Kimberley - The Griquatown farm murder trial will remain open to the media despite a request that "upsetting" details not be made public, Northern Cape Judge President Frans Kgomo ruled on Thursday.
"There is no sound reason to recall my previous order or to amend it. That order stands," Kgomo said in the Kimberley High Court.
Legal counsel for the defence and the State had asked that the media be excluded from part of the proceedings on Thursday.
Prosecutor Hannes Cloete told reporters they believed that the evidence to be presented was too sensitive.
However, reporters felt the public had a right to know the evidence.
The State was about to lead evidence by Dr Tromp Els, a clinical forensic physician, in relation to the rape charge in the matter before court.
Kgomo is hearing evidence in the trial of a 17-year-old youth accused of murdering Northern Cape farmer Deon Steenkamp, 44, his wife Christelle, 43, and daughter Marthella, 14.
They were shot on their farm Naauwhoek on April 6, 2012.
The teenager also faces a charge of rape and defeating the ends of justice.
The evidence the State and defence did not want the media to report on was in relation to the alleged rape of the daughter.
The State added the rape charge in February.
At the start of the trial, Kgomo ruled that the media could be present at the trial, but that the youth could not be identified.
The high court is sitting as a children's court in the matter.
On Thursday, Kgomo adjourned the morning's proceedings to listen to arguments about the request after reporters saw him in Chambers.
"The effect of the evidence will be far-reaching for their family and friends," Cloete said in argument.
The details of the evidence would "seriously upset" them.
He submitted there was no public interest in the detail of the evidence, as the court would eventually make an decision on the rape charge.
He submitted that, as an officer of the court, he had a responsibility to the public beyond pure prosecution.
Defence lawyer Willem Coetzee agreed, describing it as a "moral request" to the court.
Coetzee said the request was not made on behalf of the youth or his guardian, but by the two defence lawyers as officers of the court.
"This request is on this basis. We know the possible evidence that would be put before the court. It is only on a moral base that the request is made."
He submitted that the court first look at the evidence and then make a decision about what part of it could be made public.
He reminded the court that the victim was a minor who had living family such as grandfathers and mothers.
"It is just a matter to try and protect the deceased's dignity. Purely on a moral basis."
Johan van Niekerk, for Media24, Independent Newspapers and the Central Media Group, submitted that the court had no choice but to look at the matter on legal principles.
"The request is nothing less than a petition to change the court's earlier order."
He contended that the court was sitting legally in the interest of the youth and the public, and not in the interest of the family members.
Kgomo ruled that the media be allowed to be present, and said he would give reasons for the decision at a later stage.
He warned reporters covering the trial not to breach the court's agreement to name the youth, even in their private capacities.
"You, as the fourth estate, nowadays it is very easy to send to the world information and images, sometimes to friends, knowing that this would not be part of the report that you do.
"If the media even in private break the order and send images or messages to friends and family that would breach the court's agreement, we would ask the NPA (National Prosecuting Authority) to investigate a contempt of court (charge)."
The case continues.
Sapa