Sydney reporter Krystal Johnson could face contempt of court charge over murder trial article

A young journalist could be face contempt of court charges after publishing an article about a murder trial. Sydney-based reporter Krystal Johnson has ignored publishing protocols, therefore inadvertently causing a murder trial to be aborted.

Johnson, a Yahoo 7 News reporter, could be jailed for publishing an article online about a Supreme Court murder trial, which contained information that had not yet been presented to the jury. She has lifted some parts of a Herald Sun report, added a Facebook post and included other information that could be potentially prejudicial to the then-active case.

Her article should have been reviewed by her sub-editor, but as the sub-editor was busy, she published it online herself. The murder trial has since been aborted, and the jury discharged. A new murder trial is set for Dec. 7.

On Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Lex Lasry said Johnson’s explanation “strains credibility.” The matter was referred to Director of Public Prosecution John Champion, SC, who would consider whether Johnson would be charged with contempt of court.

Johnson, who was accompanied by Yahoo editorial news editor Simon Wheeler and media lawyer Justin Quill, was “very, very disappointed in herself,” according to the Herald Sun. Quill told Justice Lasry that the reporter has admitted complete blame.

“This is human error. It’s as simple as that,” the lawyer said, asking the judge to let the matter slide.

The reporter, according to the lawyer, had been called away to cover breaking news stories as she had been preparing the murder trial article. When she returned to finished to article, Johnson, forgot that she was writing about an active jury murder trial.

Although Quill has explained that Johnson has already been vilified outside the court, Crown prosecutor Andrew Tinney SC said similar reporting errors could be made if the court let Johnson’s case slide off. Quill argued that 7 News has since implemented more training for its journalists, warning them about Johnson’s actions.

Lasry has accepted Johnson’s explanation that she had not published the article with malicious intent. However, he still referred the matter to the Public Prosecutions as the director was better equipped than him to decide on whether Johnson should be charged with contempt of court.