通过匿名防止二次受害

A. Gillespie, Vanessa Bettinson
{"title":"通过匿名防止二次受害","authors":"A. Gillespie, Vanessa Bettinson","doi":"10.1111/J.1468-2230.2006.00628.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This note examines the decision of the Court of Appeal in R (Gazette Media Company Ltd) v Teesside Crown Court (1) where the Court was asked to rule on the legality of an order under s.39, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 purporting to ban the identity of the victim and defendants in a prosecution. The facts of the prosecution are set out below but the interesting issues that arise from this decision come not so much from the facts and decision (which was, to an extent, inevitable) but rather from the fact that the current law does not, in our opinion, adequately protect children from secondary victimisation and that the courts have erred in their current understanding of the legal position.","PeriodicalId":273284,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Procedure eJournal","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preventing Secondary Victimisation Through Anonymity\",\"authors\":\"A. Gillespie, Vanessa Bettinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/J.1468-2230.2006.00628.X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This note examines the decision of the Court of Appeal in R (Gazette Media Company Ltd) v Teesside Crown Court (1) where the Court was asked to rule on the legality of an order under s.39, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 purporting to ban the identity of the victim and defendants in a prosecution. The facts of the prosecution are set out below but the interesting issues that arise from this decision come not so much from the facts and decision (which was, to an extent, inevitable) but rather from the fact that the current law does not, in our opinion, adequately protect children from secondary victimisation and that the courts have erred in their current understanding of the legal position.\",\"PeriodicalId\":273284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Criminal Procedure eJournal\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Criminal Procedure eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2230.2006.00628.X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Procedure eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2230.2006.00628.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本说明审查上诉法院在R(宪报传媒有限公司)诉提赛德刑事法院(1)案中的判决,要求法院根据1933年《儿童和青少年法》第39条就一项命令的合法性作出裁决,该命令旨在禁止在起诉中披露受害者和被告的身份。控方的事实如下,但从这一决定中产生的有趣问题不是来自事实和决定(在某种程度上,这是不可避免的),而是来自这样一个事实,即在我们看来,现行法律没有充分保护儿童免受二次受害,法院目前对法律立场的理解是错误的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preventing Secondary Victimisation Through Anonymity
This note examines the decision of the Court of Appeal in R (Gazette Media Company Ltd) v Teesside Crown Court (1) where the Court was asked to rule on the legality of an order under s.39, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 purporting to ban the identity of the victim and defendants in a prosecution. The facts of the prosecution are set out below but the interesting issues that arise from this decision come not so much from the facts and decision (which was, to an extent, inevitable) but rather from the fact that the current law does not, in our opinion, adequately protect children from secondary victimisation and that the courts have erred in their current understanding of the legal position.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信