Anonymity - this should NOT be controvertial

ancient_mariner

ancient_mariner

Moderator
Messages
27,780
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
ancient_mariner said:
There is presently a petition requesting the government "To protect the reputations of all innocent suspects, whether well-known or not, from the lasting stigma of a false sexual allegation. "

The BBC have been reporting this in the context of the false allegations made against Cliff Richard and Paul Gambacchini, but very conveniently not providing the link to the petition. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47502383

Worth signing, I think.
Click to expand...
ancient_mariner said:
There is presently a petition requesting the government "To protect the reputations of all innocent suspects, whether well-known or not, from the lasting stigma of a false sexual allegation. "

The BBC have been reporting this in the context of the false allegations made against Cliff Richard and Paul Gambacchini, but very conveniently not providing the link to the petition. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47502383

Worth signing, I think.
Click to expand...
Whilst i agree in principle and have signed the petition, it's worth pointing out that the allegations are not necessarily false but unproven. A significant difference. I'm not particularly taking about Gambacchini and Richards. Just because an accusation is not proven doesn't make it false.
 
Last edited:
Agree, I understand that making things public mean that people do come forward but many, many lives are ruined by false accusations. Any one of us could be accused of something and while it may not make the front page of the Sun, it could easily make the front page of the local rag and with social media, bound to be public. Even if totally unproven, it could cost many their jobs and friends, not to mention the looks and whispers as you queue in the local shop or pick kids up from school. Remember, no smoke without fire.
 
Remember, they are requesting that names of suspects are witheld until they are charged i.e. there is reasonable evidence against them, rather than nothing more than accusations or stories.
 
The whole question of anonymity (or the lack of it) has been debated for a long time. Gordon Hewart (who became the Lord Chief Justice in 1922) is associated with the expression "Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.". (what he actually said was "a long line of cases shows that it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done." see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Sussex_Justices,_ex_parte_McCarthy)

Since then it has been considered a fundamental part of the British justice system that nothing should be hidden from the public, a principle that has been eroded over time for what probably seemed like good reasons.
 
Last edited:
It is a bit more difficult than it might seem on the face of it. Jimmy Saville got away with his crimes for decades because his victims were isolated and scared, it is often only when a name is known that other victims will come forward and allow a case to be built. The police should not have invited the BCC to film the Cliff Richard thing and the police should follow their own existing rules on this. I think putting this in primary legislation is potentially dangerous and we need to find some sensible compromise.

The law makers and police seem to be in a real bind in this area due mainly to data protection legislation. One way forward, IMHO, is some kind of register of “unproven” complaints, a bit like the sex offenders register, but overseen by a judge or quasi-judicial process where the police register all sex-pest type complaints and register both the victim and perpetrator. The register would allow data entry but not viewing, except for by a judge or panel. When an individual receives more than 2 or 3 complains (or raises more than 2 or 3 complaints) the panel can then review the situation and instruct the police to act. That instruction may go as far as allowing the police to publish perpetrator details if there is strong evidence that doing so would gather more evidence from other victims. The register would be tightly controlled and regulated and probably need to be exempted from data protection and freedom of information legislation. The fundamental controls around this have to be strong though because the police make mistakes and some are corrupt or act maliciously.
 
A significant part of the problem is that the maxim "innocent until proved guilty" has been effectively deleted in favour of trial by media and relativism (if I feel he's guilty then he IS guilty, even if they haven't found the evidence yet). The idea of an open justice system was never considered for such an environment, therefore those who are innocent by-standers DO need protection until there is sufficient evidence to proceed further. Would 'Nick' have continued making up stuff if his allegations had not bourne spectacular public fruit? Almost certainly not.

Yes, it's important that ONCE CHARGED names are publicly announced in cases like this, but otherwise they should remain secret.

The idea of a register as you describe, Chris, completely gives me the willies. I cannot imagine at present that it would not be abused by some in authority, and also since it would be digital in nature, it would not take long before the contents were spread across the internet.
 
I have a friend, a very good friend, who went through this because the daughter of his ex-wife made an accusation. It went to court and was thrown out and the prosecution rebuffed because they "had no clear evidence". The girl (now a young woman) making the accusation and her mother & friend that were meant to have been there at the time couldn't get their stories straight. It was clear it was just done for spite as he had remarried & started a new family.

However, the local press went to town before the court hearing, he lost his job and they ended up moving to Belgium (his wife is a Belgian national) to start a new life.

Nothing happened to the ex-step daughter, despite it later being proved it was all lies. You are innocent until proven guilty, and your anonymity should be kept until it is proven. End of. The local press were taken to task and he earned some money out of that, but I know he would have rather not have the money, and his life not being wrecked instead.
 
ancient_mariner said:
it would not take long before the contents were spread across the internet.
Click to expand...
We'll have to agree to disagree on that, data breaches are rare and when we really try to keep things secure we do. I would imagine that the gutter press would like to see the contents of the sex offenders register but AFAIK it has never been leaked.
 
sirch said:
We'll have to agree to disagree on that, data breaches are rare and when we really try to keep things secure we do. I would imagine that the gutter press would like to see the contents of the sex offenders register but AFAIK it has never been leaked.
Click to expand...
It doesn't need to be leaked. It just needs somebody with a few hundred followers to say you're on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top