News24

Court protects Chanelle Henning's child

2012-01-24 20:31

Pretoria - The North Gauteng High Court has prohibited the further publication of photos or film footage of a Pretoria child whose mother, Chanelle Henning, was shot dead last year.

It granted an order to this effect after an application by Corné Lindeque, a court-appointed lawyer for the child.

Judge Andre Louw also prohibited publication - in print or by television footage - of any information relating to the investigation of issues relating to the care, contact and residency of the child.

He ordered the order be served on all major newspaper publishers and gave any party affected by the order until March 6 to give reasons why a final order should not be granted.

Henning was shot by two men on a motorbike on November 8 after she dropped off her child at a crèche in Faerie Glen, east of Pretoria.

Lindeque brought the application to avoid further exposure of the child in the media, following the bail application this week of Andre Gouws, one of five men arrested in connection with the murder of the child's mother.

Lindeque's application was supported by the child’s father and maternal grandparents.

Lindeque said in an affidavit that a media storm had raged around the child and family following the mother's death.

Photos depicting the child with the mother were accessed by the media immediately after the killing, printed and shown on television on numerous occasions, she said.

"Not only was a very young child exposed to public scrutiny... but insensitive and incorrect reporting of the details of the parent’s acrimonious divorce action only contributed to the sensation of the event."

Lindeque said the child was in therapy to deal with the trauma of the mother's death.

The child "needs protection from any psychological harm".

Comments
  • Squeegee - 2012-01-24 20:36

    Protect the child further, arrest the father.

      Leendert - 2012-01-24 23:55

      Well, only if the father is actually involved which doesn't seem clear yet, one way or the other.

  • Clive - 2012-01-24 20:47

    why wait till 6 March to make the order final. It should come into effect immediately !!

      lwazi.yekela - 2012-01-24 21:55

      One of the downsides of a constitutional democracy... I'm guessing a judge cannot just hinder press freedom like that and has to give enough time for people to contest this, oh and rest assured there are some crooked reporters out there who are gonna contest this ruling even though it's clearly for good reasons...

  • Sam - 2012-01-24 21:11

    Dear God, is there one single person in South Africa who does not know who orchestrated this murder? When is he going to be arrested and sent to jail for the rest of his useless life without parole? Are the police and prosecutors stupid or asleep? He's used to a comfortable life -- put him in a louse-infested cell, give him one very thin blanket and wake him every hour for a friendly chat until he goes psychotic for lack of sleep and spills the beans. He is actually willing to let others go to jail for him -- make sure that the huge rewards he promised them can never be paid by forcing him to appoint the most expensive lawyers in the country that he can't afford (He is stupid and arrogant enough to do this). Can it be so difficult to rumble this piece of excrement? Or must the community deal with him?

  • Hadassah57 - 2012-01-25 10:04

    Makes one wonder what his mom was protecting him from in the long custody battle!

  • Jose - 2012-01-25 10:13

    these reporters can also be heartless vultures with no consideration for the traumatised boy

      Harry - 2012-01-26 00:22

      And by the sound of it, there was a hole lot of wrong reporting going on about the facts of their divorce and custody battle, according to the little boys lawyer. That then make you wonder how correct the rest of the reporting is!! Think we will have to wait and see what happens in court if we want the real facts in this case.

  • pages:
  • 1