Press Complaints Commission: "An Extremely Finely Balanced Decision"

The Press Complaints Commission has ruled that an article published by the Daily Mirror headlined "Stuart Hall judge visited gay brothel" did not breach Clause 12 (Discrimination) of the Editors' Code of Practice.

The front-page article reported that Judge Russell, who presided over the sentencing of Stuart Hall, had resigned in 1996 following the publication of allegations that he had visited a "gay brothel." Dr Nicholas Russell complained to the PCC, with the consent of Judge Russell, that the article had implied wrongly that his brother's sexual orientation was relevant to his sentencing of Mr Hall. He argued the coverage was grossly offensive and referred to his brother's sexual orientation in pejorative terms. He also argued that the article intruded into his brother's privacy in breach of Clause 3 (Privacy) of the Code.

The newspaper strongly denied that the article had included details of the Judge's sexual orientation, or that it had referred to his sexual orientation is a pejorative way. The newspaper believed that it was relevant to the debate about a high-profile case concerning sexual misconduct that the Judge who presided over the trial had in the past faced allegations about sexual activities, albeit of a very different kind, which had led to his resignation. The newspaper said that in order to properly recount the circumstances of the resignation, it had been relevant to report that the establishment had openly catered for gay men.

This was an "extremely finely balanced decision" but the Commission ultimately concluded that the newspaper had been entitled to bring to its readers' attention the fact of the Judge's resignation, and that it had not breached Clause 12 (ii) in describing the circumstances. The Commission did, however, express its reservations about the manner in which the material had been presented and made clear that it might have taken a different view had the report included gratuitous details relating to the Judge's sexual orientation.

The Commission also concluded that the article made no "prejudicial or pejorative reference" to the Judge's sexual orientation and there was therefore no breach of Clause 12 (i). It noted that the article had recounted the incident in a factual manner, without ridiculing the Judge's sexuality or employing offensive terms. Lastly, as the coverage contained minimal details about the allegations, which had been previously published, the complaint was not upheld under Clause 3 (Privacy).

ENDS

Notes to editors:

1. To read the adjudication please click here.

2. The Editors' Code of Practice can be read here.

Unbelievable.

Who's business was this, and what bearing did it have on Stuart Hall's trial?
Oh, and Russell was caught in a News Of The World sting, and it was in a sauna not a "gay brothel", by the way.
The highly reputable News Of The World?
Whatever happened to them, eh?