Author: Simon Perry
VentnorBlog Denied Access to Coroner’s Court
4:47 pm Tuesday, 23rd February, 2010, Isle of Wight
ShortURL: http://wig.ht/26xF
Read More- Isle of Wight Council, Law & Order, Media, Newport, News
VentnorBlog was this morning ejected from the Coroner’s court in Newport, Isle of Wight.
We were told by the coroner’s officer, Richard Leedham, that the coroner, John Matthews, didn’t recognise us as a member of the press (despite VB publishing articles for four and a half years and NUJ membership for longer) and he didn’t want us in “his court.”
He cited some communication from Mr Matthews to VentnorBlog in 2008 (detailed below).
Access as member of public refused too
After some discussion explaining that the correspondence wasn’t of relevance, we said we would, as a member of the public, like to enter the court.
This was also refused. We were told that the court was full and there was no room for us.
On saying that we’d wait outside the court door in case someone left, we were told that Mr Matthews didn’t want us in “his court.”
We requested to speak to the coroner but were refused.
Threat of eviction by security
We were asked to leave the building, which we refused. We were then threatened that security would remove us.
Returning to the court door, someone in a police uniform stepped in front of us, refusing to let us enter, saying that the coroner’s word was god’s word around there.
Having our access to the court physically blocked and not wishing to add to the family’s grief at this obviously difficult time, we decided to leave.
We said that we would take this up with a higher authority, the man in uniform told us that there wasn’t a higher authority.
Access still denied despite offer of space
On the way out, we saw the coroner’s officer, Richard Leedham standing with two security guards talking to them. We told them not to worry about throwing us out, as we were leaving of our own accord.
When we asked Richard Leedham about gaining access to the public court, he repeated his previous points refusing us access as press or public, again citing that there wasn’t enough space in the court.
Telling him that someone had offered to step out of the court to make a space for us, he said that would make no difference.
Unprecedented
When we asked Richard Leedham if this had ever happened before, he said he hadn’t heard of such a case.
We said goodbye and quietly left the court building.
VB will report inquest findings
Despite being ejected there were other people in the court who will be reporting back to us so we’ll provide an update on the case once we hear more.
Here’s a video we shot after leaving the court
You might find the following information useful background on the inquest we tried to attend this morning.
VB reported the story of the sudden death of Kari Ann Paxton back in September 2008.
Kari worked for the Isle of Wight council as a finance and business support manager in the directorate of children and young people just prior to her death.
We had been led to believe that circumstances surrounding her death may be of public interest.
When we reported from the initial inquest, we did a live video report after.
Eighteen months have elapsed since her death and the inquest has been postponed twice, most recently just prior to the local elections.
It is also worth giving the background to our relationship with the coroner – an incident we felt should not have affected access to the court today as either press or public.
Back on 1st December 2008 we wrote a story about the sudden death of Michael Dare (published at 13:04).
Duncan Smith, press officer for the Island police got in touch at 14:07 on the same day, advising us to change a small part of the wording of our article, which we did at 14.10.
The total time the article was visible in it’s original form was for one hour and six minutes
Unexpectedly, two days later, after his attention had been drawn to the article by the Police, Island coroner John Mathews wrote a letter addressed to Sally. In his letter he gives Sally a “private warning” to which he said he would “take no further action”.
Unless the coroner is constantly watching VB, it’s unclear how he even saw the article in its original form. Given we made the change to our text within one hour and six minutes of it being published.
We noted the contents of his letter and had intended to reply to it, to let the coroner know that we had already made the changes to the wording, but didn’t get around to sending the reply. Thinking nothing more about it, we did not hear anything again from the coroner on this matter.
Image: Satguru under CC BY-SA 2.0
The plot thickens!
You are obviously considered too dangerous VB as you aren’t in the pockets of officials like most other media organisations. God forbid that anyone should tell the public the truth. Particularly if it means that senior people have made mistakes or turned a blind eye to issues that should have been dealt with.
I have seen John Matthews in action at an inquest and he struck me as someone who was full of his own importance and liked the sound of his own voice. Any compassion expressed towards the families seemed contrived. I would take his dislike of you as a compliment.
Offensive comment?
Surely you can use the NUJ and PCC code of conduct to get you into the court? You should remind them that this country has free press.
Offensive comment?
Rule 17 of the Coroner’s rules states that every inquest shall be held in public unless there’s a question of national security.
