Fixed It: Is it difficult to not dehumanise a woman who was allegedly raped and assaulted?

The Courier Mail reported that a 29 year old man was in court for a preliminary hearing on charges of rape and assault causing bodily harm after he allegedly raped a woman in Brisbane a year ago.

The trial has not started yet and the man is entitled to the presumption of innocence. Only the court can determine whether he is legally guilty or not guilty and any public commentary that could influence the outcome of the case (for example, assuming the victim or the accused are untrustworthy) could be grounds for a mistrial. 

Perhaps the editors at the courier Mail might need a refresher course in the sub judice contempt rules. They might like to look at the very simple explainer on the QLD Sentencing Advisory Council’s website, called something like Court Reporting for Beginners).

Despite what many journalists and editors appear to believe, these rules exist to protect the entire trial and the verdict, not just the accused. The woman who was allegedly raped and assaulted has evidence to present to the court. If the case goes to a jury trial and those jurors have already seen her labelled as a “drunk nightclubber” in the Courier Mail, it could influence how they hear her evidence.

This headline is not just cruel and unethical, it’s also ignorant, unprofessional, dangerous and misleading, but maybe this is the look the CM is going for?