Should the names of the victim and accused remain anonymous

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date

Should all parties remain annoymous

  • Total voters
    39
Imo, yes.

I'd go one further. To ensure that only evidence heard in a court of law is utilised by a jury, I'd have anonymity for everyone in court, in every case, alleged victim, witnesses, accused...everyone. Untill the verdict obviously.

It would mean jurors couldn't go home and use Google Facebook Twitter etc to form opinions and possibly skew their verdict by acting on outside information.
 
c1973 said:
Imo, yes.

I'd go one further. To ensure that only evidence heard in a court of law is utilised by a jury, I'd have anonymity for everyone in court, in every case, alleged victim, witnesses, accused...everyone. Untill the verdict obviously.

It would mean jurors couldn't go home and use Google Facebook Twitter etc to form opinions and possibly skew their verdict by acting on outside information.
Click to expand...

99% of me agrees with all the above, the other 1% doubt is, there have been cases recently were allegations (that were found to be true) helped others who were scared to come forward, come forward. Really a difficult one!
 
Absolutely.
Man accused of rape, named in the papers etc. Found Not Guilty. Life still in tatters!
 
There was me thinking that a person was deemed innocent, in the eyes of the law, until proven guilty. Suppose we'd better just rip up the law books and start again.

Dangerous precedent being set here.
 
DCB said:
There was me thinking that a person was deemed innocent, in the eyes of the law, until proven guilty. Suppose we'd better just rip up the law books and start again.

Dangerous precedent being set here.
Click to expand...

?

Still is innocent until proven guilty by law

What precedent is being set ?
 
its a tough one.

I went with no simply because I believe that it has helped with all the pedophilia in the country recently and people coming forwards
 
One wonders why the names of the two arrested on suspicion of murder and kidnap in Bristol haven't been released.....
Could this be because they're not famous or am I getting cynical in my old age.....
 
It does concern me that there is a media frenzy at the home of a famous name when they are about to be arrested (ala Jim Davidson) then mysteriously some time later the charges are dropped and the accused is tainted forever. I certainly understand that naming people does potentially bring other victims forward but in the innocence of the accused is compromised when trial by media occurs
 
Names should be kept secret. On both sides. Just like women should be named if the case turns out to be crying wolf. Not a dubious innocent for the man. But in cases where the woman admits she was jilted and felt angry. These women deserve harsher penalties imo.
 
Yep and if true he's in trouble

As to the OP I think his name shouldn't have been released so early - currently he's 'helping with an investigation' therefore hasn't been charged with anything. Once charges are brought that is the time for the name to be released
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top