- Dec 10, 2005
- Reaction score
- Pacific Rim
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
No you did not say so.RightatNYU said:Did I say that?
Which I do not argue.RightatNYU said:First off, the publishing of those names is a constitutionally protected right that most papers simply choose not to exercise.
Could you clarify what you are saying here. I've bolded the points which are confusing to me. One is that whom is found guilty the other is the victim. There's no need to further victimize the victim of a rape.RightatNYU said:Secondly, why should rape be the ONLY crime in which the alleged victim is not named? Those accused of pedophilia are no doubt just as shamed and embarassed, perhaps unjustly so, just as those accused of raping and being raped.
I don't see how it is in anyway perpetuating the stigma.RightatNYU said:I would argue that by setting rape apart from every other crime, and by making the decision to publish the name of the accused but not the accuser, the system is perpetuating the stigma attached to rape.
I agree completely, as I've shown in your formal post. As was the case with your friend.RightatNYU said:Personally, I'd prefer that nobody who is being accused of a crime have their name be published until they are proven guilty.
Reagardless of, the victim, unless reversly accused of humiliating on falsehood should never be published and thus publicly humiliated as headline news.