Alan King Hamilton describes them, are extremely circumspect in theis reporting of the Jarue Jones bribery"
They have dutifully followed the learned judge's ruling that Mr Y and Mr Z, the key witnesses, wete to be enshrouded in a cloak of anonymity. Even when harristers, or the witnesses left press must be treated in precChemselvos, accidentally let a nume slip, the 'gentlemen of the press never took advantage of it'.
Paul Foot was less circumspect, naming the worthy witnesses in lasc week's Socialist Horker, King-Ham itton has decided that publiciy pinning the nurnes of these individwals to the unpleasant sexual practIces they imposed on young women constitutes contempt. He has therefore referred the case to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Less contemptuous, as Foot pointed out in his article, is the usual practice of blazoning the bares of witteases who do not happen to be members of the ruling class across the pages of the national King-Hamilten is in Do doubt about the source of his authority. "A judge, he said, "has an inherent right to control proceedings in his court.' How such control is exercisod is well known to any member of the working class who has ever If the DPP decides to prosecate Foot and Socialisr Worker, their cause must be taken up by the catire tahour movement. Any attack on the left press by the State hus to he rexisted Attempts to impose "legal" sanctions on the contents of the isely the same manner as police harassment of those who sell these papers with contempt and active resistance