I hardly think this case falls under that category, so if it was a question of available space, then surely when you were offered a seat by someone else, the coroner’s officer should have allowed you to stay.
Surely it’s not possible for the coroner to pick and choose which members of the press he has reporting at inquests?
Offensive comment?
27. Will the inquest be reported by the media?
27.1 All inquests must be held in public in accordance with the
principle of open justice, and so members of the public and
journalists have the right to, and indeed may, attend (although
parts of a very small number of inquests may be held in private for
national security reasons). Whether journalists attend a particular
inquest – and whether they report on it – is a matter for them. If
any such report is fair and accurate it cannot be used to sue for
defamation.
27.2 Those working on newspapers or magazines abide by
the Editor’s Code of Practice, upheld by the Press Complaints
Commission, which sets out the guidance for print journalists
in the UK. The Code, which can be seen at http://www.pcc.org.uk, has
requirements on accuracy, privacy and discrimination. It also
has specific rules in cases involving grief and shock. For instance,
publication in such circumstances must be handled sensitively
and, when reporting suicide, care should be taken to avoid
excessive detail about the method used.
27.3 The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) mostly deals with
complaints about published material. However, it can also help
to prevent physical harassment by journalists and will sometimes
be able to assist with problems related to material that has not
yet appeared in print. Its staff are always happy to discuss matters
informally; the PCC can be contacted on 020 7831 0022 or
0845 600 2757. It also operates an out-of-hours number for
emergencies only (07659 152656).
27.4 Suicide notes and personal letters will not usually be read
out at the inquest, unless the coroner decides it is important
to do so. If they are read out, their contents may be reported.
Although every attempt is made to avoid any upset to people’s
21
private lives, sometimes, in the interest of justice, it is unavoidable.
Photographs taken of the deceased and of the scene of death may
also form part of the evidence presented in court.
Offensive comment?
So were you permitted inside Jason, or was the Gazette not covering the inquest?
Offensive comment?
Is the Gazette not part of the “media” as you have to ask the question??
Offensive comment?
I’d be interested to hear if IWG was allowed in, considering they are the media. Hopefully, they were let in even though they are still fairly new (and young than VB of course).
I hope there has been no prejudice against online news sites such as VB.
Offensive comment?
Outrageous behaviour. I too have had experience of the power of a coroner. (Mainland) It does seem the job gives them the belief that they are not just above the law but ARE the law! You must fight this VB. It is totally unacceptable that this public official excluded you. The press are a vital part of the judiciary and inquest process. If you once made a mistake that cannot be an excuse for this.
Offensive comment?
Stick at it, Simon and Sal!
Offensive comment?
It means that you are getting noticed!!! We are all behind you, VB!
Offensive comment?
This needs to be followed up. Outrageous behaviour.
Offensive comment?
The plot certainly does thinken!
Upon moving back to the Island a few years ago a friend who happened to be heading in the opposite direction warned me about rocking the boat. They said that you will be allowed to sporadically shunt things around but once you begin to form a serious power base and show the potential to redefine the status quo they will shut you out.
Maybe a few people are starting to think VB are getting a little too big for their boots? VB you must fight this one, it goes way beyond any local spat, it makes a mockery of our fundamental rights as UK citizens.
Offensive comment?
The balance of power is shifting; The VB juggernaut of impartiality is lifting the lid on this rotton can/isle and the ruling worms inside are squirming badly!
Offensive comment?
Not very good. Will you be making a complaint in reference to this incident?
Offensive comment?
http://www.judicialcomplaints.gov.uk/docs/ojc_coroner.pdf
Offensive comment?
I think you need to take this national then worldwide it absolutely stinks…
It doesnt surprise me really as coverups and manipulation are the name of the game here on the Island maybe even more than on the mainland…
Stand United…
People Power…
Start a FB Campaign Group or whatever it takes I am sure you will get support have you contacted Vectis Radio …
Ian Mac on 527444 or studio@vectisradio.com
Offensive comment?
This is disgraceful. Defiently something to take to other press representatives.
Would certainally be a headline on IWRadio, if you decide to express your experience further.
One rule for some, one rule for the others!
Offensive comment?
What is happening? We used to expect such things of the Eastern Block countries. Perhaps we should expect the ‘Stasi’ next
Offensive comment?
