Press Council Adjudication

The Press Council found its Standards of Practice were not breached by an article about the treatment ofpeople found not guilty due to mental illness in criminal proceedings.

The Australian Press Council

The Press Council has considered whether its Standards of Practice were breached by a front page article published in The Daily Telegraph on 1 April 2017, headed “SECRET LIVES OF BRUTAL KILLERS — Mental health justice system puts monsters on the streets”. The full report was on pages six and seven, headed “KILLERS AND RAPIST ARE BEING FREED IN SECRECY”. The article was also published online on 31 March 2017, headed “Mental Act review demand: Telegraph calls for changes to law that allows details suppression”.

The article began: “HUNDREDS of the state’s most vile and vicious criminals are being secretly protected by the state with their fate and whereabouts unknown. Under secretive laws designed to protect criminals deemed to be mentally ill — many of them killers and rapists — all details about their treatment and incarceration are suppressed, including the identity of their victims”. It commented on decisions made by the Mental Health Review Tribunal to release into the community some of the 460 forensic patients for which it is responsible. It provided what was described as “sickening examples” of the acts committed by those deemed to be mentally ill. The article reported on concerns about the treatment of people whose actions would have constituted a criminal offence if not for the defence of mental illness, and who were released into the community. The Council noted such persons were found to have committed the act alleged but were found not guilty. While the Mental Health Review Tribunal would have been aware of a range of information about such persons, the Council noted that they were released into the community and their release was not made public by the Tribunal at the time. Accordingly, the Council considered that the publication took reasonable steps to ensure the material published was accurate and not misleading, and reasonably fair and balanced, in describing them as criminals whose whereabouts were unknown.

The Council noted that the Mental Health Tribunal’s Annual Report for 2016—17, which was issued after the article appeared, reported that there were 149 such forensic patients released into the community. The Council considered that referring to “hundreds” was an accurate description, not misleading and reasonably fair and balanced.

Accordingly, the Council concluded that the publication did not breach General Principles 1 or 3. Given its conclusions regarding General Principles 1 and 3, the publication also did not breach General Principles 2 and 4.

For the full Adjudication, see: http://www.presscouncil.org.au/document-search/adj-1745.