Law2 mins ago
Innocent Until Proven Newsworthy?
We often hear how those accused of rape and sexual assault should have their identities kept secret as it could damage their reputation if found not guilty.
Along those same lines, should newspapers be allowed to get away with naming those who have not been charged of other offences?
https:/
https:/
https:/
Along those same lines, should newspapers be allowed to get away with naming those who have not been charged of other offences?
https:/
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
that Guardian report doesn't name them, even when others had. But yes, I would have thought there was a case for suppressing names until charges are laid. After that, it's fair to report on the justic process, even if the accused are eventually cleared.
And now they're saying maybe there never was a drone? What is going on?
And now they're saying maybe there never was a drone? What is going on?
The problem anyone named by newspapers have is that lawyers would be able to argue that the story (that they were being questioned) itself was big news, and that people would want to know who the suspects are.
What feels wrong at the moment is that there were reports yesterday that made the pair out to be weirdos with very strong suggesothat they were ‘eco-warriors’ (this could’ve come from the police).
It reminds me a bit of the Christopher Jeffries case a few years back.
What feels wrong at the moment is that there were reports yesterday that made the pair out to be weirdos with very strong suggesothat they were ‘eco-warriors’ (this could’ve come from the police).
It reminds me a bit of the Christopher Jeffries case a few years back.
The daily mail is an appalling gossip mongering rag which stirs up trouble for whomever it gets in it's sights. This latest 'naming and shaming' of people who allegedly flew drones over Gatwick is disgusting and I would hope that it is charged with inciting hatred and similar charges. Disgraceful way to behave.
// I agree they should not have been named at least until they were charged.//
nooooo - the law is the opposite way round
rules about prejudice come in WHEN they have been charged
like sir doo dah - they can be named until they are charged. Sir Cliff recovered damages under some pretty odd circumstances ( = rich mens justice but twas ever so).
A tenant in rent arrears named me to the police as a child molester (hers of course). I had to put up with it whilst insisting that being named, did NOT prevent me from serving other court papers on her for debt (kinda linked if you think about it). It all came out in the end (pun intended) and she went under in the sum of £29k
yeah 29 000 ( er £28400 was some one else's)
This is how the law is meant to work
I got the debt pinned to her muvvuz address
because that was where she lived when the judgement came in...and the law is meant to work like that
1964 case - scrunty and son are investigated by fraud police - was an actionable case in law ( loss:affected share price)
nooooo - the law is the opposite way round
rules about prejudice come in WHEN they have been charged
like sir doo dah - they can be named until they are charged. Sir Cliff recovered damages under some pretty odd circumstances ( = rich mens justice but twas ever so).
A tenant in rent arrears named me to the police as a child molester (hers of course). I had to put up with it whilst insisting that being named, did NOT prevent me from serving other court papers on her for debt (kinda linked if you think about it). It all came out in the end (pun intended) and she went under in the sum of £29k
yeah 29 000 ( er £28400 was some one else's)
This is how the law is meant to work
I got the debt pinned to her muvvuz address
because that was where she lived when the judgement came in...and the law is meant to work like that
1964 case - scrunty and son are investigated by fraud police - was an actionable case in law ( loss:affected share price)
// It reminds me a bit of the Christopher Jeffries case a few years back.//
the bling blong of Christopher Jeffries is available on Netflix and is worffa a viewing.
he was the author of his own misfortune
( orffa sorry I am on AB. memo to myself: "must do more AB-speak for clarity or else standard AB thicko wont geddit at all")
he said to the hacks more than
he said to the police
and promptly got arrested on suspicion of mairder
the rest was Bristol [Clifton] small mindedness
the bling blong of Christopher Jeffries is available on Netflix and is worffa a viewing.
he was the author of his own misfortune
( orffa sorry I am on AB. memo to myself: "must do more AB-speak for clarity or else standard AB thicko wont geddit at all")
he said to the hacks more than
he said to the police
and promptly got arrested on suspicion of mairder
the rest was Bristol [Clifton] small mindedness
Before being charged I believe reporting and headlines should show a level of restraint - the one from the Mail on Sunday certainly doesn't even though it purported to ask a question.
https:/
https:/
Gatwick police say they cannot discount possibility there was no drone ...
https:/
2 hours ago - Detectives investigating the Gatwick drone attacks which caused three ... the couple arrested by Sussex Police on Friday night were released ...
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles28 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles54 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.