View all newsletters
Sign up for our free email newsletters

Fighting for quality news media in the digital age.

  1. Archive content
April 16, 2003updated 17 May 2007 11:30am

Butler-Sloss delays Bell ruling until after Easter

By Press Gazette

Child killer Mary Bell and her teenage daughter returned to the High Court this week in a bid to extend a permanent gag on the press revealing anything that would identify them, in order to protect them from harassment and attack.

But they will have to wait until after Easter to hear if they have been successful, as High Court president, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, said she would need time after the scheduled three-day hearing to consider her ruling in the case. Although the court heard that the Attorney-General was not totally opposed to an injunction on narrow terms, he has stepped in to ensure that the case is fully argued in the public interest and to ensure that the injunction is shown to be “strictly justified”.

Bell, who was convicted when 11-years-old of the manslaughter of Martin Brown, four, and Brian Howe, three, was detained until she was released on licence when she was 23 years of age.

She has been given a new identity and has lived in anonymity with her daughter, who turns 19 next month.

Both of them are protected from being identified by wide-ranging court orders which were aimed at giving the daughter anonymity until she turned 18.

These orders were temporarily extended pending the outcome of the proceedings, in which lawyers for both are seeking to extend the injunction indefinitely to protect their identities and whereabouts from being revealed.

Content from our partners
Free journalism awards for journalists under 30: Deadline today
MHP Group's 30 To Watch awards for young journalists open for entries
How PA Media is helping newspapers make the digital transition

Mary Bell’s counsel, Edward Fitzgerald QC, told the court that both women continue to face a “serious risk of harassment and attack”.

In the circumstances of what he called a “unique case”, he said that a permanent injunction was justified to protect the two women’s human rights to life, freedom from degrading treatment and respect for private and family life.

He said the factors which made the case unique included the fact that there was no longer any opposition by the media industry to the injunction moves.

By Roger Pearson

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog

Select and enter your email address Weekly insight into the big strategic issues affecting the future of the news industry. Essential reading for media leaders every Thursday. Your morning brew of news about the world of news from Press Gazette and elsewhere in the media. Sent at around 10am UK time. Our weekly does of strategic insight about the future of news media aimed at US readers. A fortnightly update from the front-line of news and advertising. Aimed at marketers and those involved in the advertising industry.
  • Business owner/co-owner
  • CEO
  • COO
  • CFO
  • CTO
  • Chairperson
  • Non-Exec Director
  • Other C-Suite
  • Managing Director
  • President/Partner
  • Senior Executive/SVP or Corporate VP or equivalent
  • Director or equivalent
  • Group or Senior Manager
  • Head of Department/Function
  • Manager
  • Non-manager
  • Retired
  • Other
Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how New Statesman Media Group may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.
Thank you

Thanks for subscribing.

Websites in our network