Adjudication No. 740 (July 1994) [1994] APC 49

ADJUDICATION No. 740 (July 1994)

The Press Council has upheld in part a complaint by a firm of solicitors against The Central Coast Sun Weekly for publishing a report on the suicide of a woman the firm had represented in Children's Court proceedings and who had been charged with the attempted murder of her 9-year old son.

The complainant, Bingham Finlay Turnell & Corah, complained on four grounds:

• publication of the report more than seven days after the suicide was no longer "news" and was totally unnecessary;

• a reference to the alleged attempted murder was "a shortened version of the facts" and misleading;

• the son's name should not have been published because of Children's Court proceedings; and

• a statement that the boy's father had died some years previously was irrelevant.

The complainant stated that the publicity given to their client's death had had a traumatic effect on the son and his family.

The newspaper responded by stating:

• it was a weekly publication and covered stories over a seven day period;

• the report of the suicide was shortened because of the extensive media publicity it had already received and was confined to facts as presented at a District Court;

• the paper was unaware of the Children's Court proceedings and had not reported on them; and

• the paper considered that reference to the father's earlier death helped the reader to understand why the son was not better protected from the alleged attempt by the mother to take his life.

The Press Council accepts that the publicity generated by the suicide and the circumstances surrounding it would have a traumatic effect on the family concerned. Nevertheless The Central Coast Sun Weekly had the same entitlement as other media outlets to report on the events and with one exception had done so responsibly; apart from any legal considerations the Council considers it was unnecessary to name the boy and this part of the complaint is upheld.

The Council had no evidence to suggest the relatively short report on the suicide was misleading, while reference to the father's death would, if anything, seem to attract sympathy for the boy. These parts of the complaint, together with that relating to publication of the report, are therefore not upheld.