THE CLAYTON WEATHERSTON CASE AND BLOGS AND SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES

The Clayton Weatherston murder trial is perhaps New Zealand's worst example yet of blogs and social networking sites playing fast and loose with the laws governing court reporting and contempt of court.

Everyone has the right to a fair trial, and that's why there are rules and regulations surrounding court reporting that mainstream media have always had to follow. But how do you police the internet - how do you police blogs, and facebook and twitter? There's talk at the moment that some of the more prominent blogs and facebook sites might be targeted for legal action. This makes sense as it would serve as a reminder that the normal rules do apply even in the online world - but there's no way you could keep every blog, facebook mention and tweet about the case under control, so in the end this would be a symbolic action as much as anything.

I think it is also important that juries be constantly reminded that they are not to look at the internet during the course of a trial - and I understand this is happening these days.

The interesting thing about the Weatherston case in terms of blogging, tweeting and all, is that a lot of what is being said online is almost comic in nature (in a dark and cynical kind of way) - so you could possibly argue that it's not really the sort of thing that would influence any sensible jury member anyway. I mean if someone posted some supposed new evidence on a case online, that would be one thing, but just to poke fun at an accused and say that he seems guilty, well if I was on a jury I don't think that would change my thinking much.

It's certainly an interesting issue. I'm really not sure if the legal system can stem the giant tide that is the internet - so I do wonder where we will all end up with this one.