You won’t be the first to complain or be dissatisfied. I’ve heard of many grounds.
http://www.judicialcomplaints.gov.uk/complaints/complaints_judge.htm
keep up the good work
Offensive comment?
I couldn’t be happier that you were ejected from the court…my only wish is that all of you vultures, iwcp and bbc news were ejected! I cannot believe you have so little disregard for peoples feelings, that all you care about it getting a bit of gossip and you have a tantrum when you can’t report it, I couldn’t be more grateful to the coroner for ejecting you to prevent you gossip-mongering speculative reporting
My family and I have been through enough and I was hoping today we would get a small form of closure so we could move on and remember the amazing woman my mother was. Instead I now have to deal with the sad, single-minded people of the press and public on this island giving their irrelevant and insincere comments about a private and deeply personal matter, that is non of your business.
You talk about free press well if you think you have such a right to attend my mothers inquest than I have a right to leave this comment on your foul website…let’s see if you have the guts to keep this one on, rather than delete it like the last time I complained about your gross invasion into our grief…does that sound like free press and a fair right to you??
I sincerly hope that you no-one ever again experiences the heart ache we have, but if you ever do i wonder how you would feel having cameras and journalists in your face without the slightest of respect and human empathy to even ask for your permission, and then have to listen to them moan about their rights!
You are vultures, let people grieve in peace
Offensive comment?
quite right. I think in this case, VB is too busy worrying about the fact he was ejected from the court than about the morality of being there in the first place. Lots of people think just because they can do something it means they should. Leave the family in peace VB. By all means report on the result of the inquest, but you dont need to be in the court to do that. I think inquests should be family only, and the result should be made public only after the verdict.
Offensive comment?
From what I saw about the tragic death of your mother, it is very much a matter of public interest and has repercussions for the health and safety of many vunerable people on the island. If inquests are public, then the public have a right to know. Your grief is private, but the reasons for it are in the public interest. This is nothing to do with individual media outlets that you dislike – it is to do with holding people in positions of power to account and in making sure such tragedies never happen again. And to that end, the public need to know so that we can learn.
Offensive comment?
As a photo journalist, I know I set my limits on the different situations as they come. I know if a plane crashed into the Solent, god forbid, I wouldn’t think twice about photographing the event from a professional aspect, because that is my job. However it would be inappropriate for me to photograph individuals in pain or worse.
The point I am trying to make is, the press have a duty to report in a variety of forms, and in this case I feel VB were acting appropriate for the situation. It would be inappropriate if Simon/Sal turned up on your doorstep asking for your comments, however it is totally acceptable for them to use their rights as members of the press to attend a formal meeting.
I support VB all the way, and I’m not sure if you have met Simon/Sal, but they are genuine people who care about the work that they do. I understand your loss, however it’s not fair to express your anger at VB or any other member of the press when they have acting appropriately, lawfully and professionally at all times.
Offensive comment?
Kayleigh,
I believe that every single person reading or running this web site feel nothing but the deepest sympathy and respect for you and your family. Having just looked back over VB’s reporting of your mothers death from the time it hapened, they were offering their condolences at every point. It is sad that the story behing the story i.e. a tragic death, has been lost behind the eviction from court. It is bad enough having to go through a grieving process whn every thing is ‘straightforward’, but to be kept hanging on for closure for so long, as has happened in your case, must be an unbelievable strain for you all. My sympathies and prayers go to you and yours.
Offensive comment?
We can’t imagine the grief that you and your family must be experiencing, especially after yesterday.
Access to a coroner’s inquest is a basic and important right for the public and press. Without it there are no checks on people’s deaths.
As no notes are published from the inquest, the only way that it can be understood and reported is by people / press attending.
As I found in the original inquest, hearing the details of a death is harrowing and the memory of this made me unsettled about attending yesterday’s inquest as well. I can’t imagine how painful it must have been for you and your family.
It’s exactly that which we were concerned about your mother unnecessary death that we wanted to report the straight facts from the court – to understand the circumstance and actions of others that lead to it.
As hard as it is for the horrible loss that hit your familiy to be brought up again, when these things are aired, it starts a process where the chances of a shocking event like this happening again are reduced. Surely that must be a good thing.
As we have said in our previously articles, please accept our deepest sympathies for your loss.
Offensive comment?
Firstly , and importantly, for Kayleigh who has left a comment. . I am very sorry for your loss.
I too have had to endure the inquest of someone very dear to me. It was a painful and difficult day that loomed over me for months before the event.
