gazza Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 Nobody should be publicly exposed prior to their case being proven against them full stop!! It has always been a bugbear of the supposed justice system that people are tarnished by the curiosity of the media and others. What right do we have to know the names of people accused of a crime until they are proven guilty? including three main pillars of a privilege defence against defamation: that what's reported is fair, accurate and contemporaneous. You have to report what's said in court, by both prosecution and defence (giving equal weight to both) and publish as soon as possible after the case. well thay might have to, but thay dont bloody bother, i got my name slated because thay reported n the defense side, nowt was said bout myside, i wasent even in court, and i had done fuck all wrong, but if u read it in the paper, u would have thought it was me that was in the wrong, and he was a poor victum, the fucking wankers the papers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahc Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 If it was what was said in court that's how it was reported. If you wasent even in court then how do you know what was said bout your side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 What about someone who is considered very likely to abscond before the case is brought to court? That assumption could be made about all those who are suspected of committing a crime, could it not? Though it would be those who are likely to be guilty who will probably abscond. If you knew someone was definitely going to abscond then I still think it wrong to put them in custody, but with the current legal system and method of meting out justice there is little else that could be done, unless you possibly tag them as an alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 If it was what was said in court that's how it was reported. If you wasent even in court then how do you know what was said bout your side? cause i have the recording, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted May 13, 2009 Share Posted May 13, 2009 There are some 'professions' that require exemplary behaviour from all involved. Social workers, councillors, MHKs, doctors and others you can think of. Their private life is public because of their jobs. Oh and judges too don't forget, I think you call them deemsters over here. And solicitors, I think you call them advocates over here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Like The Moon Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 That's the crux of it, yes. But I am asking for other opinions, I am unsure, as there is the issue of being seen to be doing things correctly and accountability etc! Doing things correctly would be, in my mind, to not advertise people's wrongdoings until it is known that they have committed such acts, i.e. that they are guilty. But it shouldn't make any difference whether it is a policeman or not if others are to be 'exposed' for their supposed crimes. I agree with that 100%! Nobody should be publicly exposed prior to their case being proven against them full stop!! It has always been a bugbear of the supposed justice system that people are tarnished by the curiosity of the media and others. What right do we have to know the names of people accused of a crime until they are proven guilty? I agree with this so much. A relative of mine was charged with an offence, which he denied, but without going into too much detail, the fact that his name was in the paper and the details of the offence etc before he had even been to court for a verdict were all to much for him. He ended up convinced he would be found guilty because everyone would have already made up their mind....and even if it was not guilty everyone would still have thier opinion and alienate him..anyway to cut a long story short, he hung himself, leaving behind 7 children. Selfish yes, but mud sticks and he could not live with that. (The offence had nothing to do with kiddy fiddling either - before assumptions are made) I beleive that if the details had not been put in the paper before he had gone to trial then he would probably still been here. Everyone says innocent until proven guilty - but I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I agree with this so much. A relative of mine was charged with an offence, which he denied, but without going into too much detail, the fact that his name was in the paper and the details of the offence etc before he had even been to court for a verdict were all to much for him. He ended up convinced he would be found guilty because everyone would have already made up their mind....and even if it was not guilty everyone would still have thier opinion and alienate him..anyway to cut a long story short, he hung himself, leaving behind 7 children. Selfish yes, but mud sticks and he could not live with that. (The offence had nothing to do with kiddy fiddling either - before assumptions are made)I beleive that if the details had not been put in the paper before he had gone to trial then he would probably still been here. Everyone says innocent until proven guilty - but I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. Why did you mention kiddy fiddling. I didn't think that at all. It could have been anything. And considering how so many people respond when they hear someone has committed ANY crime (i.e. act or think like idiots) I would have thought it would cause someone a lot of problems, especially in the land of skeet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Like The Moon Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Why did you mention kiddy fiddling. I didn't think that at all. It could have been anything. And considering how so many people respond when they hear someone has committed ANY crime (i.e. act or think like idiots) I would have thought it would cause someone a lot of problems, especially in the land of skeet. I made the assumption that people would think that because he actually killed himself over the offence and that they may beleive it was something extremely serious and along those lines (why else would he kill himself type assumption). My own paranoia maybe - not wanting to tarnish his name any further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I'm sure your poor relative isn't the first victim of this crazy system and certainly won't be the last. I would really like to hear the justification for the actions of the courts and media being so crass, cruel and voyeuristic in these cases. There really is no need. I imagine, that in a twisted way, they believe that the publicity given to people pre trial is as much of a deterent to prevent anyone even putting themselves in a position that they may become a suspect in a crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I imagine, that in a twisted way, they believe that the publicity given to people pre trial is as much of a deterent to prevent anyone even putting themselves in a position that they may become a suspect in a crime? I think with the media a lot of the reason it is there is because many people accept it. It is new and far more exciting to hear about who was arrested last night rather than convicted for a crime many months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 In the pursuit of even more money for advocates and the covering up of discrepancies by members of the judiciary past and present I have experienced a number of families wrecked by so called Manx Justice. It rears its exceedingly ugly head in many forms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.