07-03-2025
Police force orders media not to report court evidence in free speech threat
In the email, sent by Hertfordshire Police's corporate communications department, the force said: 'We are writing to remind you of the Ipso notice below which has been issued.
'We are aware of some coverage going against this notice, and we ask you to please review your content that has been published to ensure it complies with the below.'
The email then contained the Ipso advisory notice which had been circulated on Wednesday in advance of Clifford's trial.
Clifford had pleaded guilty to the murders of his ex-girlfriend Louise Hunt, 25, and her sister Hannah Hunt, 28, whom he killed with a crossbow, and their mother Carol Hunt who he stabbed to death. On Thursday, he was found guilty by a jury of raping Louise Hunt prior to her murder in July 2024.
The women were the wife and daughters of John Hunt, the BBC horse racing commentator.
'Think they have more authority than they do'
The demand by police that the media complies with voluntary guidance will raise concern among advocates of free speech.
Harry Miller, a former police officer and free speech advocate, said: 'The police continually overreach.
'They think they have more authority than they do have. They have one job and that is to uphold the law.
'They are playing outside of their box yet again. They need to restrict themselves entirely to upholding the law.'
Mr Miller, who fought a successful legal battle against Humberside Police after he was reported for a non-crime hate incident, said it sets a 'dangerous precedent'.
He added: 'It is another example of the chilling effect on free speech. It will have a chilling effect on the fourth estate and I don't think the public can put up with that.'
'Editors retain full control of decision making'
Ipso has been accused of threatening the key principle of open justice in the past. In 2022, it circulated a request from a former primary school teacher charged with slapping a horse that newspapers refrain from taking her photograph outside the court.
Ipso operates a privacy notice system in which specific requests made by individuals and organisations are passed to editors and journalists. It has stressed that such notices are private and passed on on a confidential basis and that 'editors retain full control of decision making'.
In a statement issued as a result of concern over the horse cruelty case, Ipso said at the time: 'Privacy notices do not prevent reporting on matters of public interest, including court proceedings, and do not supersede the standards set by the Editors' Code.'
But last year, Ipso ruled against journalists reporting evidence given in open court in a decision branded a dangerous intrusion. In that case, Ipso said that details of a rape trial reported by the website Aberdeen Live had been an 'intrusion into grief or shock' of the anonymous victim in the case.
The victim, whose identity is protected by law, had complained to Ipso that the website's report of a specific 'detailed description of her physical reaction to the attack' had contained a 'level of detail' that 'had retraumatised her'.
Lawyers on that occasion warned that the case could create a 'slippery slope' in which the press regulator interferes in reporting on court cases held in public.
