Baby P anonymity mystery

[David H]

Now Baby P has had his photos distributed what are the legal and actual reasons they haven't named him seeing as he is no longer actually anonymous?

[fraser1444]

Due to the fact the sentencing procedure has yet not cease, the identities of the family are still concealed. Despite the release of the pictures, the name will give a clue to who the parents may be and where they may be found. And as they are out in public until the sentencing verdict is released the identities are concealed for the protection of the parents.

[Ethel]

There are three other children - that is why the names are surpressed

[QueenOfAmber]

I think baby P is a poor baby. :( May he rest in peace. :(

[jno]

'anonymous' means 'without a name'. Publishing his photos doesn't give him a name. Publishing his name, or those of his family, does. The reasons for suppressing it are no doubt those Ethel gives.

[Velvetee]

Where are these three other children Ethel?

[Aquagility]

Google will give you all the names you want.

[Ethel]

In care, probably. She' s certainly had one since, and she had two other children.

[David H]

Thanks everyone, it makes more sense now. But I'd have thought many people would recognise the photo instantly and they do not have a court order stopping them revealing the name.
As Aquagility said, the names can be Googled. They may have been anyway but showing the photo would guarantee it, one ID is enough and it seems to me they are quite happy to leak this information for reasons I can't imagine as in the past photos have been treated exactly the same way as names, which is why this stood out like an alarm bell. After all, what do they do on Crimewatch to identify people? Show their photos. Still dubious.

[David H]

Fraser, I'd have thought giving the name of the lodger would also have been enough to link anyone else involved. That's another inconsistency I wondered about and suspect no one outside the case knows the true reasons for the selective approach they've used.

And queenofamber, I totally agree with you.

[jenniprice]

I got a txt to say the people's names are; tracey connolly and steven barker. And it says pass it on till everyone knows.
I dont know why the lodger can be named but not the parents, however like say soemone knows and maybe they sent this txt and it's working its way round the nation..

[Skyline D]

That post probably needs deleted. As I understand it it is a breach of a court order to publilsh the names on a UK hosted website (which this is) and the site owners could be compelled to reveal the names and contact details of anyone posting the names for potential prosecution.

[puddicat]

i got vilified but still here!!!

[jenniprice]

Ooh sorry, didn't realise.
I don't know if that is the names-just txt I got.
Plus it's all over facebook!

[lubecki161]

i got that text too! I dont know why we shoul not name and shame sickos like them! They deserve everything they get and more!