Akers faces contempt claim over Leveson evidence – Press Gazette

by peterjukes

Niri Shan, a media lawyer at Taylor Wessing, said while Akers’ comments could be considered “injudicious”, nothing she said was in contempt of court

”Contempt potentially arises after someone has been arrested and if something is said that gives rise to a substantial risk of serious prejudice to their trial,” said Shan.

“In my view, whilst statements made by Sue Akers may be regarded as injudicious, nothing Sue Akers has said could be regarded as being in contempt of court because her written statement, and oral evidence were given to a public inquiry and are therefore, protected by privilege.

“Moreover, the police officers and journalists who have been arrested have not been charged. Even if they are charged, it is unlikely that their trials will take place until well into 2013 so it is not likely that anything she said, even if it wasn’t protected by privilege, would meet the test of contempt.”

via Akers faces contempt claim over Leveson evidence – Press Gazette.