A woman and the Irish Sunday Mirror

The Irish Sunday Mirror published an article on four unresolved murders that had taken place in the 1990s.  No one was convicted of any of the murders.  One person was charged with the murder of one of the victims.  The trial collapsed and the accused man was released from custody.  The person accused of murder in that trial died a decade later.  The article was based on an interview with a brother-in-law of the now deceased accused person.  In the article the interviewee claimed that his brother-in-law had killed the four people and that there had been other people involved in the killings. The article reported the name of the woman who was married at the time of the killings to the interviewee and who was a sister of the person accused of the murders.

The complaint is taken by the woman identified in the article as a sister of the accused.  The complaint is being considered under Principle 5 – Privacy of the Press Council of Ireland’s Code of Practice for Newspapers and Magazines. The complainant argues that the publication of her name was a breach of her privacy and has caused her and her family distress.  She states that she has been separated from the interviewee for seventeen years and had recently been divorced from him. 

In response to the complaint the Irish Sunday Mirror argued that it was in the public interest to publish an article about unsolved murders and that establishing the “means of knowledge” of the person interviewed and his credibility was key to the article. The newspaper also made the point that marriages are a matter of public record.

The relevant section of the Code in adjudicating on this complaint is Section 5.2 where it is stated:

Readers are entitled to have news and comment presented with respect for the privacy and sensibilities of individuals.  However, the right to privacy should not prevent publication of matters of public record or in the public interest.

The Press Ombudsman has decided not to uphold the complaint. He is persuaded by the argument of the newspaper that the publication of the article was in the public interest and that the information about the marriage of the complainant to the interviewee is a matter of public record. It is fully understandable that the complainant would have preferred if the article had not made any reference to her.  However, it is the Press Ombudsman’s view that the reference to the complainant in the article was necessary in order to assist in establishing the credibility of the person being interviewed.  It was also noted that the complainant’s name was only used once and that no other details were published about her.   

4 September 2014

The complainant appealed the decision of the Press Ombudsman to the Press Council of Ireland.