Analysis: Constraints on media not to publish material that could prejudice any trail

IN A case like the Jo Yeates one, considerable constraints are placed on the media not to publish any material, after the point of arrest, which could create a substantial risk of serious prejudice to any trial.

There is however, a fundamental difference of interpretation between England and Scotland as to what amounts to a substantial risk. In England, there is considerably more leeway at early junctures than we have here in Scotland.

What courts tend to do now is accept that juries are not germ-free environments, and that jurors are capable of deciding a case on the facts presented in court, rather than what they may have read in the media.

The issue becomes more critical the closer you get to the trial.

If there's a considerable period between the arrest and the actual trial, that would be to the advantage of the media as they would be less likely to be done for contempt of court.

There's also the other side of the coin, which is the risk of libel and defamation, where newspapers do what they did earlier in this case, and pillory and castigate an individual - who it appears has no role in the crime - because of his past.

That may well be the reason why, in these circumstances, police have not released the name of the man arrested.

• Campbell Deane is a media lawyer.