Skip to main content

Attribution in Crime Reporting

Getting attribution right in crime reporting is both a legal and an ethical obligation. This guide covers the correct terminology at each stage of proceedings, the absolute and qualified privilege defences, the fair-and-accurate test, and the common errors that lead to defamation claims and regulatory complaints.

Last reviewed: Next review due:

Why attribution matters in crime reporting

Crime reporting touches on the most serious allegations that can be made about a person: that they committed a criminal offence. The consequences of inaccurate or misleading attribution are significant — financially (defamation claims), legally (contempt of court), and ethically (IPSO complaints and reputational damage to the outlet).

The law provides strong protection for court reporters through absolute privilege — but that protection depends on the report being genuinely fair and accurate, and genuinely contemporaneous. Get the attribution wrong and you may find that the privilege you relied on does not apply.

McNae's Essential Law for Journalists (Oxford University Press) remains the standard reference for UK journalists on attribution and court reporting. Every reporter covering courts should have access to a current edition.

Correct terminology at each stage of proceedings

Before arrest"A person" or a description without naming

Where police have not arrested or named a suspect, you should not name them or give details that would identify them. Publishing an identification before arrest and charge raises serious defamation risk — there may be no privilege, and you have no courtroom attribution to rely on.

Under investigation / arrest without charge"A [age]-year-old man was arrested in connection with..."

Police can confirm an arrest. You should not name the individual unless they have been publicly identified by police or they are a public figure whose arrest is plainly a matter of public interest. Even then, use language that clearly states they have not been charged.

Charged"X has been charged with..." / "A man charged with..."

Once charged and before the court, a person can generally be named. Use "charged with" — not "accused of committing" (which implies guilt) and never "convicted of" at this stage.

During trial"The defendant" / "The accused" / "[Name], who denies the charge..."

During proceedings use "defendant" or "the accused". Always include a denial or the plea. "X, 42, who pleads not guilty to [charge]" is more accurate than simply stating the charge as if uncontested.

After conviction"X was convicted of..." / "X was found guilty of..."

After conviction, the person is "convicted". Use "convicted" after a jury verdict. After a guilty plea, use "pleaded guilty to" — a guilty plea is not the same as being "found guilty" after trial, and the distinction matters for readers.

After acquittal"X was acquitted of..." / "X was found not guilty of..."

An acquittal must be reported accurately. Do not use language that implies guilt despite the verdict. Avoid headlines such as "X cleared" which can read ambiguously — "X acquitted" or "jury finds X not guilty" is clearer.

Absolute privilege — Defamation Act 2013, section 14

Section 14 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides a complete defence to defamation for a fair and accurate report of proceedings in public before any court in the UK, published contemporaneously. The three conditions are all required:

  • Proceedings in public: The hearing must have been open — not held in private, chambers, or under a reporting restriction that would prevent publication. If the hearing was in private, absolute privilege does not apply even if you somehow attended.
  • Fair and accurate: The report must convey a substantially correct impression of what happened. It need not be verbatim but must not omit anything material that would change the reader's understanding of the proceedings.
  • Published contemporaneously: On the day of the proceedings, or at the earliest practicable time thereafter. A feature published weeks after the proceedings does not attract absolute privilege — only the weaker qualified privilege.

Qualified privilege — Defamation Act 2013, section 15

Section 15 and Schedule 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 provide qualified privilege for:

  • Reports of proceedings in public before any court in the UK — even if not contemporaneous.
  • Reports of proceedings in public before courts outside the UK.
  • Reports of findings or decisions of public regulatory and disciplinary bodies.
  • Reports of proceedings at public meetings on matters of public concern.

Qualified privilege can be defeated by proof of malice — intentional publication of a false statement knowing it to be false, or with reckless disregard for its truth. The report must still be fair and accurate. If the publication makes a false, malicious addition to what was said in court, the privilege is lost for that element.

Common attribution errors

  • "Admitted" — only use this word after a guilty plea or proven admission. "Admitted" implies acceptance of guilt, not mere charge.
  • "Evil" / "monster" / "predator" — these descriptions are prejudicial and generally inaccurate before conviction. IPSO has upheld complaints about prejudicial characterisation before trial.
  • "Cleared" — often read as implying that the acquitted person probably was guilty but got off. Prefer "acquitted" or "found not guilty".
  • Present tense for allegations: "X, who is a rapist" — only after conviction. Pre-conviction: "X, who is accused of rape".
  • Describing a charge as a "crime" before conviction — a charge is an allegation. A crime is something a court has found proved.
  • Publishing the sentence before the conviction — in breaking-news coverage, always state the conviction first.
  • Headline says "convicted" when the story makes clear there was a guilty plea — be specific.

