No idea about Swedish law, or the way that this would work in England or Scotland. If it was the case that leaking made a case untryable I'd expect a lot more leaks to happen, because it would very much be in some people's interests.
Maybe it's just when it gets reported in newspapers then, it becomes a crime for the newspapers to have published material that they should not have. I know when a trial is completed, suddenly lots of stuff is cleared to appear in the news. Like the Sheridan trial, as soon as the jury delivered their verdict, the news agencies were green lighted to publish lots of material they had obtained.
I'm honestly not sure. But I think there is the same injunction. If somebody publishes confidential material relating to an ongoing prosecution, they can be charged with contempt of court.
That would certainly be the case if the court had jurisdiction over the person who published the material. But if they are say in another country, it gets far less likely any action could be taken against them for publishing information that is sub judice.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
Maybe it's just when it gets reported in newspapers then, it becomes a crime for the newspapers to have published material that they should not have. I know when a trial is completed, suddenly lots of stuff is cleared to appear in the news. Like the Sheridan trial, as soon as the jury delivered their verdict, the news agencies were green lighted to publish lots of material they had obtained.
no subject
no subject
But I may well be wrong.
no subject