IT is welcome news that "no disciplinary proceedings need to be taken against the Chief Constable" of Cleveland, Barry Shaw, regarding the circulation of sexual rumours about a female police clerk and Ray Mallon.

It would have been disgraceful had a chief constable been involved in such a slur and we are glad, and relieved, that the Cleveland force will not be torn apart by another high-profile disciplinary hearing.

Mr Shaw made a statement yesterday that is instructive. He said he had been subjected to a trial by media whipped up mischief-makers who are "either deliberately misinformed or given selective information".

He is right. And yesterday was the prime opportunity to provide the evidence of the misinformation and put the selective information into context.

But Cleveland Police Authority banned the press and public from doing so. A QC told the authority that it didn't have to evict outsiders from yesterday's meeting, but that it "may". And it did.

And so the public doesn't know how the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Michael Hedges got it so wrong when he said Mr Shaw was "culpable for abuse of authority and breach of confidence".

The public doesn't even know if the allegations of a whispering campaign emanating from somewhere within the force are groundless.

The same confusion surrounds the first part of Mr Hedges' report. That investigated a leak to a national newspaper which was timed to embarrass Mr Mallon. Mr Shaw was exonerated for the leak. But - because that hearing was also held in private - the public doesn't know where it came from.

This is a textbook case of justice, if it is to be done, requiring also to be seen to be done.

By conducting its affairs so resolutely in private, the police authority has done neither itself, Mr Shaw nor the people of Cleveland, any favours.