Police in Lancashire have taken a unilateral decision to stop releasing photographs of people who receive a sentence of less than a year except in "exceptional circumstances."
The constabulary's press and PR officer, Nick Evans, has suddenly issued the following statement:
"As part of our continuous review of policy and practice we have taken the decision that we will no longer be releasing custody pictures of individuals imprisoned for less than 12 months immediate custody when they are sentenced, unless there are exceptional public interest reasons for doing so.
This is for reasons of proportionality and, lesser so, demand. This new practice is effective immediately."
Journalists who deal with the force are unhappy about the decision, which they believe flies in the face of media guidelines issued by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo).
Those guidelines encourage "the release of images to the media where appropriate and at the earliest opportunity."
Jon Harris, managing director of the Manchester-based news agency, Cavendish Press, thinks the Lancashire decision "is a great pity." He asks three pertinent questions:
"Why is it 'proportionate' not to issue pictures of people who are jailed for 11 months as opposed to those who get 12 months? What does it mean by 'exceptional circumstances'. Who decides what is 'exceptional'?"
Harris, who has enjoyed good relationships with the Lancashire force, believes a request he made for a mugshot may have triggered the announcement by Evans.
He was seeking a picture of a man who featured in a story in The Times and in the Lancashire Telegraph. It told how cricketers in Accrington abandoned their game to chase, and eventually catch, a suspected thief.
Lancashire police later issued a formal statement saying "a 29-year-old man from Doncaster was being held on suspicion of theft."
In fact, the man appeared soon after in court in Blackburn - without any member of the press being present - and was sentenced to jail.
So why the change of mind by the Lancashire constabulary about releasing a picture?
Journalists in the county do not see it as a sinister attempt to subvert press freedom. It is really about cutbacks that have created a shortage of staff, said one, notably at the press office.
I certainly think he may be right. I rang the press office phone number twice this afternoon - with a 15-minute gap in between - and couldn't obtain any reply after waiting for more than five minutes on each occasion. Nor was a voicemail available to leave a message.
