Outside of BBC Broadcasting House (Image: Getty)
A high-profile trial of a woman accused of illegally aborting her baby collapsed due to “appalling and sloppy” reporting by the , a judge has said.
Sophie Harvey, 25, previously stood trial accused of procuring her own miscarriage when she was 19.
Prosecutors alleged she took the medication after learning she was at 28 weeks and five days gestation – meaning she could not get a legal abortion in England as she was beyond the 24-week cut-off.
Harvey and her boyfriend Elliot Benham, 25, always accepted they had purchased abortion pills online.
But Harvey insisted she had never taken them and instead gave birth to a stillborn child in the bathroom of her home in Cirencester, Gloucestershire, in September 2018.
The trial took place at Gloucester Crown Court (Image: Google)
The couple stood trial at Gloucester Crown Court in May of this year but the jury was discharged by a judge following an application by their lawyers who cited inaccurate reports of the proceedings by the corporation.
During a hearing held in the absence of the jury, the court heard the opening headlines of the Points West edition of Thursday May 16 had shown archive footage of a property in Cirencester with a tent and scenes of crime officers working and stated: “The remains were found in the garden.”
Later, in the report of that day’s trial proceedings in which Harvey had given evidence, a journalist said in a piece to camera she had taken the pill.
Tom Godfrey, representing Harvey, applied for the jury to be discharged due to the reporting, saying it would go to the issue of his client’s credibility as she maintained she did not take the abortion pill.
“The prosecution maintain she is lying. It is that issue which the jury will have to decide – whether she is a liar and is not being honest,” he said.
Referring to the ’s opening remarks, he said: “That is a wholly false statement. It is wholly untrue by someone at the .“It is a terrible error.
“It is not disputed by the Crown… Miss Harvey’s case is that following the stillbirth she disposed of the baby in the bin. There is no suggestion of what happened to that baby is untrue. The Crown’s case is that she has been untruthful about taking the pills – not what happened afterwards.
“This was the . This was not a Facebook post or a Snapchat and not viewed by a couple of people. This is a headline piece going out on the at 6.30pm – the opening headline to the news.
“It is, I am afraid, unforgiveable that such an egregious error was made. If any members of the jury saw the news or have been asked about it would question her integrity because what they heard on the news is completely contrary to what Sophie Harvey told them all that day, it follows they will question what they have not been told about the footage of the search and the tent.
“All of that has the potential to prejudice the jury against Sophie Harvey. The concern is that Sophie Harvey was lying because she told us she had put the baby in the bin, but we have heard on the news that she didn’t. It is denting the credibility of Sophie Harvey.”
Anna Vigars KC, representing the Crown, opposed the application and said the errors could be corrected to the jury by a “robust direction”.
In rising to consider the application, Judge Ian Lawrie KC, the Recorder of Gloucester, said it was “not appealing” to highlight the errors to the jury in a judicial direction.
“I want to think about it and, whatever I decide, it was appalling and sloppy reporting from the .”
Agreeing with the application to dismiss the jury, the judge said: “The reporting was not just an error – it was misleading and false – and therefore the defendants’ credibility is at issue.
“The more I say, the more it highlights the issue. Whatever I say in setting out the false picture, it opens it up as an issue, which I do not think can be resolved with a robust direction.
“I have no option but to discharge this jury which I do with a heavy heart.”
Afterwards the apologised in court for the mistakes, which was accepted by the judge.
A new trial was fixed for February 2025 but in a hearing last week, Harvey and Benham pleaded guilty to a new offence of conspiracy to procure a poison with intent to procure a miscarriage.
Harvey, of St Mary’s Road, Cirencester, Gloucestershire, and Benham, of Wingfield, Swindon, Wiltshire, had previously admitted a charge of concealing the birth of a child.
Other offences, which they had denied, including procuring a poison, procuring a miscarriage by poison and perverting the course of justice, were ordered to lie on file.
Judge Lawrie imposed 18-month community orders on the pair.
In addition, Harvey was given a mental health treatment requirement while Benham was told to complete 150 hours of unpaid work. Both were told to pay a £114 surcharge.
A spokeswoman said: “The apologised to the court for the unintentional errors in some of our reporting of the trial in May 2024.
“Our apology was accepted by the judge hearing the case.”