An inquest is necessary to acertain the cause of death and whether or not there is a criminal case to answer. It is an important ‘right’ for the deceased person.
The inquest itself is a gruelling experience for those who are left behind. They are wanting and needing to protect the privacy and dignity of their loved one, yet find themselves powerless to do so.
They have to endure publicly reliving the events surrounding the death, knowing that there are others there, who later may be reporting (their loss) as the ‘top story’ or constructing a sensational headline to print.
(NB I am not pointing a finger at Ventnor Blog here).
This, during the early stages of grief when it is very difficult to face other people, is at a time when the numbness has begun to recede and allow the pain to be truly felt; it is at a time when other people have rightly moved on and wrongly assume that you have too.
My experience of the coroner was of someone who went to great lengths to explain each step of the procedure. Someone who made time to ensure our needs were met within the constraint of his job, and someone who asked the relevant questions required by law. Also someone who recognised our vulnerability and was vigilant with regard to conducting the court with clear instruction to those attending.
I agree there is and should be a public right to hear the facts. I feel that persons reporting should be those whom are able to show a degree of sensitivity and respect for the deceased, keep detail to a minimum, reporting the broad facts, and in some way take the lead and prime the wider community to recognise how best we can all include and support living people going through difficult times in their lives. After all reporters are part of the community too, albeit with the potential to shape how others react.
The reason I have written this note is to give my perspective only, and hope i have not caused furthur distress or offence to anyone reading this.
If you read this Kayleigh I would like to tell you that it is possible to be happy again and in time good memories will return.
Offensive comment?
It’s about time VB took a little bit of stick!
Offensive comment?
Why?
Offensive comment?
The point is that Coroner’s Courts are a matter of public interest otherwise we would never find out the shortcomings of those in power. The fact that they deal with death, which is a tragedy for any family, cannot have a bearing on the greater public interest. I agree that journalists should not report for sensational purposes, and I agree that aggressive interviewing of the grieving family and friends is totally unacceptable. However open, yet sensitive, reporting of the proceedings is necessary, and those involved have to be aware that if a loved one’s death is a matter for the Coroner, then the details will be a matter of public record. It isn’t easy, but that is how it is.
Offensive comment?
Mr. Plod was not entirely correct when he said the Coroner was God. He might like to think he is, but he does have a boss.
The Lord Chancelor and, indeed, under certain circumstances, the High Court can sack him.
It seems you have upset “The Establishment” – more power to your elbow!
Offensive comment?
I am the original Mike 46 who was mistaken for Michael Dare when he died in November 2008 and whose link is at the top of this report.I found Michael’s body in my garage and was the sole witness at his inquest. So I do understand the distress Kayleigh and her family are going through at this time. At the inquest I attended the CP were there and there report was biased he was an ex policeman (albeit many years ago). I have to say that in defence of VB they handled the matter with diplomacy and were never intrusive. I know the press do get it wrong but as a previous poster said if we didn’t have the press we would never get to the REAL truth behind the news.
Offensive comment?
well done for your fight for freedom of information. Watched the play on BBC4 last night
about MP’s expenses and the brave journalist who kept going despite all attempts to block her. We have freedom of information, supposedly, but we still need to fight for it. Could this be something to do with Kari being a council employee.
Ventnor blog seems our one source of reliable info on the Island
Offensive comment?
i have to repeat my comment that i think inquests should be limited to family. There is no reason for the press to be present when the inquest could be filmed and then distributed to press outlets and published for all to see.
Should VB have been ejected from the court? no, thats clearly a breach of the current rules.
Is it time the current rules were examined and perhaps altered? Yes, i think so. In all cases of death, sudden or otherwise, the families wishes should be paramount. The coronor releases the verdict publicly after the inquest, and so theres no reason for press to be present
Offensive comment?
I’m afraid if that was the case Coroners could say and do anything and truth could be hidden.
I don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings but I believe press should have every right to be there, come on now we don’t like in china! (although sometimes it does feel that way)
It’s a Coroners duty to investigate any un-natural death, without any press around they could tell you anything.
I think Mr Mathews needs to be investigated. What’s that saying…. Conflict of Interest!
Offensive comment?
they couldnt do what they like if the inquest was videoed and made public. that is the check on them.
