This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/apr/19/rolf-harris-lawyers-leveson-suppress-arrest
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Rolf Harris lawyers cited Leveson in attempt to suppress news of arrest | Rolf Harris lawyers cited Leveson in attempt to suppress news of arrest |
| (21 days later) | |
| Lawyers for Rolf Harris used a controversial passage in the Leveson report to try to dissuade the media from naming the entertainer after his arrest on suspicion of sexual offences. | Lawyers for Rolf Harris used a controversial passage in the Leveson report to try to dissuade the media from naming the entertainer after his arrest on suspicion of sexual offences. |
| The London law firm Harbottle & Lewis cited Lord Justice Leveson's contentious proposal that the public should be prevented from knowing the names of arrest suspects in all but "exceptional" circumstances. | The London law firm Harbottle & Lewis cited Lord Justice Leveson's contentious proposal that the public should be prevented from knowing the names of arrest suspects in all but "exceptional" circumstances. |
| The lawyers for Harris told one publisher "there is no public interest in publishing such content as is entirely self-evident following the publication of the Leveson report". | The lawyers for Harris told one publisher "there is no public interest in publishing such content as is entirely self-evident following the publication of the Leveson report". |
| One publisher was warned it could be hit with an expensive damages bill, even if it correctly named a police suspect, in line with a proposal the lawyers said had been recommended by two high court judges. | One publisher was warned it could be hit with an expensive damages bill, even if it correctly named a police suspect, in line with a proposal the lawyers said had been recommended by two high court judges. |
| In the attempt to suppress reports naming Harris, the law firm wrote that the judges, Lord Justice Treacy and Mr Justice Tugendhat, have been reported to believe "publications should be forced to pay damages to police suspects who are named by the media, even where they accurately report they have been arrested". | In the attempt to suppress reports naming Harris, the law firm wrote that the judges, Lord Justice Treacy and Mr Justice Tugendhat, have been reported to believe "publications should be forced to pay damages to police suspects who are named by the media, even where they accurately report they have been arrested". |
| Harris was named for the first time by the British press on Friday as the man arrested five weeks ago on suspicion of sexual offences under Operation Yewtree. He was held under the "others" strand of Scotland Yard's investigation, which was launched during the Jimmy Savile scandal, and the allegations against Harris do not relate to Savile. | Harris was named for the first time by the British press on Friday as the man arrested five weeks ago on suspicion of sexual offences under Operation Yewtree. He was held under the "others" strand of Scotland Yard's investigation, which was launched during the Jimmy Savile scandal, and the allegations against Harris do not relate to Savile. |
| The tersely-written legal letters were sent amid growing concern in the media about proposals to ban the public from knowing the names of police suspects in most cases. | The tersely-written legal letters were sent amid growing concern in the media about proposals to ban the public from knowing the names of police suspects in most cases. |
| Under guidance drawn up by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) – and backed by several senior judges, lawyers and the information commissioner – police forces in England and Wales would be prevented from confirming the names of arrestees when talking to journalists. | Under guidance drawn up by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) – and backed by several senior judges, lawyers and the information commissioner – police forces in England and Wales would be prevented from confirming the names of arrestees when talking to journalists. |
| The plan for anonymous arrests has been branded draconian and an affront to open justice by newspapers, citing fears that police forces will be able to make arrests without scrutiny and potential witnesses or victims will be prevented from coming forward. | The plan for anonymous arrests has been branded draconian and an affront to open justice by newspapers, citing fears that police forces will be able to make arrests without scrutiny and potential witnesses or victims will be prevented from coming forward. |
| Bob Satchwell, the executive director of the Society of Editors, warned on Friday that there is "a very small but dangerous step between the media being banned from naming people arrested to the police arresting people secretly". | Bob Satchwell, the executive director of the Society of Editors, warned on Friday that there is "a very small but dangerous step between the media being banned from naming people arrested to the police arresting people secretly". |
| He added: "There is no doubt that since the Leveson inquiry, media organisations have been subdued in naming people who have been arrested, particularly when they are high profile. | He added: "There is no doubt that since the Leveson inquiry, media organisations have been subdued in naming people who have been arrested, particularly when they are high profile. |
| "Arrests are matters of fact and the public are entitled to know about them. There is no law preventing the naming of those arrested, nor should there be. | "Arrests are matters of fact and the public are entitled to know about them. There is no law preventing the naming of those arrested, nor should there be. |
| "Publicity puts the facts in the public domain, preventing speculation that can put people at risk when the police announce only that 'a 55-year-old man has been arrested'. Publicity can also encourage witnesses to come forward – for both prosecution and defence." | "Publicity puts the facts in the public domain, preventing speculation that can put people at risk when the police announce only that 'a 55-year-old man has been arrested'. Publicity can also encourage witnesses to come forward – for both prosecution and defence." |
| The Metropolitan police did not name Harris after he was first questioned on 29 November last year or when he was arrested and bailed on 28 March. | The Metropolitan police did not name Harris after he was first questioned on 29 November last year or when he was arrested and bailed on 28 March. |
| Although the entertainer's name was known to the media – and published widely on Twitter and blogs – newspapers and broadcasters in Britain chose not to identify Harris until Friday. | Although the entertainer's name was known to the media – and published widely on Twitter and blogs – newspapers and broadcasters in Britain chose not to identify Harris until Friday. |
| The BBC and some newspapers, not including the Guardian, are understood to have received a warning letter from Harbottle & Lewis. | The BBC and some newspapers, not including the Guardian, are understood to have received a warning letter from Harbottle & Lewis. |
| In one correspondence, the lawyers mentioned the inaccurate BBC Newsnight programme that erroneously linked Lord McAlpine with an allegation of child sex abuse, and the Sun's false story about Louis Walsh that left it with a €500,000 (£427,000) damages bill. | In one correspondence, the lawyers mentioned the inaccurate BBC Newsnight programme that erroneously linked Lord McAlpine with an allegation of child sex abuse, and the Sun's false story about Louis Walsh that left it with a €500,000 (£427,000) damages bill. |
| The law firm wrote to one of the many websites that named Harris after his arrest, saying: "Given recent events … we are very surprised and indeed highly concerned to note the content on your website". | The law firm wrote to one of the many websites that named Harris after his arrest, saying: "Given recent events … we are very surprised and indeed highly concerned to note the content on your website". |
| It added that "the serious consequences of your acting in the manner detailed will not be lost on you" and warned that it "would appear to us to be without a defence to a libel action". | It added that "the serious consequences of your acting in the manner detailed will not be lost on you" and warned that it "would appear to us to be without a defence to a libel action". |
| Harbottle & Lewis had not responded to a request for comment at the time of publication. | Harbottle & Lewis had not responded to a request for comment at the time of publication. |
| • To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email media@guardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication". | • To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email media@guardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication". |
| • To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook. | • To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook. |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. Enter your email address to subscribe. |