R v BGI & Anor

R v BGI & Anor

The welfare of the child defendants, both aged 12 at the time of the offence and conviction, outweighs the public interest in open justice and unrestricted reporting. The pre-sentence reports provide clear evidence that lifting anonymity would have an extremely detrimental impact on their mental health and rehabilitation. The gravity of the offence and public interest in reporting knife crime do not tip the balance in favour of publication. The application for an excepting direction is refused for both defendants.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; First Defendant: BGI; Second Defendant: CMB; Applicant (media): Independent Television News, News Corp UK & Ireland Limited and Associated Newspapers Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Media Application for Excepting Direction (lifting Reporting Restrictions) Prior to Sentencing
Outcome
Application for excepting direction refused
Legal Topics
Reporting Restrictions, Anonymity of Child Defendants, Open Justice, Freedom of Expression, Welfare of the Child, Excepting Direction Under Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999
Criminal Law Media Law Youth Justice Reporting Restrictions Anonymity of Child Defendants Open Justice Freedom of Expression Welfare of the Child +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

BGI

First Defendant

CMB

Second Defendant

Independent Television News, News Corp UK & Ireland Limited and Associated Newspapers Limited

Applicant (media)

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Media Application for Excepting Direction (lifting Reporting Restrictions) Prior to Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an excepting direction under section 45(4) and (5) of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 to permit identification of two child defendants convicted of murder
  2. 2 Balancing the welfare of the child defendants against the principles of open justice and freedom of expression

Ratio Decidendi

The welfare of the child defendants, both aged 12 at the time of the offence and conviction, outweighs the public interest in open justice and unrestricted reporting. The pre-sentence reports provide clear evidence that lifting anonymity would have an extremely detrimental impact on their mental health and rehabilitation. The gravity of the offence and public interest in reporting knife crime do not tip the balance in favour of publication. The application for an excepting direction is refused for both defendants.

Court Disposition

Application for excepting direction refused

Orders

  • Reporting restrictions under section 45 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 remain in place for both defendants
  • Media's application to lift anonymity is dismissed