Should arrestees be named before trial?

This link will take you to ongoing debates and discussions on several topics of interest to members of Sensitize ©. All members of Sensitize © are welcome to start new debates and discussions.

Moderator: Louis P. Burns aka Lugh

Should arrestees be named before trial?

Yes...the police only arrest the guilty
0
No votes
No...the innocent deserve some privacy
6
100%
 
Total votes: 6

psikottix
visitor

Should arrestees be named before trial?

Postby psikottix » 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?

User avatar
Louis P. Burns aka Lugh
site owner, media producer & writer
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 7:32 am
Location: Derry, Ireland
Contact:

Re: Should arrestees be named before trial?

Postby Louis P. Burns aka Lugh » Thu Dec 21, 2006 10:31 pm

psikottix wrote: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?

I have voted for the second option here Psi: 'No... the innocent deserve some privacy'.

My thoughts are fairly basic and based on what I hope is viewed to be fair. The Media (and it erks me something rotten that I'm struggling to get my media production company established) have no right whatsoever to name anyone, unless that person has been found guilty in a court of law (fairly) through evidence, trial by jury and witness statements for whatever crime they've been detained and questioned about.

I could talk at length about how the scum within the ranks of the former policing agency for Northern Ireland - the RUC (Royal Ulster Constabulary) wrecked my career as a jobbing actor and my life due to the nervous breakdown that followed. Or how the Derry Journal dragged my name through the mud back then because of my arrest but, I'd only bore both you and myself. What I will say is this though. I couldn't even sue the cunts afterwards because anyone arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act isn't entitled to compensation for wrongful arrest. Nor are they allowed access to justice when their case is dismissed and they seek reasons for what has happened to them...

What has happened recently in Suffolk is without doubt tragic and someone is guilty of horrendous crimes but to splatter a blokes name and image all over the daily papers in what was blatant sensationalism to feed a news hungry mob was extremely irresponsible and beneath contempt.

Ok, the man made an arse of himself by phoning the papers, but that doesn't make him a criminal. Crimes must be investigated fairly and arrests made by the police based on evidence gathered. Anything else is a PR spin because they're clueless.

If, at the end of all this, Mr. Stephens is innocent, and I've said this on the Mark Thomas Info forum as well; then I hope he sues the crap out of the police, the newspapers and the media. After all, they openly set about, in a frenzy, to destroy his life. Oh, and jail time might be fitting for the fuckers as well. See how they like it...

Edits: to correct grammar and text only.
Louis P. Burns aka Lugh
Administrator, editor & owner of the Sensitize © online community of forums and domain for artists, e-poets, filmmakers, media/music producers and writers working through here. To buy the Kindle book of Illustrated Poetry, Sensitize © - Volume One / Poems that could be Films if they were Funded by myself with illustrations by Welsh filmmaker and graphic artist; Norris Nuvo click here for N. Ireland and UK sales. If purchasing in the U.S.A. or internationally then please click here.

ASIN B00L1RS0UI

My writing is not covered by Creative Commons policy and may not be republished without permission. All rights reserved. All Sensitize © Arts sponsorship donations and postal inquiries to:

Louis P. Burns
42 Farland Way
DERRY
N. Ireland.
BT48 0RS
Telephone (UK): 028 71219225


Click here to Join Sensitize © Arts via Facebook or to contact the site owner: Louis P. Burns aka Lugh with any forum hosting or site related inquiries.

spacecadet
visitor

Postby spacecadet » Thu Dec 21, 2006 11:35 pm

People are innocent until found guilty by 12 dossers too ignorant to avoid jury duty.

psikottix
visitor

Postby psikottix » Fri Dec 22, 2006 4:01 pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_west/6203167.stm

Apology for murder photo mix-up

A national newspaper has apologised after it printed a picture showing the
wrong man in its coverage of the murders of five women in Ipswich.

The Daily Mail said the picture of Gareth Roberts from Pwllheli, Gwynedd,
was mistakenly shown as murder suspect Steve Wright.


Another prime example of what I have been saying. Another innocent tarred with a badly-wielded media brush.


:evil:

User avatar
Louis P. Burns aka Lugh
site owner, media producer & writer
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 7:32 am
Location: Derry, Ireland
Contact:

Postby Louis P. Burns aka Lugh » Fri Dec 22, 2006 5:17 pm

psikottix wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_west/6203167.stm

Apology for murder photo mix-up

A national newspaper has apologised after it printed a picture showing the
wrong man in its coverage of the murders of five women in Ipswich.

The Daily Mail said the picture of Gareth Roberts from Pwllheli, Gwynedd,
was mistakenly shown as murder suspect Steve Wright.


Another prime example of what I have been saying. Another innocent tarred with a badly-wielded media brush.


:evil:

I saw this in a mailing list I follow. I hope he doesn't accept their apology and sues them as well...
Louis P. Burns aka Lugh
Administrator, editor & owner of the Sensitize © online community of forums and domain for artists, e-poets, filmmakers, media/music producers and writers working through here. To buy the Kindle book of Illustrated Poetry, Sensitize © - Volume One / Poems that could be Films if they were Funded by myself with illustrations by Welsh filmmaker and graphic artist; Norris Nuvo click here for N. Ireland and UK sales. If purchasing in the U.S.A. or internationally then please click here.

ASIN B00L1RS0UI

My writing is not covered by Creative Commons policy and may not be republished without permission. All rights reserved. All Sensitize © Arts sponsorship donations and postal inquiries to:

Louis P. Burns
42 Farland Way
DERRY
N. Ireland.
BT48 0RS
Telephone (UK): 028 71219225


Click here to Join Sensitize © Arts via Facebook or to contact the site owner: Louis P. Burns aka Lugh with any forum hosting or site related inquiries.


Return to “Debate & Discussion on Sensitize ©”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest