Here’s my complaint to the PCC in regard to this:
Please explain how you believe the Code of Practice has been breached
This article clearly draws a comparison between benefits claimants and convicted murderers. (Accuracy)
There is also excessive intrusion into the lives of the surviving children. (Children)
No respect is given to the wider family whatsoever. (Intrusion into grief or shock)
The public interest defence of exposing crime, would be valid if the story had been dealt with paying some heed to sensitivity, and not conflated the commission of a serious crime with an area of public policy which bore no relation to the crime itself.
I would like to see a prominent front page apology from the Daily Mail, consistent with the recommendations set down in Leveson. Anything less than this is unacceptable.
Please add the clause(s) you believe to have been breached
iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.
5 Intrusion into grief or shock
i) In cases involving personal grief or shock, enquiries and approaches must be made with sympathy and discretion and publication handled sensitively. This should not restrict the right to report legal proceedings, such as inquests.
i) Young people should be free to complete their time at school without unnecessary intrusion
v) Editors must not use the fame, notoriety or position of a parent or guardian as sole justification for publishing details of a child’s private life.
9 *Reporting of Crime
(ii) Particular regard should be paid to the potentially vulnerable position of children who witness, or are victims of, crime. This should not restrict the right to report legal proceedings.