Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Laura Hutton/Photocall Ireland

Poll: Should trials with disturbing evidence be held in private?

What do you think?

THE TRIAL OF Graham Dwyer attracted a ferocious amount of public interest, despite the horrific details the case contained.

On many days, crowds gathered outside the court, waiting for a garda to open the door so they could scramble for a seat.

Although the public were excluded from the courtroom while some graphic footage was shown to the jury, the majority of the trial was held in open court. However, in some jurisdictions, judges have more discretion to hold certain cases in private – something which columnist Aaron McKenna argued should have happened in this case.

We want to know what you think: Should trials with evidence of a disturbing nature be held in private?


Poll Results:

No (8094)
Yes (4994)
I don't know (896)

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
75 Comments
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.
    JournalTv
    News in 60 seconds