Simon, whilst the press may find inquests emotionally difficult, they should understand that their presence makes the process even more difficult for the family. A live or recorded video link to the press would save a lot of heartache for the family, would present the press with the information they need, and allow any virdict to be questioned after the event rather than at the time in front of the family. And once again, while you may have a right to be at the inquest, you should consider if you SHOULD be at it, or should simply report the virdict. The families wishes should be paramount unless family members are involved in the death, which is not the case here i think. Im wondering if you can see that it may not just be your reporting of the story that is upsetting, but also your very presence at the inquest. Not just yours of course, but the press in general.
Offensive comment?
A live video feed & recording of it might be a good idea. From speaking to other press, I think most journalists find it emotionally difficult to be at Coroner’s inquests.
I’d imagine that the day passes as a blur to the family, so being able to watch back the video could remind them items they’d missed (if, of course they wanted to be reminded).
Offensive comment?
So very sad to read the comments of the grieving relatives above. At this distressing time it must be difficult to step back a little and be 100% rational.
What they hopefully will come to realise in time is that the court is there to look into and protect everyones interest.
If there is guilt to be found, it should be discovered and properly aired, not covered up. If there is no guilt, this must equally be brought to light. If accident, or unsound mind is involved, then exposing these matters may enable others to be more aware and careful to prevent similar future occurences.
All of these things can only happen in the clear light of day, not hushed up behind closed doors. A responsible and sensative free press is your and my representative within these courts. If they are denied access, then whether justice is or is not happening inside, we will always suspect a cover-up or whitewash is being brewed up.
Dadshep.
Offensive comment?
the man in uniform told us that there wasn’t a higher authority.
——–
there’s always a higher authority.
get in touch with radio 4′s `law in action`; `the media show`; `you and yours`.
this is the type of story they might want to cover.
Offensive comment?
I too am sorry for your loss. But without the press reporting inquests we would never know things that the powers that be would rather we didn’t. Lockerbie, the Marchioness disaster and the Iraq war spring to mind. I feel it’s vital that the exact circumstances of all deaths and what lead up to them are in the public domain. Good coroner’s ask vital questions of those in authority. Hopefully this stops mistakes being repeated. ‘Press intrusion’ is a fact of life – just part of the process, although I accept that this can feel very wrong to a family in grief. I too have had to endure press reports of an inquest into a close family member that seemed to bear little relation to the person we knew. My instinct was to write to the newspaper concerned and protest. In reality I felt it best left. VB should be permitted to do what is after al, just a job.
Offensive comment?
I think its more about just how its reported. If the press are present in the inquest this could lead to further upset for the family. Theres no reason to have the press physically in the room, they can be handed a transcript afterwards. There should be some separation between the family and the press and public, who, while they may have some interest, should not be allowed to impinge on the familys grief and the inquest process.
Offensive comment?
whether close relatives, for whom one must have considerable sympathy, feel that the press presence is appropriate or not, is, as others have stated before, completely beside the point. Where such courts are held in camera we are all left wide open to being given the results that are perhaps, thought to be good for us. That way leads to a very slippery slope, probably more for our children and grandchildren, than ourselves. Everything must, be seen to be out in the open with the media reporting as much or little as is necessary to explain the findings.
Offensive comment?
well as ive said before, put a camera in the court. theres no reason for the press to actually be in the room adding to the familys distress. separate the press from the process and the press can report the events without being able to influence them either intentionally or otherwise. Theres no reason why an inquest cannot be open with closed doors when video technology is available. And quite frankly, saying that the familys wishes is beside the point is incredibly short sighted. their wishes should be paramount, and the court should be set up to accomodate their wishes as much as possible. I dont think anyone would feel that asking the press to be in a separate room watching a video link rather than in the court would be an unreasonable request.
Offensive comment?
What if ‘the family’ have played a part in the death? Do they get to keep that private?
The system we have is there to protect all of us. Not much is more important than death, the Coroner’s Court system is generally a good one. Many a dodgy person has been caught or named and shamed by a Coroner when the burden of proof for a prosecution may not have been made.
Remember there can be a jury – who may decide someone was unlawfully killed. Coroner’s courts are far too important to have the press excluded. As for sensational cases , the press tend to hang around outside and take pictures or interview people coming and going. Banning them wouldn’t spare a distraught family from questioning or intrusion. VB must fight for the right to attend on behalf of all of us.
