Crime copy gets published at speed, often with a police press officer on one line and a desk asking for the story five minutes ago. That pressure is exactly why a checklist earns its keep. Contempt, defamation, privacy and reporting restrictions are separate legal risks, and a story can clear one and stumble into another. Here are ten checks worth running before you hit publish on anything involving an alleged offence, an arrest or a court case in England and Wales.

None of this is a substitute for advice from a media lawyer, and on a contested story you should have one on speed dial. Treat this as the routine that stops obvious problems reaching the desk in the first place.

1. Find out exactly which court, if any, is involved

The single most useful question is also the bluntest: has anyone been charged, and at which court? A police station, a magistrates' court and the Crown Court all come with different rules and different timings.

Contempt of court bites hardest once proceedings are "active" — broadly, from arrest, the issue of a warrant or summons, or the service of an indictment, depending on the case. From that moment, anything you publish that creates a substantial risk of serious prejudice or impediment to those proceedings can land you in trouble, regardless of whether you meant it.

That means no interviews with witnesses setting out what they saw, no reconstructions of the prosecution case, no photographs of a defendant that suggest guilt, and no detailed account of an alleged confession. Keep a note of the date the case became active and who told you.

2. Establish precisely what has been alleged, and by whom

Vagueness is where libel claims are born. "A man from Leeds has been arrested in connection with the death of..." is not the same as naming someone and describing the crime. If you do name a person, make sure every factual assertion about them is either provably true, protected by absolute privilege as a fair and accurate report of court proceedings, or clearly attributed opinion.

Remember that defamation in England and Wales still puts the burden on the publisher to defend what it wrote. Two quick tests help:

• How would an ordinary reader understand this sentence? Meaning comes from the whole piece, plus any headline, standfirst, picture caption and social media post.
• Can I prove this in court with documents, recordings or witnesses I can actually produce?

Headlines live in their own risk zone. A piece of careful copy under an overexcited headline is a problem waiting to happen, because the headline carries its own defamatory meaning.

3. Check the anonymity position for every individual

Reporting restrictions are not one rule but several, and they attach to different people at different times.

Complainants in sexual offence cases

Automatic lifetime anonymity applies to alleged complainants in sexual offences. It is not optional, it does not depend on the case reaching court, and it survives an acquittal. Jigsaw identification matters: a combination of details — a job, a street, a family relationship — can be enough to identify someone even without a name.

Children and young people

Restrictions apply in youth courts and there are statutory provisions protecting under-18s in adult proceedings. They can lapse in certain circumstances, such as when a young person turns 18, but assuming they have gone is a mistake.

Other orders in force

Judges can impose orders postponing reporting of a trial, restricting details of a hearing held in private, or protecting witnesses. Ask the court clerk or the prosecution what is in force and get the exact terms. If you are unsure of the wording, ask before you file.

4. Look again at how you describe anyone not convicted

Language carries legal weight. "Arrested on suspicion of" is not "responsible for", and neither is the same as "charged with". "Acquitted" means acquitted — not "cleared on a technicality" unless a court or a reliable source has said precisely that.

Be careful with the word "paedophile", "fraudster" or "killer" applied to someone before conviction. Ask yourself whether the article, read by a stranger, leaves the impression that this person did it. If the honest answer is yes, rewrite.

5. Audit your archive and social output

Old copy is live copy. A 2019 story about an arrest that never led to a charge is still being read today, and it may still be actionable. Before publishing a fresh story about the same person, check what you have already published, what has been updated, and whether a Correction or clarification is needed elsewhere.

The same goes for social posts, newsletters and syndicated versions. If a story is amended, amend it everywhere it appears, and keep a record of what changed and when.

6. Interrogate your sourcing and your notes

Two independent sources for a serious allegation is the classic baseline, but the real test is whether each source can withstand scrutiny. A neighbour who heard a rumour is not the same as someone with direct knowledge.

Interviews with victims or witnesses during an active case need particular care. Their accounts may differ from the evidence and may create a substantial risk of prejudice. Speak to a lawyer before publishing anything that rehearses the prosecution case, even in general terms.

7. Consider privacy and data protection as separate issues

Even where a story is true and privileged, there can be a privacy claim. Health information, sexual life, family details, grief, addresses and images taken in private places all attract protection. There is a public interest defence, but it must be argued and evidenced, not assumed.

Ask what personal detail genuinely advances the story. If a paragraph identifies someone but adds nothing to the reader's understanding of the crime, cut it. Photographs matter too: a picture of a family home, a hospital entrance or a grieving relative at a door is a privacy risk, not just a colour detail.

8. Review images, documents and court listings

Court lists are a wonderful tool and a trap. Names on a list can be wrong, charges can be amended, and a listing may not reflect what actually happened in the hearing. Don't write from the list alone.

For photographs, confirm you have the right person before you publish a face. A mistaken picture attached to a crime story is one of the most damaging errors a newsroom can make. Check footage for background detail — a street sign, a car registration, a house number — that could identify a protected person.

9. Read it once as a defence lawyer

Before publishing, read the piece as if you were acting for the person you have written about. Note every assertion, every implication and every unflattering adjective. That exercise often surfaces the sentence you should remove.

10. Plan the correction before you need it

Decide, in advance, who checks legal risks on this story, who has authority to hold it, and how quickly a correction or update can be published. Keep your notes, recordings and correspondence in a form you could hand over. If something does go wrong, prompt removal or amendment and a clear correction is usually the right first move — but speak to a lawyer before you act.

A practical closing routine

Keep a short checklist on the wall next to the subs' desk. Court and stage of proceedings; precise nature of the allegation; anonymity and reporting orders; wording about unconvicted people; archive check; sourcing notes; privacy judgement; images and documents; a hostile read-through; and a named person responsible for sign-off.

If a story touches a live case and you are not certain, hold it. Twenty minutes with a lawyer is cheaper than a contempt application or a libel claim. And when the law is genuinely unclear, take professional legal advice rather than relying on a rule of thumb from a busy newsroom.

Photo: KATRIN BOLOVTSOVA / Pexels