Reporting Bans.

I just wonder: It's patently clear that the reporting restrictions on Muslim Rape Gang trials have the effect of hiding the true nature of the problem.

I get that reporting on such cases if there is a reporting restriction in place would fall foul of the reporting restriction. Me: 1, TR: 0.

But... what if you were to be more general. For instance if You said at Leeds there are currently 40 trials with reporting restrictions.... Oxford has 20, Telford has 100.... etc. (Those figures being plucked out of thin air as examples, and in no way are the true numbers, even if by some mad coincidence I've stumbled on the correct numbers)...

Now, would reporting on the number of restricted cases come under contempt laws? If there were no specifics about what the case was about? Just the fact that each court had x number of restricted cases?

If a website called MRG-watch or something similar was set up, then the public would be aware of the number of restricted cases. They could then investigate further if they wished to see what each case was about if the information was public before the restriction came into force.

It's just that no-one could report about the specifics of the case.

Or does Tommy Robinson's court case change that now? Especially does it mean that even the numbers of cases cannot be discussed? Because that seems to be the fallout from the TR case: that peeved Justices will change the laws to suit their case and you may fall foul of them if they deem you to have slighted their authority.

After all, even the Police were prevented from asking for information about an absconder from the Leeds trial because of the reporting restrictions (because there is no limitation on the restriction even if it's the Police wanting to bring one of the defendants to justice).

Just musing in the back of my mind, as you do.....