The ‘Responsibility’ Of The Media

[sp1814]

There have been calls for those accused of rape to have their names shielded from the public.

In this case (the death of Gaia Pop), what should the media do? Should they report the names of those who have been arrested/interviewed by the police?

As it now looks as if Gaia Pope committed suicide, do those who have had their names published by certain media outlets have a right to feel aggrieved - like those men accused of, but not convicted of rape/sexual assault?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5099941/Gaia-Pope-Three-released-without-charge.html#comments

[Old_Geezer]

Why not ? I'd feel aggrieved in their shoes.

[dannyk13]

I have always thought that names should not be published until anybody accused of rape has appeared in court.

[ToraToraTora]

we know the victim in this case. Not the same as those accusing where the accuser is not named but the acusee is. Both or neither, probably neither should be named in my view.

[Prudie]

This case is difficult. I was surprised myself when these 3 were arrested on suspicion of murder when a body hadn't even been found and now it looks like there was no murder at all. The problem is this all took place in a small community and those 3 will not forget and nor will the locals. It was never going to be kept quiet as it might have done in a sprawling city and I can well understand why they feel aggrieved.

[mikey4444]

But why were the arrested ?

[douglas9401]

It is a wee bit wearying when the police say the equivalent of 'oops' and wander away from the mess they've created leaving the blameless to fight their corner.

[sp1814]

To me, this has the high stink Of Christopher Jefferies.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2011/jul/29/joanna-yeates-national-newspapers

Remember when he was arrested after the murder of Joanna Yeate? There were a large number of ‘responsible’ newspapers who indulged in an orgy of speculation, and it turned out that the man was completely 100% innnocent.

[Gromit]

If people have been arrested, the media will report that because it is news. The media are entirely blameless in this case.
Sounds like the police did not do a good job. The body was found very close to where clothes were found, and had supposedly been searched. The arrests seem particularly inept, the grandmother on oxygen and the uncle with an alibi. I’m afraid it is probably just incompetence.

[Bazile]

Incompetence that will affect their lives adversely from hereon in all sorts of ways - e.g. travel to some countries

[Prudie]

And I don't mean this disrespectfully but the whole thing would make the basis for the next series of Broadchurch.

[New Judge]

"But why were the arrested ?"

Because it's what the police do. It's standard practice in such circumstances to round up everybody whom they believe might have committed the deed. They can take their fingerprints and DNA, turn their premises over and use all of that as part of their investigation.

[youngmafbog]

This is Dorset Police an incompetent 'service' I have no time for at all having had a few problems with them over the years.

I still fail to see why people have to be arrested, surely they could be 'helping with enquiries'?

Or is it Plods sneaky way of building the DNA database through the back door?

I hope these people take Dorset Police to the cleaners. Might wake them up a bit or with luck get a few useless Chiefs fired.

[EDDIE51]

Police can only take DNA without consent if the person has been arrested. So they arrest anyone who may be implicated to be certain to get the DNA.
If you are arrested and your DNA taken, the record is supposed to be destroyed if you are released without charge. There are allegations that this does not always happen.

[youngmafbog]

So I was correct in saying that it is Plods sneaky way of building the DNA database through the back door?

[douglas9401]

Now I'm no polis but wouldn't it be quicker, more cost effective and less damaging to ask for a sample before escalating?

[youngmafbog]

Douglas, I would imagine the answer would start with the letter 'F' and end with it too.

[douglas9401]

Falstaff?

[EDDIE51]

As I said, if you are arrested and have your DNA taken, the records are supposed to be destroyed if you are released without charge. BUT there are doubts if it really happens.
The police have asked that everyone's DNA to be taken at birth and kept on record , they say this will help in the fight against crime and terrorism. They could just go to a crime scene take samples of the DNA and know who was there.
It has been estimated that they already have the DNA of 30% of the population.

[EDDIE51]

Details of the UK DNA data base here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_National_DNA_Database
As it says, records are supposed to be deleted after 3 years if you are not convicted, but there are many reports that they are not. Anyone convicted of or cautioned for any offence has their DNA stored permanently. This can be just for a minor motoring offence, so 35 in a 30 limit and your DNA is on record for life.

[Davemano]

More assuming Eddie. Where are the many reports that DNA files are not disclosed. When was the last time you knew of a person being arrested for a minor traffic offence - 35 in a 30 limit. Samples are only taken from persons in custody.