Two articles published in Daily Sun, entitled “One mistake!” (20/04/2010, p. 1) and “Abandoned by boozing Mum”, (20/04/2010, p. 4) together with another article published in The Star, “Arson accused walks away scot-free”, (20/04/2010, p. 2); were selected as MAD OAT Mads for the gratuitous identification of two child witnesses (Daily Sun and The Star)and three children who were abandoned by their mother (Daily Sun).

Of the two articles that identified child witnesses, the first one entitled “One mistake!” from Daily Sun, reported on the shooting of a mother to an 11-year-old boy, who had witnessed the brutal murder. The mother’s boyfriend reportedly, made a mistake by calling her by another woman’s name. “Things went completely mad! After a bitter argument he first shot her stone dead and then blew his own head off!” the article stated.

It is apparent that the child was at the scene when the alleged incident took place as his grandmother stated, “He [my daughter’s boyfriend] pulled out his service pistol and shot my daughter – in front of me and her 11-year-old son.” Even though the alleged perpetrator (the mother’s boyfriend) is dead, the child is still a witness as criminal proceedings, for which investigations will take place.

The article; however, provided a photograph of the child – sitting with his grandmother – which was accompanied by his name.

The second article entitled “Arson accused walks away scot-free” came from The Star and reported on the acquittal of a woman accused of the murder of five family members and the attempted murder of five others. She was alleged to have poured turpentine in the lounge of their family home and set it alight, supposedly “following a fierce fight with her brother-in-law”.

One of the victims, a nine year-old family-member, testified against the woman (his aunt) claiming that he saw her “pouring turpentine in the kitchen, toilet, passage and lounge before setting their house on fire and fleeing.” However, “In rejecting his version, the court found there were no traces of turpentine in the other rooms except the lounge where the fire started,” the article reported.

The boy who reportedly “was left disfigured with serious burn wounds to his body and head,” and, although clearly a child witness, was named in the article and a picture of him was also provided. Confusingly, the child was unidentifiable in the picture, presumably in attempts to protect his identity, yet he was still named in the caption and the article.
Identifying both the children in the two articles by Daily Sun and The Star failed to act in their best interests. The children were both child witnesses and tragically lost family members under traumatic circumstances. In addition, the child who testified against his aunt stands a risk of being humiliated and victimised as his name was made public knowledge alongside his claims, which were reportedly unfounded in court.

Child witnesses should not be identified as they are protected under Section 154(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act which states:
“No person shall publish in any manner whatever information which reveals or may reveal the identity of the accused under the age of 18 years or of a witness at criminal proceedings who is under the age of 18 years.”

On another note of concern, three children who were abandoned by their mother were identified in another article published by Daily Sun. The mother is alleged to have gone drinking, leaving the children aged three, five and 12 – alone for two weeks.

The youngest was “crying and kept asking (the eldest) if there was food for him in the pot,” the article reported. The eldest was forced to take on the role as head-of-household and reportedly cooked for his siblings and bathed them.

Child abandonment is a form of child neglect which constitutes as the abuse of a child under the law. Consequently, abandoned children cannot be identified in the media as they are victims of child abuse.

Daily Sun, however, named the three children, provided two pictures of the eldest child, including one where he was holding his youngest sibling who was crying at the time. Furthermore, the newspaper interviewed the eldest child and provided the name of his school and grade level. This was not in the best interest of any of the three children.

Media have the responsibility to exercise caution when reporting on vulnerable children, to avoid subjecting them to further trauma or intimidation.

We urge Daily Sun and The Star to not identify child witnesses or victims.