Should arrestees be named before trial?
Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:24 pm
There seems to be a habit that the media have adopted: Naming people arrested for a crime, despite the fact they have not been found guilty by a court. I was just wondering how people felt about this!
Personally, I believe people are innocent until proven guilty. Naming people arrested for a crime (the Suffolk Strangler being a current case in point) destroys the life of the person arrested. The police in this case have made two arrests, yet believe only one person is responsible. This means that at least one of the suspects is going to be hounded by an ignorant public for doing nothing wrong.
We are told by "the media" that it is in the public interest. How so, if innocent members of the public have their lives destroyed by this irresponsible reporting?
Makes me MAD!!!!
Your thoughts?
Personally, I believe people are innocent until proven guilty. Naming people arrested for a crime (the Suffolk Strangler being a current case in point) destroys the life of the person arrested. The police in this case have made two arrests, yet believe only one person is responsible. This means that at least one of the suspects is going to be hounded by an ignorant public for doing nothing wrong.
We are told by "the media" that it is in the public interest. How so, if innocent members of the public have their lives destroyed by this irresponsible reporting?
Makes me MAD!!!!
Your thoughts?