Offensive comment?
im not disputing the medias right to attend, and clearly vb should not have been excluded under current rules. However, there is a discussion to be had about if the press should be allowed inside the court room itself. I personally think theres no reason to not have the press in a separate room with a video link. Obviously all the evidence should be heard,and if the family is involved in the death (not in this case, but others maybe) then that should come out too. but press intrusion wont help and may hinder that process. The press are there to report the facts and allow us to make our own minds up, not to place pressure on anyone or indeed to hang around outside making a scene. Unfortunately, in free society that cannot be stopped. But procedures in the court need updating, and a video link allows full access for the press whilst minimising press intrusion within the court.
Offensive comment?
“annonymous” I feel it is only fair to point out that Simon acted with discretion and the utmost respect for the family. He did not create a ‘scene’ as may be inferred by your comment, but left the court quietly. He is a person with great integrity and sensitivity, as anyone who knows him will agree.
Offensive comment?
in that comment i was talking about the press in general. from what ive read, simon did indeed behave in an honorable way. He should not have been excluded from the court under current rules, but i do think those rules need to be changed slightly to separate the press from the family whilst still allowing full access with a video link.
Offensive comment?
Thanks for clarifying that. Simon agrees about the video link btw (as he mentions above).
Offensive comment?
I don’t understand. There are many people present at an inquest – the coroner, his/her associates, admin staff, security etc. These are also strangers to the grieving families as well as the press. You cannot ban all strangers from an inquest. As long as the press are inobstrusive then I don’t see any problem with their presence at an inquest.
Offensive comment?
all the people you mention there, ie security, are authority. its their job to find the cause of death.
The press only have one role, and that is to report the outcome of the inquest. as a result theres no reason they should be in the room with the family when they could just as easily be located in a separate room. The presence of authority whilst not exactly comforting is accepted. The presence of the press largely isnt accepted. So, to avoid conflict, distance the press from the inquest and allow them access to a record of it.
The family at any inquest want to find out what happened. The authority figures help with this, just as does a jury at some inquests, and witnesses at others.
The presence of the press does not help and may infact hinder procedings. therefore they should be distanced from the court.
Offensive comment?
Anything that disrupts access to the truth cannot be acceptable, and events such as this can develop into ‘the thin end of the wedge’. Re-read the Novel ’1984′, and then look at Arthur Koestlers ‘Darkness at Noon’ for a good look at a corrupted future. It would seem that Simon and Sal behaved with appropriate good manners, so what’s the establishments problem here? We need somebody determined to legally get at the truth, so good on VB.
Offensive comment?
I have thought long and hard about this post as I would not want to intrude on the family’s grief with all the issues that were raised yesterday.
However, it is to be hoped that those from the press who were there will be asking salient questions. Among which was why did the Council’s Chief Executive feel it necessary to attend for the whole as an interested party? Also why did the council feel it was appropriate to pay for legal representation in the form of a barrister?
I hope that the CP will point to the points made in the summing up about a Council Policy on referral to occupational health service that ends with a reminder to the manager that they will have to fund any treatment.
I hope also that mention is made of the appalling way in the the Children’s Services restructure was handled. A debacle that lead to large numbers of competent staff being made redundant and with inadequately trained and managers being placed in positions of responsibility managing staff who were experienced and knowledgeable.
A debacle that was lead by someone who felt that process was more important than people.
Offensive comment?
I think there should be another forum, blog, listing or whatever to get this thing moving forward.
Leave the poor family alone and concentrate on the business at hand! Kayleigh is obviously very upset and greiving and so I think you should all stop and think – how would you FEEL! If it was your mother, your sister, your friend!
You don’t feel like you have your say because you don’t … we don’t and its about time that changes. please lets not focus on some poor ladies departure in this world in order for us to practise this power or lack of power of speach and certainly not on a blog to cause more distress to a family that are powerless to the forces of media!
yes i understand you all want to know what has happened – however you will not find that information out.
however if you all stop writing on this blog and start another one.. where would you start?
would you start about the article in IWCP about the budget, or would you start a article about the lack of things for anyone to do on this island and how teenagers are roaming the streets.. and how we are paying massive amounts of taxes for people to live and breed off of us…! whom the tax payers.. and how we pay for councilours to come over here and spend our money.
leave the west family to breath VB and move on channel your energies else where and start a movement that is like no other tried before…
whats really annoying everyone is the fact that we never get our say.. things happen and they are ignored etc etc
the fact is the council are [comment removed by moderator]
Offensive comment?
