IT has been my view for some time that the contempt of court rules are in a mess when it comes to what newspapers can and can't publish with regard to criminal proceedings.

While national newspapers are repeatedly seen to be driving the proverbial coach and horses through the law, how are editors in the provincial press expected to know where to draw the line?

We have needed a line to be drawn in the sand and the Christopher Jeffries case has provided it.

Mr Jeffries is the innocent man who was the subject of grossly unfair reporting after he was arrested over the killing of Jo Yeates in Bristol.

I've kept the copy of the Daily Mirror because I felt it was so over the top at the time.

'Jo suspect is peeping tom' screamed the front page headline.

Hang on a minute - what about all those restrictions we had drummed into us at journalism college? What about the dangers of prejudicing a fair trial?

The Attorney General Dominic Grieve today told the High Court that The Sun and Daily Mirror were in contempt over the Jeffries case. Both papers deny the charges.

I don't think it is any exagerration to say that this is the case which will re-define the contempt of court laws for news organisations.

If the papers are found guilty, we will have a stern reminder of what is and what is not acceptable. We will have a line in the sand.

If verdict is 'not guilty', it will render the contempt of court legislation, in its present form, pretty meaningless.