A child who hits 18 while before courts can now be named
A CHILD before the courts can now be identified if they turn 18 during proceedings, following a landmark Court of Appeal judgement.
Those who enter adulthood while before the courts or by the time their appeal comes for hearing can now be identified.
The court returned the judgment yesterday in the case of the youth who murdered ‘decent and upstanding’ student Cameron Blair and who will be named in 28 days unless his legal team takes the case to the Supreme Court.
The youth, who was 17 when he pleaded guilty to Mr Blair’s murder, is now 21.
His anonymity had been preserved by an interpretation of Section 93 of the Children Act, which held that the rules protecting the identity of child offenders still applied when that person appeared before the Court of Appeal, having reached the age of 18.
However, the Court of Appeal ruled yesterday that section 93 ‘applies only to a child’, which is defined as a person under the age of 18 years.
Delivering the judgment on behalf of the three-judge court, Judge Isobel Kennedy said the language used in the Act is ‘clear and unambiguous’ in that it provides for reporting restrictions in proceedings before any court concerning a child.
‘A child is a person under the age of 18 years and so in giving the words their ordinary meaning, once a person is under the age of 18 years and where proceedings are before any court, reporting restrictions apply,’ she said.
She added that no provision of the Act ‘provides for an extension of reporting restrictions and anonymity to those who age out before proceedings conclude’. ‘Reporting restrictions are expressly limited to those under the age of 18 years,’ the judge said.
Following the judgment, Judge George Birmingham, president of the court, told the legal teams he would put a stay on the lifting of reporting restrictions to allow an appeal to the Supreme Court. He asked the young man’s lawyers to indicate if they do not intend to appeal the ruling.
The ruling has implications for child defendants, unable to get a hearing date or complete their trial and sentence before they turn 18.
Two of the most high-profile child offenders, aged 14 when they were convicted of murdering Ana Kriegel, are known only as Boy A and Boy B.
They will come before the courts as adults in the coming years when their sentences are up for review. However, an order preserving their anonymity remains in place.
Yesterday’s decision comes following an appeal by Mr Blair’s murderer against his life sentence, with a review after 13 years. In December, when dismissing the appeal, the court sought submissions on whether the 21-year-old could be identified.
Judge Birmingham had requested submissions from the DPP and lawyers representing the man who was legally a child when he murdered Mr Blair at a house party in Cork city in January 2020. Karl Finnegan, for the defence, argued that to name any young offender before the Court of Appeal goes against the spirit of the legislation.
Anne Rowland, for the DPP, said a literal construction of the Act ‘doesn’t provide for the extension of anonymity to anyone over the age of 18.’
She said this might be a disincentive to appeal for anyone who turns 18 after conviction or sentence, but added that ‘after a person has aged out, it is not a proceeding concerning a child’.
‘Clear and unambiguous’