Ireland

This piece was interesting to me because I got an email from England from someone who was amazed that we could freely post pictures of our children on the blog. In England and Ireland and probably other places, you can't do that.

From America, I've received several thank yous from the grandparents of our kids who are delighted with posted pictures because they don't get to see their kids or grand children often enough. I can't imagine losing that freedom.

This picture is of the kids getting ready for the play. It's fru-fru day, and the girls are trying on their crowns.

The Corkman is convicted of breaching the Child Care Act

THE CORKMAN newspaper was fined €750 by Judge Michael Pattwell for breaching the Child Care Act.

The newspaper published a story and picture of a man who was protesting about accessibility to his children, who were in care at the time.

The paper was convicted of breaching section 31 of Child Care Act, 1991. Editor of The Corkman Brendan Malone was in court to answer the charge and was represented by The Corkman solicitor Graeme Murray.

Both legal sides agreed to amend the summons from Independent Newspapers to The Kerryman Ltd, the publisher of The Corkman.

Solicitor for the Health Service Executive (HSE) Southern Area, Denise Kirwan told the court the article, which was published, concerned a parent who made a protest regarding accessibility to his children.

“The article and photograph identified the children and the photograph of the father linked both together, and that’s why we are here today,” said Denise Kirwan. She said the newspaper had contacted the communications department of the HSE prior to publication and were advised not to publish the photograph and the article.

She said an e-mail from the HSE was sent to The Corkman regarding this but it had gone unopened before the paper printed the photograph and article.

Defending solicitor Graeme Murray denied the newspaper made contact with the HSE but an e-mail which had arrived at the editor’s computer prior to publication went unopened as it was one of 200 which he received on that day.

“Had the e-mail been opened before publication, it would not have been printed. On discovering the error we immediately wrote to Denise Kirwan explaining the circumstances. Again, there is just no way we would have printed the article had the e-mail been opened,” said Graeme Murray.

The Corkman Editor Brendan Malone said it was the second year in a row that The Corkman had investigated the same man making a protest regarding access to his children.

“We went ahead with the story unaware that any proceedings were taking place. I received the e-mail but, unfortunately, and correcting what was stated previously, it was not one of 200 there were, in fact, in excess of 300 on that day.

This event happened right in the middle of the two busiest weeks of the year for our paper,” explained Mr Malone. Judge Pattwell said, as editor, he could not possibly do all of the work himself. “We would simply not have published this story, had we been aware of the forewarning, as it goes against everything which we stand for,” Mr Malone pointed out.

Denise Kirwan argued, within the body of text, it clearly stated the children were in care and therefore the newspaper was responsible for the identification of the children.

In response, Brendan Malone said the same thing happened the year previously and the paper had spoken to the HSE regarding same. “It was a news value story as it was the year previously,” said Brendan Malone.

When Judge Pattwell asked was news value more of a dominant feature for the newspaper than little children: Mr Malone said the protection of children was paramount to the paper. Graeme Murray asked Judge Pattwell to consider not recording a conviction because of the extenuating circumstances, and offered payment to a children’s charity.

This was rejected by Judge Pattwell who said the case was a serious matter. The monetary fine for a breach of Section 31 of the Child Care Act is €1,269 and the Judge felt this was grossly inadequate, but said he could only work within the law. “The apology the newspaper offered immediately must be taken into account, and maybe the individual who was protesting should have considered his responsibility to his own children,” said Judge Patwell.

He said it was with some regret that he reduced the ‘miserly fine’ to €750.

* In addition to the fine, The Corkman has decided to make a payment of €1,000 to a children’s charity.