Press freedom row behind scenes at Night Stalker trial

The judge who tried Night Stalker rapist Delroy Grant has been accused of an unprecedented attack on press freedom after he blocked details of the case from emerging in open court.

Despite admitting he had no legal power to stop reporters identifying many of Grant’s victims, Judge Peter Rook used case management rules to prevent the names of the people being heard in open court.

The case is thought to be the first of its kind – and there are fears the judge’s ruling could set a legal precedent that will lead to further restrictions on open justice.

Judge Rook, an Old Bailey judge who was tasked with running Grant’s trial at Woolwich Crown Court, is a leading expert on how the courts handle sex crime.

He is the co-author of the legal textbook Rook and Ward on Sexual offences, considered a definitive work on legislation, practice and procedure.

The judge presided over the three-week trial that saw Grant convicted of 29 counts relating to burglaries and attacks on 18 elderly men and women between 1992 and 2009.

All victims of serious sex crimes receive automatic anonymity under the Sexual Offences Act, but that anonymity lapses if the victim has subsequently died, and their names can be revealed in open court, as can the victims of a burglary.

Of the nine victims of sexual assault by Grant , only two are still alive.

At the opening of the trial Judge Rook used the Criminal Procedure Rules (CPR), which govern the way trials are conducted and managed, to direct prosecution and defence lawyers to avoid mentioning the names of the dead victims in open court, instead referring to each of the victims with a letter.

It can now be reported that the judge turned down an application from several news organisations including ITN, the makers of Channel 4 News, to reverse that decision, despite the misgivings of the prosecuting barrister.

Read more: ‘Depraved’ Night Stalker Delroy Grant guilty of rape

Jonathan Laidlaw QC said he had been instructed not to enter in to any arrangement that would restrict press reporting on the case.

He told the court: “The Court of Appeal on a number of occasions has said that we do have to trust the press to employ good judgement and restraint in these sorts of cases and one has to be careful about imparting other restrictions not afforded by statute.

“I do really, really have a principle difficulty with any sort of order.

It is clear that I have no statutory power to prevent publication. Judge Peter Rook

“I do see a difficulty with employing the criminal procedure rules when the overriding objective is to achieve something that is motivated by restricting publicity. I see a fundamental difficulty in the use of CPR in that way.”

Adam Wolanski, representing five media organisations, said the arrangement suggested by the judge “would prevent full and open reporting” of the case.

He told the judge: “If the effect of such an endorsement restricts the reporting of the case…you are being asked to make a reporting restriction.”

“You have to be satisfied you have the power to do something.”

Judge Rook said: “It is clear that I have no statutory power to prevent publication.

“The sole question for me is whether I have case management powers to order that the evidence is presented in such a way that the identities and addresses of victims are not revealed in open court.

“I must bear in mind the importance of open justice when considering my case management powers.

“Given that I have the power to restrict evidence to that which is relevant, and to ensure that it is presented in the shortest and clearest way, in my view I do have the power to sanction such an arrangement in the exceptional circumstances of this case where the serious sexual assaults are not disputed and where identities will not assist the jury in their task.”

He added: “In my view there is a substantial risk that public knowledge, that is the placing in the public domain of the humiliation suffered by the deceased complainants, will be very distressing to the feelings of the family and friends of the deceased.

“Furthermore it may be particularly acute given that the serious sexual assaults occurred when the victims were elderly to those individuals and their families.

“I also consider, given the nature of this case, that the public knowledge as to the victims of the burglaries will be disturbing to those individuals and their families.”

Read more: Night Stalker found guilty of raping 89-year-old woman

The judge appeared to acknowledge that the law might have to be changed to stop other judges using the loophole in the future, saying: “It is for Parliament to address this issue in due course if it sees fit.”

Legal commentators say there is a danger the ruling could set a precedent for other criminal trials to go ahead with the names of the victims remaining a secret.

Eric Metcalfe, director of human rights policy at the law reform and human rights organisation Justice, said: “No doubt the judge was acting with the very best of intentions to prevent distress to the families of victims, but the principle of open justice is too important to be qualified in this way.

“It is to the CPS’s credit that it declined to enter into the arrangement suggested by the judge.”

Grant, 53, of Honor Oak, south London, will be sentenced by Judge Rook tomorrow morning.