The death of the former Conservative minister and ex-Reform UK spokeswoman is now being investigated by counter-terrorism police
The death of 78-year-old Ann Widdecombe would have been surprising no matter the circumstances. The former Conservative minister and ex-Reform UK spokeswoman appeared to be in good health, giving an interview just minutes before her suspected killing.
Yet, it is the nature of her death – now being investigated by counter-terrorism police – that is particularly staggering.
Counter-terrorism police, who took over the investigation from Devon and Cornwall police, have now said that Widdicombe was killed in a “targeted attack”. But before this detail was confirmed, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage came under fire for telling reporters his beliefs about the nature of the attack. He has continued to speak publicly on the case, telling TalkTV that the prime minister and Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall Police both told him about the circumstances of the incident.
In such a high-profile case, there is a real temptation to speculate on the details or motivations of her death by those in the media, by other politicians or even on social media by the general public.
Senior policing figures have asked the public not to engage in such speculation, as it might be unhelpful for the investigation and distressing for Widdecombe’s family. Downing Street has also warned against speculating because of the importance of protecting the “integrity” of the investigation.
Such speculation may also amount to a contempt of court. Contempt of court refers to several laws which help to maintain the authority and impartiality of the trial process. It includes laws which prohibit the taking of photographs in court or the disruption of court proceedings, and those which make it unlawful to breach orders of the court.
The type of contempt likely to be committed by speculation about Widdecombe’s death is known as “contempt by publication”. It occurs when published material creates a substantial risk that legal proceedings will be seriously impeded or prejudiced.
This type of contempt may only be committed when proceedings are “active”. For criminal cases, this is when there is an arrest without warrant; a warrant is issued for an arrest; a summons is issued; there is service of an indictment or other document specifying the charge; or an individual is orally charged with an offence.
Such proceedings remain active until there is a conviction and sentence, discontinuance, acquittal or “other verdict, finding, order or decision which puts an end to the proceedings”.
At the time of writing, a 28-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of killing Widdecombe. This means that proceedings in the case are active, and that a publication which might prejudice or impede them may amount to a contempt.
John McGarry is a Senior Lecturer in Law at Leeds Beckett University.
This article was first published by The Conversation and is republished under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.