As usual, they are intelligent sensitive people, the judges of the High Court are not wrong, as you eloquently point out. However, the considerations their reasoning is based have little weight with the public or with journalists trying to make a pound and build their audience. "Accused" is their stock in trade. I doubt I could suppress, oversight, information about an arrest in England and Wales on Wikipedia without losing the tool unless there were very special other issues involved.
Fred > I think that journalists should not identify the suspect unless the > journalist gets permission from the suspects family. Because if the > suspect has children the children could get bullied in school. Or > identify the suspect if he/she has no children or family. > > On 4/22/13, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote: >> There is extended discussion in England and Wales regarding whether >> journalists should identify suspects that have been arrested. >> >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/apr/21/press-intrusion-name-suspects >> >> See also >> http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc1213/hc07/0780/0780_ii.pdf >> >> Fred >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > > > -- > *AKHIL MULGAONKER * > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