Media are animals, and very selfish.
Kayleigh has been through so much and all you care about is that you were evicted from the courts, think about this young ladies feelings having to read all this rubbish about her own MOTHER!
Get a grip you pigs.
Offensive comment?
Nina, no one has written any rubbish about the mother. If you read the articles you will see that those running the blog have expressed their condolences many times and dealt with the matter sensitively. I think people are getting confused,ths article is about a member of the press/public being excluded from an inquest on no specific grounds.
I think Simon was right to highlight being excluded and he’s have shown compassion for the family at the same time. It is very unfair to call them pigs, if you knew them or if you read this site regularly you would see that they are always fair, balanced and very generous people.
Offensive comment?
As far as I can see this thread is about our right to know how a death occurred, inquests and the press, not any one specific death- but all sudden deaths in England. Inquests are held in Britain even when a British citizen dies abroad. (Think Princess Di and recent service deaths in Iraq/Afghanistan) What matters most is that the truth is discovered don’t you agree? I have no idea what else you think the people here are discussing? Certainly not a specific case, despite the genuine expressions of sympathy.
I’m sure you all realise too that most of us know what it’s like to be bereaved. As someone else posted, an inquest is the only chance for the dead to be heard. They protect all of us and the common good.
Offensive comment?
Thank you Marsha…you have summed it up perfectly. One of the things that frustrates me most is that all of the effort gone into these comments and the comments that will be made when the details of the inquest come out are WASTED.
People will spend time having their say, criticising the council and Sevenacres but will any of you actually make an effort for change…NO…NEVER! so why do you all go to so much effort to hear the facts and have your say when tommorow it will all be chip paper, but it is at our painful expense. All this wasted time and typing on a website, but your comments and all the reporters staring at me during a harrowing time and pointing cameras in my face & putting it on TV….these intrusions will not change what happened to my mum and they will not change what will continue happening to others.
And once it’s reported and you all know what the press have decided to tell you…do you think you’ll have all the facts…NO because you weren’t there you didn’t go through it, you didn’t lose someone you love.
Everyone on this island, with a pair of eyes and ears is blatantly aware that the IW council are an incompetent plague of corrupt vermin, my goldfish could run county hall better and exactly the same goes for Sevenacres. The fact that they are responsible for our safety and care is beyond a joke and the fact that you and I pay them to throw money down the drain on ‘proposed’ reorganisations that cause so much distress and anxiety to their hard working staff infuriates me greatly.
The facts are that it makes it twice as hard to overcome deep grief and loss when the painful memories are printed for all to see and when they are in vain, i just wish that could be treated with more sensitivity.
The law should be changed because families have more right to protect their loved ones than the public do to know how a person met their death. If she was alive today would you have a right to know her problems? NO so now she is no longer with me you think you do?
As for cameras filming the inquest…have you not listened? It is harrowing enough talking about or listening in front of a room full of witnesses and ‘reporters’ how your loved one died, let alone having a camera glaring at you during the process, it is bad enough having that outside the court.
It is the coroner’s job is investigate the reasons a person met their death, not the press’ and John Matthews does his job with upmost professionalism and respect for all.
In one way I’m glad you will know snippets of how my mum was failed because those who failed her should be held to account and believe me they will, but no one except for the people who loved her need to know how she felt and how she passed, it is bloody well not in the ‘public interest’!!! and no one needs to see my face on TV either. I just hope there is enough human empathy left in this world to recognise that.
Offensive comment?
thats all fair enough, but the best way to fuel interest is to give attention. if you ignore VB, then interest will wane. Obviously youve been through something no one should have to go through, but by commenting on here your simply working yourself up further and fueling VB. Ignore the commenters and they will get bored and go away. And whilst i dont know you personally at all, it cant be healthy to read all this, so dont read it. just turn off your computer and ignore it
Offensive comment?
Think about it people would you want to stand in a room full of strangers ,re living the moment you find your Mum dead then have it reported about so everytime your out you get pitying looks from people knowing about your Mothers death ,not saying press shoudnt report on it just not show Kayleighs face on Tv or have to re live it in same room as others ,ie a press release from the court should be enough . Kayleigh is my Neice and her Mum was my best friend ,I actually don’t want to hear from the press how she died ,I couldn’t cope with going to hear about it in a room full of gore hunters either .All I need to know is that a beautiful wonderful Lady is no longer with us and that a young vibrant amazing girl has lost her Mum far too soon .
Offensive comment?
thats fair enough, and i dont think anyone would want that. hence why i suggested a video link to separate the press from the process. That removes the press from the room, and the family dont need to be filmed at all. Or, if its better for the family, allow the family to watch the link.
I also think that if the family keeps fuelling VB, then comments will continue. If the comments on here are ignored they will stop. The press may have the right to report it, but the family commenting here simply keeps the story going. If they really wish to greive in peace, they should ignore these comments and try and move on as best they can when they can.
Offensive comment?
Completely understand what you say Shazza.
Just so you know where we’re coming from, VB are anything but sensationalist reporters. We have no intention of putting a camera in front of Kayleigh or putting pictures of Kari online.
We always try to report sensitively and put ourselves in the shoes of those affected by something as tragic as Kari’s case.
Our deepest sympathies continue go out to all of Kari’s family and friends.
Offensive comment?
My brother committed suicide. We, his family were persuaded not to attend the inquest. This meant the true circumstances of the the events leading to his death were never discussed or examined. Ten years on his now grown up children want answers that no-one is really able to provide. However painful my feeling is that an inquest should be as thorough as possible and involve as many people close to the deseased as possible. Closure for my family is impossible because we don’t fully understand the reason my brother died. The press do report things that maybe we would rather not know, but trust me, whatever is said can never compare with the imagination.
Offensive comment?
You’ve made Big Brother Watch.
http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/
Go for it!!
Offensive comment?
This is a coroner’s court. A place where public inquests are held.
Yes, that’s pubic inquests.
It is not a venue for someone to display animosity and spite towards members of the press or anyone else, for that matter.
May I suggest you get the NUJ on the case? God knows, we pay enough in membership dues!
Offensive comment?
I can recall a case when a coroner, let’s be kind, let’s say the coroner made a ‘mistake’ and brought about a perverse verdict that flew in the face of the evidence presented in his court.
The family of the deceased was angry. They spoke with a reporter from a local paper who had attended the inquest. He agreed with their point of view and agreed to help them .It was his shorthand notes that were instrumental in the verdict being overturned.
If the reporter had been banned from the inquest,who could or would have challenged the coroner? Nobody.
Offensive comment?
wow what a debate!
well on the subject of press in the coroner’s court, I have to say, if you are happy to have members of the public there then you have to be happy to have ‘press’ there; its the same thing! And in this day and age, anyone can write about anything they’ve seen or heard, on their blog, from their mobile , or any other number of ingenius new technologies. So in effect anyone becomes press. Indeed, the people in that category are accountable and trained and experienced.
The whole point of having a free press is so that every point of view can be expressed, to encourage healthy debate (that’s different from arguing) so that no stone is left unturned (factually speaking) and to make sure that everything is transparent. If no one can hide, then no one can hide anything. Or something.
The only way of finding an answer (to anything) is by looking at it from every angle, and the only way to do this is by havingaccess to all the information. In cases like these, awareness is required to make any progress, ie. to examine what went wrong and to adjust procedure accordingly. (Please note I am talking more about the political stance of being allowed in the courtroom, as I don’t know about the particular case this thread originally referred to). Awareness is your most crucial tool to make changes, especially in a society like the Isle of Wight, where things are very easily set in their ways.
I have to say I don’t think Kayleigh would be any happier if there were no such thing as media coverage, as the nature of living in a small community is what makes people gossip and stare. That’s just part and parcel of living here, and if it seems new, you’ve been lucky.
Offensive comment?
This ‘incident’ is clearly of far greater importance – to all of us -than the spat over Schoolboy Poo’s swearing.
Freedom of speech,movement and assembly is being steadily eroded in this country,not by massive legal and political moves but by seemingly ‘small’ incidents such as this.
Let us not forget Simon was not only evicted as a journalist but also as a free member of the public.
I believe the coroner should be removed from his post.It’s that serious.
Offensive comment?
Simon,
Has the coroner’s reason for ejecting you been made clear yet?
Offensive comment?
Coroner’s have a (potentially) frightening amount of power and are almost impossible to remove once appointed. Without the press recording their work they would fail in their duties more often. It should be noted that on occassion they use their powers to shame government, which has to be a good thing for the majority of us.
Offensive comment?
Can you expect authorities to take you seriously when you flippantly fly the hammer and sickle in order to mock?
Offensive comment?