The right to respond

IPSO's Editors' Code clause 1 (Accuracy) requires that inaccuracies are corrected and that significant omissions are avoided. For crime stories involving serious allegations, best practice — and often the most legally protective approach — is to give the subject of the allegations an opportunity to respond before publication.

While a fair and accurate court report attracts absolute privilege regardless of whether you sought a response, a response can: improve accuracy; establish facts that affect whether a story should be published; and in the event of a complaint, demonstrate that you acted responsibly. Always document your approach and any response received.

Jurisdiction note:Absolute privilege under the Defamation Act 2013 s.14 covers courts in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. In Scotland, the equivalent common law privilege for court reports operates similarly. In Northern Ireland, the same Act applies. The IPSO Editors' Code clauses on accuracy and court reporting apply to all regulated UK publications regardless of where the proceedings took place.

Related guides

Contempt: Active Proceedings
When the strict liability rule applies and what you cannot publish.
Magistrates Court Daily Practice
How to use correct terminology in everyday magistrates court coverage.
Crown Court Reporting
Attribution at each stage of a Crown Court trial.
Court Reporting Guide UK
The complete guide to covering UK courts from scratch.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between "suspect", "accused", and "defendant"?
"Suspect" is the correct term for a person who police believe may have committed an offence but who has not yet been charged. "Accused" or "defendant" is used once a person has been charged and appears in court. Once a person has been convicted, they are "the convicted" or simply named as having been convicted of the specific offence. Using "convicted" before a verdict is a serious error that can found a defamation claim. The distinction matters most in pre-charge reporting.
When should I use "alleged" or "police say"?
"Alleged" should be used for any offence that has not been proved in court — whether at the pre-charge, charge, or trial stage. It is not needed after conviction. "Police say" or "prosecutors say" is appropriate when repeating a claim made by those parties; it attributes the statement rather than adopting it as fact. You should use "alleged" and attribution together in most pre-conviction crime stories. The word "alleged" is not a magic talisman — placing it in a headline does not make a defamatory assertion non-defamatory if the overall impression is that the person is guilty.
What is absolute privilege for court reports?
Section 14 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides that a fair and accurate report of proceedings in public before any court in the UK, published contemporaneously, attracts absolute privilege. This is the strongest defence in defamation law — it cannot be defeated even by proof of malice or deliberate unfairness. The conditions are: (1) the proceedings must have been in public; (2) the report must be fair and accurate; and (3) the report must be published contemporaneously (on the same day or at the earliest reasonable opportunity). Reporting a conviction months later does not attract absolute privilege — only qualified privilege under s.15.
What does "fair and accurate" mean in practice?
A report is "fair" if the overall impression it gives is not misleading — it does not selectively omit information that would materially change the reader's perception. A report is "accurate" if the factual statements it contains are correct. The report need not be verbatim — a fair summary satisfies both conditions. If a defence submission is made and you do not include it, but only report the prosecution case, the report may not be "fair" even if each fact stated is accurate. Best practice is to include both sides of any contested issue.
What happens if I repeat an allegation made in court?
If you are reporting what was said in open court contemporaneously, absolute privilege protects you even if the allegation is false and defamatory, provided the report is fair and accurate. If you are repeating the allegation outside that context — for example, re-publishing a court allegation in a feature written months later — you need qualified privilege (s.15 Defamation Act 2013) or another defence. Always distinguish between reporting what was said in court (privileged) and independently asserting the allegation as true (potentially defamatory if false).

Related guides

Media LawContempt: Active ProceedingsRead →Media LawReporting Restrictions OverviewRead →Court ReportingMagistrates Court Daily PracticeRead →Court ReportingCrown Court Reporting in DetailRead →BeatsCourt & Justice Reporting BeatRead →GuidesCourt Reporting Guide UKRead →

Primary sources

Not legal advice. This guide is for educational purposes. Consult a qualified media lawyer before making publication decisions in legally sensitive situations.