Australian Reporters Charged Over [Cardinal] George Pell Gag Order Violations

The Boston Globe ^ | 3/26/19 | Rod McGuirk

[marshmallow]

CANBERRA, Australia — Some of Australia’s highest-profile journalists face possible prison sentences and large media organizations could be fined after being ordered to appear in court next month for allegedly breaching a gag order on reporting about Cardinal George Pell’s convictions on charges of sexually molesting two choirboys.

Reporting in any format accessible from Australia about the former Vatican economy chief’s convictions in a Melbourne court in December was banned by a judge’s suppression order that was only lifted in February.

Such suppression orders are common in the Australian and British judicial systems, and breaches can result in jail terms. But the enormous international interest in a criminal trial with global ramifications has highlighted the difficulty in enforcing such orders in the digital world.

The Victoria state Supreme Court confirmed on Tuesday that an unprecedented 23 journalists, producers and broadcasters as well as 13 media organizations that employ them have been summoned to appear on April 15 for a preliminary hearing on breaches of the suppression order.

They include Damon Johnston, editor of Australia’s largest-circulation newspaper, Herald Sun, and its owner Herald and Weekly Times. The Melbourne newspaper was criticized by Pell lawyers for running a front-page headline saying ‘‘CENSORED’’ following the verdict, as news of the conviction of the most senior Catholic ever charged with child sex abuse was trending on Twitter.

Top-rated Sydney radio broadcaster Ray Hadley and national morning TV program host Debra Knight are among the well-known people facing prosecution.

[glasseye]

Must suck to be a subject instead of a citizen.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Couldn't get past the paywall to get the rest of the story --- and link them to Facebook? No.

But what kind of reporting was it? --- I understand there's a raving witch-hunt atmosphere in Australia --- and who is objecting to the gag order: the prosecutors or the defense?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Fascists never think they’re the fascists.

[Terry Mross]

Still following the old order. The church takes care of the king and the king takes care of the church.

[naturalman1975]

There was a suppression order on reporting any details of the trial - ostensibly to ensure Cardinal Pell received fair trials, given the Witch Hunt atmosphere.

When the verdict was announced, it was published overseas (the ability of Australian courts to prevent overseas news outlets from publishing anything being pretty much non existent) but it remained a crime for any journalist or media organisation to publish any details here.

Many news organisations sought to get around the ban by publishing articles that said somebody (who they would not name) had been convicted of a crime they could not identify - such as this front page of the country's largest circulation newspaper:

While some others blatantly violated and printed details.

The gag order is now lifted (or I wouldn't be posting this - I'm classed as a journalist under the laws so I was subjected to it, and though I objected to the suppression order, I followed it).

[Mrs. Don-o]

But is the govt really suppressing reporting in order to protect the defendant's rights --- as they claim --- or to protect their system of marsupial "justice".

(I am referring of course to the kangaroo courts.)

[BlackVeil]

I believe that the state is hiding important information about this case - most especially, about the credibility of Pell’s accusers. The gag orders are a serious legal measure, and stifle proper public scrutiny of all the events.

[Lurker]

What marinade was used on the grilled policemen? Just asking for a friend...

L

[naturalman1975]

Personally I do think the intention was to protect the integrity and fairness of the trials. I don’t think it worked (largely because there was already a decade or more of publicity before the order was put in place - the damage had already been done) but I do think that was the intent.

But I don’t think it was a good idea because it does make the whole process less transparent and even if it wasn’t abused this time, it will be at some point if this keeps happening.

What I think we actually need is Judge Only trials in cases like this - but Victoria is one of the only places in Australia where that doesn’t happen.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thank you for your perspective.

[Gay State Conservative]

The gag order is now lifted (or I wouldn't be posting this - I'm classed as a journalist under the laws so I was subjected to it, and though I objected to the suppression order, I followed it).

About a year ago I attended a couple of days of a big Mafia trial in Boston. It was a Federal trial rather than a state (Massachusetts) one.Federal trials are a big deal being ultimately managed from DC. On several occasions the defense lawyer made specific references to all the publicity the defendants had received over the years.

There were "civilians",like myself,in attendance as were members of the Press...the Press being interested due to the fact that the defendants were associated with "Whitey" Bulger,a very well known (and deadly) gangster here in the US.

Not that I'm en expert in such things but it's tough for me to understand how countries like Britain,Canada and Australia can muzzle the Press in the way they do.

Just sayin'...I suppose that if I had a deeper understanding of the law I might think differently.