I’m disgusted at the write-up concerning the young man Nixon in the Tuesday edition last week (‘Jail term for life-saver dad’) and feel even more strongly now about the need for proper coverage of public court hearings.
Was it necessary to print word for word what the judge had to say? This was appalling to say the least!
I don’t think it was right to introduce the name of the man’s child into this and wonder how would anyone feel if this happened to them. Was it a case of filling in blank space in the paper?
We have to take into account the impact of this type of coverage on family members, particularly children.