Judge Upholds Anonymity for Wolverhampton Machete Attack Murderers

[Social Media]

 

A judge has upheld the anonymity of two 12-year-old boys found guilty of the brutal murder of Shawn Seesahai in Wolverhampton. The court rejected a media application to name the young convicts, emphasizing that their welfare outweighed the principles of public interest and open justice. The case has drawn significant attention due to the shocking nature of the crime and the tender age of the perpetrators, who are among the youngest defendants convicted of murder in Britain since the notorious case of Robert Thompson and Jon Venables in 1993.

 

 

The tragic incident occurred on November 13th of the previous year, in the Stowlawn playing fields of Wolverhampton. Nineteen-year-old Shawn Seesahai was fatally attacked, sustaining a machete wound to the heart and a skull fracture. The court heard that the attack lasted scarcely more than a minute, yet resulted in devastating injuries. One of the boys used a machete to inflict severe wounds on Seesahai’s legs and heart, while the other punched and stamped on his head. Seesahai's injuries were catastrophic: his back and legs were slashed, his skull was fractured, and a 23cm-deep machete wound pierced through his right lung and heart, nearly exiting his chest.

 

 

Four media organizations—PA news agency, ITN, NewsCorp, and Associated Newspapers—argued that the anonymity granted to the defendants under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act should be lifted. They cited significant public interest and the need for open justice. Jude Bunting KC, representing three of the media organizations, contended that the murder fell into a category of high public interest, involving the prevalent issue of knife crime. He asserted that naming the boys would enable the media to investigate potential institutional failures and better inform public debate.

 

However, Mrs. Justice Tipples, presiding over the case at Nottingham Crown Court, rejected the application. She accepted the evidence contained in pre-sentence reports and from social workers, which indicated that naming the boys would have a severely detrimental impact on their welfare. One of the defendants, still aged 12, was described as vulnerable with extremely complex needs, and identifying him was said to have an extremely detrimental impact on his mental health. The other boy, who turned 13 after the conviction, was similarly at risk of negative attention within the custodial setting if his identity were disclosed.

 

In her ruling, Mrs. Justice Tipples acknowledged the shocking nature of the killing, given the very young age of the defendants. However, she emphasized that the welfare of the youths, who both face mandatory life sentences, outweighed the broader public interest and principles of open justice. The judge noted that the evidence from social workers and pre-sentence reports was compelling, demonstrating that naming the boys would significantly harm their mental health and safety.

 

Defense counsel Rachel Brand KC and Paul Lewis KC opposed the media application, underscoring the importance of prioritizing the boys' welfare over public interest. Brand argued that the welfare of the boy who is still 12 should be given heavier consideration than public interest factors. Lewis, representing the boy who has turned 13, urged the court to focus on the specific facts of Seesahai’s killing rather than abstract principles from previous cases. He questioned how naming the two boys would better inform public debate, stating, "There is no evidence that to name two 12-year-olds would provide any deterrent."

 

The victim’s family had expressed the belief that the boys should be named. However, Mrs. Justice Tipples focused on the particular needs of the young defendants and the compelling evidence regarding their welfare. The decision underscores the court's commitment to safeguarding the welfare of young offenders, even in the face of severe public scrutiny and media interest.

 

Following the judgment, Jude Bunting KC acknowledged that an appeal against the ruling in a higher court was unlikely. He had previously submitted that the murder was within a category identified during a previous case as having a high public interest, noting the substantial public concern surrounding knife crime. However, the judge's decision to prioritize the welfare of the young defendants over public interest considerations reflects the nuanced and complex nature of justice in cases involving juvenile offenders.

 

The youths are due to be sentenced in September, with their identities remaining protected to safeguard their welfare as mandated by the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act. The case highlights the ongoing tension between the principles of open justice and the need to protect vulnerable young offenders, raising important questions about how society balances these competing interests.

 

Credit: The Guardian  2024-08-03

 

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

Cigna offers a variety of health insurance plans designed to meet the minimum requirement for medical treatment coverage, with benefits reaching up to THB 3 million. These plans are tailored to provide comprehensive healthcare solutions for expatriates, ensuring peace of mind and access to quality medical services. To explore the full range of Cigna's expat health insurance options and find a plan that suits your needs, click here for more information.

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, Social Media said:

A judge has upheld the anonymity of two 12-year-old boys found guilty of the brutal murder of Shawn Seesahai in Wolverhampton.

But their pictures were posted?

[Pique Dard]

2 hours ago, Social Media said:

The case highlights the ongoing tension between the principles of open justice and the need to protect vulnerable young offenders, raising important questions about how society balances these competing interests.

In my humble opinion, it's the need to protect the victims that's the priority, not the so-called young offenders .
True to me, I also reject the adjective "vulnerable" applied to these criminals.

[stevenl]

36 minutes ago, Pique Dard said:

In my humble opinion, it's the need to protect the victims that's the priority, not the so-called young offenders .
True to me, I also reject the adjective "vulnerable" applied to these criminals.

Naming the boys won't protect the victims.

[mikeymike100]

" The decision underscores the court's commitment to safeguarding the welfare of young offenders, even in the face of severe public scrutiny and media interest. "

 

So don't they give up heir rights to welfare, when they commit murder? What about the victim's rights?

[Grusa]

In my view, it would be kinder to everyone to simply terminate them, than to incarcerate them for "life". Naming them is not then a welfare issue.

Others guilty in similar circumstances have  not fared well in their later lives.

[impulse]

If they released the names, it would allow a thorough look into their family backgrounds and when they came to be in the country.  And under what circumstances.

 

We can't have that...

 

[nglodnig]

If he will be sentenced to life imprisonment what difference does it make? He's hardly likely to be be pointed out on the street......

 

[JonnyF]

4 hours ago, impulse said:

If they released the names, it would allow a thorough look into their family backgrounds and when they came to be in the country.  And under what circumstances.

 

We can't have that...

 

 

Exactly. We all know the reason their names will not be released. It contradicts the mantra of cultural enrichment. 

 

You can bet if it was Katie Hopkin's son you'd know exactly who it was. 

[James105]

1 hour ago, nglodnig said:

If he will be sentenced to life imprisonment what difference does it make? He's hardly likely to be be pointed out on the street......

 

 

12 year olds do not get life imprisonment, no matter how heinous the crime.  Jon Venables, one of the two 10 year olds that tortured and killed two year old Jamie Bulger served just 8 years in jail for this crime, so was 18 years old when he was released. 

[cncltd1973]

I wonder if they are secretive because it's tied to migrants or muslims in some way. looks like England can't take another hate crime without bursting into flames

[Will B Good]

10 hours ago, Srikcir said:

But their pictures were posted?

Where?

[john donson]

adult crime should mean adult punishment