![]() | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tuesday, November 11, 1997 Published at 14:57 GMT World Freed British au pair goes into hiding ![]()
Freed British au pair Louise Woodward has spent her first night for 279 days in freedom. Whisked away by her lawyers, she left the courtroom in a private car, rather than in a sheriff's van. She is with her parents but must stay in America until appeal proceedings are heard. That could take up to two years. Freedom came after the judge, Hiller Zobel, reduced her sentence after downgrading her conviction from murder to manslaughter. Both sides are appealing - the defence to clear her name, the prosecution to have her sent back to prison. Defence lawyer Barry Scheck urged reporters not to try to find his client. "Louise Woodward has no statement to make until these judicial proceedings are concluded. Please don't try to locate her. Don't try to compete for exclusives ... Don't try to find her. Please stop any invasions of her privacy." The judge has denied an immediate motion by the prosecution to have the sentence stayed and took up the defense's offer for the au pair to surrender her passport and remain in Massachusetts until the court decides she can leave. After the new sentence was passed, the au pair's attorneys said Louise was excited about being properly reunited with her family. "The reaction obviously is one of relief. Louise's time in prison has been extremely difficult for her obviously and for her family. They haven't been together outside a prison now since February, so this is a tremendous time for them to be together." The parents of eight-month-old Matthew Eappen say they could have lived with the downscaling of the conviction but cannot believe Louise has been freed. The main contenders are likely to be the Daily Mail, which has already had accesss to the Woodward family, the Sun, the biggest selling tabloid, and the News of the World. But she remains a convicted criminal, and the Editors Code of Conduct forbids payment to criminals except in cases of public interest. "In the eyes of the British public - in other words the readers of our newspaper - she is innocent, she's a victim. So therefore they'd have no problem justifying paying out large sums of money to her. That's the irony," says publicist Max Clifford. The Press Complaints Commission said it was sure editors were aware of their responsibilities under the Code of Conduct. "Payment... for stories, pictures or information should not be made... to convicted or confessed criminals or the associates, except where the material concerned ought to be published in the public interest and payment is necessary for this to be done," the Code says. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||