reporting of their Old Bailey trial was one of two grounds on which the Court of Appeal in 1993 allowed appeals against their convictions for the murder in 1991 of Alison Shaughnessy, a bank clerk who was the bride of Michelle's former lover. The case papers were referred to the Attorney General by the Court of Appeal. But in June last year the Solicitor General, in the absence of the Attorney, announced that it was not regarded as an "appropriate case" to bring contempt proceedings against the newspapers, which included the Sun, the Daily Mirror, the Daily Express, and the Daily Mail. The two sisters then obtained legal aid and the leave of a judge to challenge the Solicitor General's decision, which they claimed was irrational and unlawful, by judicial review. After the judgment rejecting their application, their solicitor, Mark Stephens, claimed the case was one of "great constitutional importance". He said that the sisters would be seeking leave from the law lords to appeal against yesterday's ruling. He claimed that the Attorney General has "from the dim, distant past remained unaccountable for his actions if he gets the law wrong or is procedurally unfair". Mr Stephens added: "I think that is something which in a modern society is unacceptable." |