Skip to main content

Preventing Secondary Victimisation Through Anonymity

Buy Article:

$43.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

This note examines the decision of the Court of Appeal in R (Gazette Media Company Ltd) v Teesside Crown Court 1 where the Court was asked to rule on the legality of an order under s.39, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 purporting to ban the identity of the victim and defendants in a prosecution. The facts of the prosecution are set out below but the interesting issues that arise from this decision come not so much from the facts and decision (which was, to an extent, inevitable) but rather from the fact that the current law does not, in our opinion, adequately protect children from secondary victimisation and that the courts have erred in their current understanding of the legal position.
No References
No Citations
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
No Metrics

Document Type: Research Article

Affiliations: De Montfort University

Publication date: 01 January 2007

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more