Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday July 19 2017, @09:56PM   Printer-friendly
from the can-he-hide-it-from-search-engines? dept.

The UK Supreme Court has lifted an anonymity order and ruled that a man arrested but not charged in connection with a high-profile "child sexual grooming" case has no reasonable expectation of privacy under the European Convention on Human Rights:

A man arrested but never charged in connection with an investigation into child sexual grooming has lost a legal battle to keep his identity secret. [...] Seven men were convicted and jailed at the Old Bailey in May 2013 for serious sexual offences in connection with what became known as the "Oxford grooming case". The Supreme Court ruling, by a 5-2 majority, stemmed from an attempt by the Times and the Oxford Mail newspapers to name [him].

BBC legal correspondent Clive Coleman described the court's decision as significant, saying it reaffirmed the powerful principle of open justice. The case examined the rights of the press and public under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights to freedom of expression and the rights of [the man] and his family under Article 8.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday July 20 2017, @03:57PM

    by tangomargarine (667) on Thursday July 20 2017, @03:57PM (#541951)

    I'm sure you don't mean to imply that might makes right, yes?

    "Well they're stronger than me so I guess I should just roll over and give up" isn't exactly an Aesop's Fable :P

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2