incentivation
Hmmmmm....
I've long had apprehensions about the naming of people arrested for criminal offences by the media. This is particularly relevant in the context of the very recent arrests of those allegedly involved in the Child Pornography ring out of Europe.
It seems to me that we name, and obviously shame, the individual before any form of due process determines their guilt. The media plays in important role in alerting the community to these law enforcement outcomes when the actual process of guilt determination takes considerably longer. The community develops their own opinion in relation to guilt prior to it being proved in a court.
Obviously in instances where criminal action is not proved or unjustified, civil litigation can often be pursued and relative costs awarded.
Suppression orders can be sought in certain instances to prevent the media naming the suspect, however particularly in extremely public matters, the damage caused to the individual often extends beyond any monetary cost. The humiliation and outward perception can often have detrimental effects on the emotional and psychological health of the individual and affect aspects of their future (employment, relationships etc).
For example, although rugby league player Anthony Laffranchi was not even committed to stand trial on the allegations of sexual assualt brought against him, there would still be many within the community who would hold the view that he was not innocent, but merely unable to be convicted due to a weak prosecution case. Of course, the views of others are usually irrelevant, but quite often they can have a damaging impact.
Maybe I'm just soft.
What are your thoughts? Does the naming of suspects by the media contribute to a determination of guilt in others minds and is this fair and just? Should there be greater legal protection to prevent the identity of individuals being revealed until conviction?
It seems to me that we name, and obviously shame, the individual before any form of due process determines their guilt. The media plays in important role in alerting the community to these law enforcement outcomes when the actual process of guilt determination takes considerably longer. The community develops their own opinion in relation to guilt prior to it being proved in a court.
Obviously in instances where criminal action is not proved or unjustified, civil litigation can often be pursued and relative costs awarded.
Suppression orders can be sought in certain instances to prevent the media naming the suspect, however particularly in extremely public matters, the damage caused to the individual often extends beyond any monetary cost. The humiliation and outward perception can often have detrimental effects on the emotional and psychological health of the individual and affect aspects of their future (employment, relationships etc).
For example, although rugby league player Anthony Laffranchi was not even committed to stand trial on the allegations of sexual assualt brought against him, there would still be many within the community who would hold the view that he was not innocent, but merely unable to be convicted due to a weak prosecution case. Of course, the views of others are usually irrelevant, but quite often they can have a damaging impact.
Maybe I'm just soft.
What are your thoughts? Does the naming of suspects by the media contribute to a determination of guilt in others minds and is this fair and just? Should there be greater legal protection to prevent the identity of individuals being revealed until conviction?
