It's Gylfi
No. The law stops the name from being reported as he hasn't been charged, but they are free to use other details to describe who it is.
Like how the mail said a 31 year old married Everton player who regularly plays for his international team was arrested by North Manchester police. I don't know why you or the other guy is trying to pretend otherwise, there's no legal ramifications for any of us by saying it's quite obviously Gylfi that's been arrested. No-one is saying he's guilty.
https://davidbanksmedialaw.com/2011/...w-to-avoid-it/
The Contempt of Court Act 1981 swept this aside and created the concept of ‘active’ proceedings. Proceedings are active when someone has been arrested; a warrant has been issued; they have been orally charged or an information has been laid. If none of these things has happened then contempt evaporates as a problem – publish whatever you like.
3. OK, proceedings ARE active, what should I avoid
Publishing something which creates a substantial risk of serious prejudice or serious impediment to those proceedings.
4. What does that mean?
Well, that’s a little subjective, but case law has shown the following to be a problem:
*Photos or descriptions where identity is at issue – ie the defendant claims it was not him who committed the crime and the prosecution has eyewitnesses whose testimony has to be tested by way of an ID parade. They must rely on their memory of the offence, not a photo helpfully published by the media. This action cause the record fine for contempt (so far) £80,000 for the Sun and £20,000 for Kelvin MacKenzie as editor.
*Assumptions of guilt – in crime reports, police have arrested A man, not THE man.
*Previous convictions – not normally allowed in as evidence, so don’t go informing the jury of them.
*Blackening a defendant’s character – if the prosecution do it in front of the jury, that’s fine. Just don’t do it yourself as they await trial.
5. Does this mean a media blackout about a crime if proceedings are active?
No. The CCA 1981 was drafted in response to the Sunday Times coverage of the Thalidomide scandal, which had been found in contempt under the old common law. The ST took an appeal all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled that the common law contempt, as applied, was in breach of the ST’s right to freedom of speech. So the CCA 1981 includes a Section 5 defence of ‘discussion of public affairs’. So, for example, a euthanasia trial does not shut down all mention or discussion in the media of the issues of euthanasia. But such discussion should avoid direct commentary on the trial.
Are you Pedro Martinez, Ronnie? I recognise the writing style.
“He’s defiantly been nicked; all my contacts on Merseyside have confirmed this all day.
You could add, resisting arrest to the charge sheet based on that bit of reporting.
By the way, how did you vote on Browny's Foxy Knoxy poll, Yes or No?
Well here's what the Attorney general has to say about it, he's a tad more reliable a source than keyboard barristers!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...ces/ar-AAMmtn0
The police put it out the arrested footballer was thirty one and then Everton posted that one of their players had been suspended. Apparently, there are only two players at Everton who fit the bill so to speak, so good luck with trying to get people to stop trying to find out which one of the pair it is and then putting it online. Once something like social media becomes available for large percentages of the population, you won't begin to stop people using it in the manner it has been in this case unless there is direct intervention by the authorities into what can be posted on the various platforms and there's no sign at all yet that is going to be happening anytime soon.
Thats besides the point, the point being that if anyone names him, the poster and the message board could potentially be prosecuted for contempt! and we know it has happened in the past in cases like Ched Evans where people named the woman, so its to like it doesnt happen.
This is how the sun have got round it. Can't see any problems with this...
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This is simply f***ing disgusting. <a href="https://t.co/KLCLCXW6kF">pic.twitter.com/KLCLCXW6kF</a></p>— Football365 (@F365) <a href="https://twitter.com/F365/status/1417744803547303936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 21, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Apparently slept with a 15 year old prostitute, they've tried to blackmail him for it and he's said no, so they've gone to the old bill.
Like I said, apparently.
Probably a million other stories doing the rounds as well.