Want the top news headlines sent to your inbox daily? Sign up to our FREE newsletter below Subscribe Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

Police and social services tried to block members of the public from seeing footage of a killer which had been aired in open court - but they were defeated by ChronicleLive

Body-worn camera footage of Karine Atay in the aftermath of killing her husband was a critical piece of evidence in establishing her claims of self-defence were false.

Such video clips or photographs shown in court should usually be released to the media and the police and CPS are supposed to follow protocols which clearly state this.

We understood Northumbria Police intended to release the footage if and when Atay was found guilty.

(Image: Northumbria Police)

However, a senior officer in the case decided the footage should not be released on the grounds it may cause upset or distress to the children of the Atays, who were in the house at the time.

We then approached the Crown Prosecution Service, which decided the footage should be released, in line with the protocols.

Northumbria Police appealed against the CPS decision, which was reviewed at national level and the decision to release was upheld.

In light of police objections, we decided to write to trial judge Paul Sloan QC to get him to intervene, knowing the law was quite clear that the footage should be released.

Police then contacted social services and other parties acting for the children, who also said the release of the footage would harm the children.

Northumbria Police initially instructed a barrister to fight against the media and CPS and social services also instructed a barrister.

The case was listed for a hearing last week, where we repeated our submissions orally and the CPS explained why it agreed it should be released.

While police decided not to be formally represented at the hearing, they did send a letter to the judge persisting with their objections - which drew a comment from Judge Sloan about them seemingly not thinking they were bound by the agreed protocols.

Finally, on Tuesday, after a lot of spent time and money, the open justice principle prevailed and the judge ordered the footage should be released.

Giving his ruling in our favour, Judge Sloan said: "Application is made by a court reporter, Mr Rob Kennedy, on behalf of NCJ Media Ltd, for an order permitting use of certain sections of body-worn camera footage recorded by police officers who attended the scene of a crime, namely a manslaughter committed by the defendant Helena Karine Atay.

"The footage in question was viewed by the jury in open court during the trial.

"The application is not opposed by the CPS, however it is opposed by Gateshead Council ... it's also opposed by a solicitor appointed to act on behalf of the two children and likewise by the defendant herself.

"Northumbria Police maintain their opposition to the application but have not appeared before me, having taken the view the argument in opposition ought to be advanced by the local authority."

Judge Sloan said the open justice principle was "at the heart of our justice system" and said it maintains public confidence to ensure that justice is not only done, but seen to be done.

He referred to authorities which say it is "impossible to over emphasise the importance of the media to be able to report criminal proceedings" and how the "media can be described as a public watchdog".

(Image: Northumbria Police)

The judge also said the footage was crucial in helping the jury reach their verdict.

He said: "Initially she put up a pretence someone else had been responsible for the killing and in that context the first of the clips shows her trying to convey to the police there were others who may have had a motive to attack her husband. It was indicative of the deceit she was prepared to use.

"The next clip shows her arrest and reaction and the third clip shows her admitting she has been involved, referring to an argument that got out of control and it also shows her refusal to acknowledge that nonetheless she was a killer.

"There was no suggestion her husband had attacked her and that she had acted in lawful self-defence.

"In my judgement the clips serve to highlight matters that were key to the jury's consideration. The clips encapsulate the decisions the jury had to resolve."

Judge Sloan added: "It's argued the footage will always be available but the same can be said about written reports of the case, some of which contain details of far more disturbing aspects of the case.

"I'm satisfied the applicant has a serious journalistic purpose in seeking the material and the application is made in connection with contemporaneous reporting.

"It's a case of marked public interest and it involved the unlawful killing where the defendant has sought to distort the truth.

"It's argued the contents could be disseminated by means of the printed word alone, however it's not for the court to exercise editorial judgement."

(Image: Newcastle Chronicle)

The judge said the court is concerned for the welfare of the children, who have been protected from reporting on the case so far.

He added: "But the harm they are already suffering and will inevitably continue to suffer does not arise from accurate, reliable reporting of the trial, rather from their experience living in a household where their mother was dependent on alcohol and the tensions and distress that gave rise to.

"It arises from the fact their mother killed their father by stabbing him to death.

"It is destruction wrought by their mother that lies at the root of their distress, not accurate reporting.

"As for unpleasant posts on social media, the best protection against that is accurate reporting by the media.

"Discussion about the case is potentially disturbing but such discussions will take place regardless of whether this material is released.

"Having carefully considered all the arguments, I'm satisfied the principle of open justice must prevail. Accordingly, the application is granted."

We asked Northumbria Police to explain why it had wasted time and money fighting the CPS and media on this issue.

A spokeswoman said: “We will always endeavour to release materials used as part of the prosecution case to the media.

“However, it is important to recognise we also have a statutory duty to protect vulnerable children. Alongside our partners, we have a significant role in ensuring their wellbeing and on this occasion we felt releasing the footage, due to the unique circumstances of this case, would have a detrimental impact on this priority.

“We therefore believe it was only right to raise initial concerns at the release of the material. We then supported Gateshead Council’s Children’s Services, with their formal representation to the judge in this case.

“The decision to release materials is ultimately in the hands of the judge and we respect the ruling they have made.”