Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

Kaieteur News Editor, reporter fined $200,000 for contempt

June 29, 2013, By , Filed Under News, Source

 

Editor in Chief of Kaieteur News Mr. Adam Harris, and reporter Rehanna Ramsay were fined $150,000 and $50,000 respectively after they appeared before Justice Brassington Reynolds charged with contempt.

 

The newspaper had published an article on Thursday June 27 that forced the judge to declare a mistrial in a murder case. The newspaper published the details of a voir dire. Justice Brassington Reynolds yesterday at the trial called the article a “jaundiced” account that imported evidence that was not even before the court and some of which might not have been heard by the court.


According to the judge both parties, the defense and the prosecution, were upset, which caused him to discontinue the trial. Justice Reynolds chastised both the reporter and the editor, stating that the “quality control” of what hits the press lies at the feet of the latter. He said that this had to be sadly lacking in this instance.


Attorney at law Khemraj Ramjattan, in a plea to the judge explained that the reporter Rehanna Ramsay has been working at Kaieteur News for about a year and would be classified as a “junior reporter”. The lawyer said that Ramsay mistook the proceedings in the court for an open court trial, when in fact it was a voir dire. She submitted the report which was carried by the editor.


Ramjattan said that a full front page explanation was carried, after the newspaper recognized the damage. Ramjattan pleaded with the judge that although there should be some form of reprimand, he urged for leniency.


The judge in responding to the lawyer urged that whoever is doing the court reporting to be well grounded.  Brassington said that person cannot be inexperienced. The reporter should be in a position to recognize a voir dire.


The judge added that the “gate keeping” was flawed and this led to a slippage which is considerably reprehensible.


Harris was fined $150,000 with an alternative of 14 days in jail. His reporter Rehanna Ramsay was fined $50,000 with an alternative of seven days on the contempt charge. The fines have already been paid.


The Judge filed the charges against the two after the newspaper carried details of the voir dire of the murder trial.


A voir dire is a trial within a trial that is conducted without the jury’s presence. It is mostly conducted to ascertain specific facts in a case and whether those facts would be admissible during the trial. The details of the voir dire are not made public since those details could prejudice the case.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Wheh them sour puss deh? Yesterday, yall been running allyou mouth like Demerara river to defend (KN) new editor. This is the same news paper that say sorry more times than you would actually wipe your BT with it. 

FM

(Observer)A WAY of life, particularly one that exhibits an unerring recourse to daily untruths, is indeed the well known masthead of Kaieteur News, Guyana’s best known print medium for distortions, and everything associated with unethical journalism. Months ago, because of its compulsive predilection for  reporting  untruths and distortions, this epitome of misrepresentation was forced to issue an  apology to a magistrate adjudicating in a matter heard in the  Essequibo jurisdiction. This was for erroneous reporting.


It goes without saying that any media house, founded on the well grounded principles of  professional  journalism and ethical reporting, would have learnt from  such a lesson, ensuring that  it is not faced with such an embarrassment, again. But not Kaieteur News; and the reason is not very difficult to comprehend.
This daily  believes that it is the embodiment of the right to publishing all and every news report without recourse to proper verification. This, as is so well known in the media, has often led to inaccurate reporting, leading to incorrect conclusions on the part of the readership, on issues, events and personalities. Such a  culture has  the cumulative effect of even ruining reputations in many instances.
Any media house, even in its formative stage, would understand such a causation of bad reporting; much less a journal such as the Kaieteur News that has an editor of such long-standing media experience. It is a given that coverage of judicial proceedings has to be undertaken with the utmost accuracy, given the nature of  legal  proceedings and the  need  for a clear and proper understanding of what is being said and interpreted legally; and its serious implications for justice. No proper court will ever tolerate  misrepresentation on what has been elucidated in its  respected assembly.
This was the lesson that both the  Kaieteur News editor and his free- lancer, appears to have forgotten, that caused  both to be arraigned before a trial judge in the Supreme Court to answer charges of contempt, relative to a murder trial over which  the latter judge had been presiding. It is baffling that this newspaper can seek refuge under the blanket of “total lack of knowledge of the judicial system, an ignorance of what a ‘voir dire’ is, and poor editing and management by Kaieteur News Ltd.” It begs the question as to what  journalistic training, if any,  is conducted for its journalists.  
The fallout from such   inaccurate reporting on the trial is, of course,   aborting of the proceedings  in the proper interest of justice. This means that the accused  will have to  re-appear again in a new trial, which is  a situation of justice delayed, because of a  grossly irresponsible press; and  further expenditure for a new trial. There is also the serious implication that witnesses for the trial  can become seriously incapacitated, rendering them incapable of further testimony, and even dying.
Whether this sanction puts a brake on the recurring practice of misrepresentation and inaccurate reporting on the part of Kaieteur News, remains to be seen. It is time that this media house suffer  judicial consequences for its intransigence. It has been long overdue. No court  must tolerate such disrespect.
The honourable trial judge must be commended for his forthright action in the interest of judicial practice and principles, and his fearless decision to penalise the  errant parties.

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×