Of course I am serious -its what the law states!
(a) it is lawful for the person to claim, in those circumstances, or for that purpose, on oath or otherwise, that he or she was not charged with, or convicted of, the
offence; and
It might be public information at the time of the original offence (eg. in 1994), but once its a spent conviction it is illegal to disclose this information. So republishing it is an offence. I don't see it being an excuse to a breach of the law that someone else published it 25 years ago.
Otherwise what is the point of spent conviction legislation if every newspaper was allowed to publish details of everyone's old convictions whenever they felt like it?
