The team is joined by GuestKats Mirko Brüß, Rosie Burbidge, Nedim Malovic, Frantzeska Papadopolou, Mathilde Pavis, and Eibhlin Vardy
InternKats: Rose Hughes, Ieva Giedrimaite, and Cecilia Sbrolli
SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Hayleigh Bosher (Book Review Editor), and Tian Lu (Asia Correspondent).

Friday, 17 December 2004


Ananova reports on legal proceedings involving Maxine Carr, the greatly reviled former girlfriend of British double-murderer Ian Huntley. In July, Carr's lawyers obtained an order protecting her new life. The injunction currently in place bans publication of any details which could reveal her new identity, including any description of where she lives and the nature of her work. Carr, 27, was jailed a year ago for conspiring to pervert the course of justice with Huntley, who killed schoolgirls Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman.

In May, Mr Justice Eady ruled that Carr's identity needed to be kept secret for her own safety following her release on probation that month after serving half of a 42-month sentence. He said the order was "necessary and proportionate" as there was "clear evidence" of danger to her life and physical well-being - which involved Carr being advised to wear bullet-proof clothing. The media did not challenge the issue of publication, but said that the injunction was too wide in its stance on the soliciting of information; they claimed that they needed to monitor where Carr was and what she was doing as there was a public interest in knowing whether, for example, she was seeking employment in a school.

Maxine Carr: in search of a secret identity
The IPKat draws attention to the contrast between the sort of control that celebrities seek over their name, image, reputation and details of their personal life with that sought by people in Carr's position. In the former case the public's interest is an asset that the celebrity seeks to exploit for commercial gain; the need to protect against access to or use of personal information is balanced against the public's interest in knowing what the celebrity is really like. In the case of Carr and others in her position there is no question of protecting a commercial interest: Carr's interest in being safe from attack is instead being balanced against the public's interest in its own peace of mind.
Other cases of new identity for criminals here and here
New identity for convicted criminal: Les Miserables


Anonymous said...

As a mum of three i dont like the idea of her in my area (Cornwall). why are we paying for us to live in fear of her? For her own safty send her to another country and start a new life. I think no matter where she lives no one in that area will what her on their doorstep.

Anonymous said...

We Have just learnt that the woman in question is living less than 1 mile from our house!(Derbyshire) as a father of 3 children i find this an absolute disgrace and think that the public should be allowed to know where these people are instead of paying for their protection! one thought though who protects the children?

Subscribe to the IPKat's posts by email here

Just pop your email address into the box and click 'Subscribe':