Should suspects in sex crimes be publicly named before they are even charged?

Greetings and welcome to The Football Net. We love talking balls, do you?

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. Therefore you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, take part in the banter, vote in polls and enjoy fun competitions such as fantasy football and the betting exchange. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join us today to talk balls with us!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2

Should suspects in sex crimes be publicly named before they are even charged?
Topic Started: Oct 20 2009, 09:37 PM (384 Views)
dutchmcfc	Oct 22 2009, 11:26 AM Post #16
disoriented scholar, covered in chocolate Posts: 18,134 Group: Members Member #24 Joined: September 14, 2007 Team: Manchester City Players: Ireland, Messi, Komp	mumanc Oct 22 2009, 11:07 AM sorry dutch dont buy it,"papers are scumbags ,who print what they want,because they know no one can afford to take them to court,and even if they did and won,the "papers" would make more money than they lost selling the story whats happened to the roleyes emoticon. Flak removed it, cause a few people moaned about it What I'm getting at is that papers and journalists in general do not have the same priorities as the state. Making them an independent information outlet. that is independent from the state. They are not independent from their owners or readers, and will spout certain opinions. Some for political or idealistic reasons others for monetary reasons. This freedom of press certainly has some severe disadvantages because like you point out many papers are scumbags who'd do anything to sell a paper. The advantage is that people can inform themselves from very diverse sources. the fact that few people do read papers critically, is not a fault of the papers but of the people.
	"We did not cross the border, The border crossed us!" The path is nameless- Lao Tse


mumanc	Oct 22 2009, 11:43 AM Post #17
red thru and thru. Posts: 4,664 Group: Members Member #64 Joined: October 2, 2007	dutchmcfc Oct 22 2009, 11:26 AM mumanc Oct 22 2009, 11:07 AM sorry dutch dont buy it,"papers are scumbags ,who print what they want,because they know no one can afford to take them to court,and even if they did and won,the "papers" would make more money than they lost selling the story whats happened to the roleyes emoticon. Flak removed it, cause a few people moaned about it What I'm getting at is that papers and journalists in general do not have the same priorities as the state. Making them an independent information outlet. that is independent from the state. They are not independent from their owners or readers, and will spout certain opinions. Some for political or idealistic reasons others for monetary reasons. This freedom of press certainly has some severe disadvantages because like you point out many papers are scumbags who'd do anything to sell a paper. The advantage is that people can inform themselves from very diverse sources. the fact that few people do read papers critically, is not a fault of the papers but of the people. TBH dutch in this day and age papers are outdated,they are printed by 12ocklock the previous night so you are reading yesterdays "news " anyway,turn your TV on and you get the news live.



dutchmcfc	Oct 22 2009, 11:44 AM Post #18
disoriented scholar, covered in chocolate Posts: 18,134 Group: Members Member #24 Joined: September 14, 2007 Team: Manchester City Players: Ireland, Messi, Komp	mumanc Oct 22 2009, 11:43 AM dutchmcfc Oct 22 2009, 11:26 AM mumanc Oct 22 2009, 11:07 AM sorry dutch dont buy it,"papers are scumbags ,who print what they want,because they know no one can afford to take them to court,and even if they did and won,the "papers" would make more money than they lost selling the story whats happened to the roleyes emoticon. Flak removed it, cause a few people moaned about it What I'm getting at is that papers and journalists in general do not have the same priorities as the state. Making them an independent information outlet. that is independent from the state. They are not independent from their owners or readers, and will spout certain opinions. Some for political or idealistic reasons others for monetary reasons. This freedom of press certainly has some severe disadvantages because like you point out many papers are scumbags who'd do anything to sell a paper. The advantage is that people can inform themselves from very diverse sources. the fact that few people do read papers critically, is not a fault of the papers but of the people. TBH dutch in this day and age papers are outdated,they are printed by 12ocklock the previous night so you are reading yesterdays "news " anyway,turn your TV on and you get the news live. The same pretty much goes for the other media though
	"We did not cross the border, The border crossed us!" The path is nameless- Lao Tse


mumanc	Oct 22 2009, 12:00 PM Post #19
red thru and thru. Posts: 4,664 Group: Members Member #64 Joined: October 2, 2007	atleast its live and not yesterdays



dutchmcfc	Oct 22 2009, 12:12 PM Post #20
disoriented scholar, covered in chocolate Posts: 18,134 Group: Members Member #24 Joined: September 14, 2007 Team: Manchester City Players: Ireland, Messi, Komp	mumanc Oct 22 2009, 12:00 PM atleast its live and not yesterdays That it's live doesn't make it any less susceptible to the same things newspapers as journalistic media are susceptible to. Maybe even it's even worse actually. the potential for TV to totally misconstrue a story is much bigger precisly because it is Live. Now BBC is far from perfect but it's relatively (note the use of that word) reliable. But look at what americans have to put up with. FOX for one.
	"We did not cross the border, The border crossed us!" The path is nameless- Lao Tse


footyfan000	Nov 15 2009, 10:07 AM Post #21
Tadpole's Excrement Posts: 1,771 Group: Members Member #1,146 Joined: March 26, 2008 Team: Blackburn Rovers Players: Tugay	Newspapers such as The Sun are very much based on rumours. But The Times and The Guardian are far more reliable in general, and a much better read purely because they don't report so many rumours, if any. They should not be allowed to release any details about a suspect until found guilty imo, else it totally defeats the object of our law system which is 'Innocent until proven guilty'. You are persecuted by the public once your details are released whether found guilty or not, so releasing details almost makes you, in the public eye, guilty.



Mr Flibble	Nov 16 2009, 09:06 PM Post #22
Hamster Molester Posts: 7,556 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: September 14, 2007 Team: Chelsea Players: JT, Lamps, Cech	mumanc Oct 22 2009, 09:42 AM RetardedDwarf Oct 21 2009, 03:45 PM Cant really blame the papers, they just report the facts. you are joking with this statement aren't you In the fact that the papers will report that Mr A N Other of Some Road, Leeds has been chagred with rape, no i am not joking. Wasnt saying that the papers always report the facts, just saying that by simply publishing name/lanaction of the person charged they r reporting the facts. Its to do with the question of whether names should be realised or not.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Mass Debate Parlour · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2