Defendant anonymity.

[Anders]

Can’t believe I didn’t see this forum until today. This debate is related to this thread. I hope this discussion has not all ready been done.

Should a defendant accused of rape have their anonymity protected like the accuser?

A couple of thoughts I have on this question:
By giving out the defendant’s details others people raped by the defendant may come forward.
The stigma of a rape accusation will tarnish a defendant even if found innocent.

I believe in innocence until proven guilty, and unfortunately, in today’s climate a rape accusation often seems to be as good as a guilty verdict, thus I am in favour of anonymity. If only details of those found guilty are released then other victims could then come forward.

[Nemeliza]

Id say no, but only when pleeding guilty =/

[Nick]

I touched on this here,
http://forums.hexus.net/showthread.php?threadid=2662

as well.

I think the law definitely needs changing to give rights to an INNOCENT person. After all, they are innocent until PROVEN guilty, are they not?

[petrefax]

i'm in favour - agreed, rape is a terrible crime & apparently difficult to get convictions, but then again being accused of something as heinous when innocent is no joke. thats the sort of thing you're not gonna live down easily, even if all charges are dropped

[scouse]

at the end of the day do women LIE when they shout rape? yes they do, ofcourse most are true and it is terrible that iut happens but at the end of the day a lot of men are accused and are totaly innocent yet once there name is mentioned even after being found innocent they are guilty to the public and that is FACT, so the law should be protect the name till the law decides guilty only then should a name be given.

who ever says the name should be mentioned think if it was you how wwould you feel? walking down the street, in your job (if you still have it?) in the pub your friends so on would all be thinking i bet he did it i always thought he was strange so on and on. so i suppose it easy to say a man should be named before he is proven guilty aslong as we ourselves are not in those shoes.

[Anders]

Interesting, I’d be pleased to hear opinions from anyone who agrees with the current law, if anyone does? I hope I didn’t bias the debate by giving my position first off.

I’d think (hope) my friends and family would stick with me if I were ever accused of such a crime. I really don’t understand how someone could falsely accuse another of such a horrible crime.

[BoB_DoG]

Originally posted by Anders
Interesting, I’d be pleased to hear opinions from anyone who agrees with the current law, if anyone does? I hope I didn’t bias the debate by giving my position first off.

I’d think (hope) my friends and family would stick with me if I were ever accused of such a crime. I really don’t understand how someone could falsely accuse another of such a horrible crime.

Just as people can commit such horrible crimes, they can be just as bad and falsely accuse others of such things. WHen greed or hate or spite get into peoples heads, they can do terrible things. Also, it is much easier to falsely accuse someone of a crime (I mean to justify it in your head and then carry it out), than it is to actually commit a heinous crime.

It is sad, but unfortunately true

Oh, and back on topic, I agree that their identities should be protected until proven guilty.