Attorney General takes action over 'Bulger killer' images
Contempt should be treated as ordinary criminal offence, Law Commission says
The Attorney General has instituted contempt proceedings against people breaking a court order by posting images on the internet 'purporting to be of Jon Venables or Robert Thompson', convicted for the murder of James Bulger in 1993.
Dominic Grieve QC said: 'There is an injunction in place which prevents publication of any images or information purporting to identify anyone as Jon Venables or Robert Thompson.
'The terms of the order mean that if a picture claims to be of Venables or Thompson, even if it is not actually them, there will be a breach of the order,' Grieve said.
'Providing details of the new identities of Venables and Thompson or their whereabouts is also prohibited '“ this order applies to material which is on the internet.
'There are many different images circulating online claiming to be of Venables or Thompson; potentially innocent individuals may be wrongly identified as being one of the two men and placed in danger.
'The order, and its enforcement, is therefore intended to protect not only Venables and Thompson but also those members of the public who have been incorrectly identified as being one of the two men.'
The Attorney General said the injunction would apply both to media organisations and individuals and court papers would be served 'shortly'. The move comes as the Law Commission considers changes to the law of contempt to take into account the use of internet and social media.
In its consultation on contempt, which closes tomorrow, the Law Commission suggested that contempt by publication should be treated as a normal criminal offence.
'With the new media and the internet, prosecutions might be against individuals, and the normal criminal trial process would be better suited to dealing with these cases,' the Commission said.
'The prosecution and defence would have to prepare the case like any other criminal trial. The criminal rules of evidence would also apply. Legal aid would be available. This change would ensure that the publisher's right to liberty and right to a fair trail would be fully protected.'
The commission also asked consultees whether, in the absence of a public prosecution policy for contempt, the factors considered by the Attorney General when deciding whether to prosecute should be published.