I'm watching the news and am (obviously) really pleased and relieved to see that the police are making such headway in their investigations into the disgusting terrorist attacks/plots.
However. We were just given a huge amount of info about one particular suspect, including his and his wife's full names, ages, qualifications, career history, and details about his parents in Jordan. Oh, and not to mention the fact that we were SHOWN A PICTURE OF HIS HOUSE. We weren't offered any real evidence as to the proof against him. (The same was not true regarding several other suspects in the same report.)
Now everyone knows who he is, and where his family live and work.
So... what if this man is found to be genuinely innocent of all the charges? Even if that is proven to be the case, the BNP (and other assorted morons who don't know their ar$e from their elbow) will no doubt burn his house down anyway.
Who can justify the ridiculous 'trial by press' nonsense?
2007-07-02 07:19:48 · 11 answers · asked by Wildamberhoney 6 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
achrimsdale - I am aware of that, but I wasn't talking about legality.
2007-07-02 08:05:26 · update #1
Dellyxx - the chap I am talking about was displayed in a full screen picture, this was on the BBC at 6.30pm... perhaps the blurred one was another suspect?
2007-07-02 08:14:18 · update #2
Spencer - I agree completely about taking a hard line, but that isn't the point at all. The point is that the press are telling us all this about someone who has not been proven guilty. We don't need to see a picture of his house or be inundated with Hello magazine-style gossip about his family.
Anyone remember ROBERT MURAT in the Madeleine McCann case? Hmm.
2007-07-02 08:36:06 · update #3
I'm more concerned that this apparently premature disclosure may be used by the suspects legal team to get the case dropped or charges reduced.
Frankly this is typical of the British media, who make the case for a strict privacy law and media blackout in cases of Terrorism every time they pull a stunt like this.
2007-07-02 07:54:06 · answer #1 · answered by pwei34 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Press are always doing this lately. Splattering details all over the paper, then when no more evidence is forthcoming - no apology - nothing. If a guy gets accused of rape, his details are allover the paper; his accuser has anonymity. If he is found innocent, his accuser still has anonymity and he has to face the,"No smoke without fire Brigade" The laws on press should be looked at. We all want the gorey details at the expense of the innocent. And yet sometimes the press ignores situations if the, "like the look" of the main participant(s)
2007-07-02 09:23:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes, worrying isn't it? Better hope that they don't suspect you of anything. Being innocent won't save you from the press, and they make mistakes all the time.
Imagine the magnitude of mistake that could be made once they had all the info in a national database...then you might have any number of government agencies accusing you of things and giving all your details to the press - relevant or not.
2007-07-02 07:23:32 · answer #3 · answered by piggingheck 5 · 8⤊ 0⤋
Maybe we have decided to start taking a hard line against terrorists for a change and I'm sure that they wouldn't be releasing this information unless there was a stack of evidence. I was 3 cars back on the motorway when they stopped their vehicle and arrested them and it was a very well executed operation by the looks of it - so lets applaud our security services for once and think twice about this liberal society we live in that breeds such contempt.
2007-07-02 07:39:31 · answer #4 · answered by Spencer D 3 · 0⤊ 5⤋
there is something about the situation does not lie well with me ...gut reaction
how awful it happened on the PM's departure and the arrival of the new PM
first car bomb in scotland i believe weird huh ?
2007-07-03 05:19:52 · answer #5 · answered by Jezabel 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You know what, I could have predicted that the good old police wouild be making numerous arrests right away. Lol. I think they're arresting random people, just so that the general public feel like we're being looked after... maybe maybe not.
2007-07-02 07:29:36 · answer #6 · answered by Illuminattiness 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I noticed BBC news blurred his face out at the request of the police, however Sky showed him.
2007-07-02 07:32:37 · answer #7 · answered by Delly xx 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
The guy isn't a terrorist until proven, he is only a suspect...
After all, he might a normal guy who Brits arrested because of him having a Muslims name...
You can't see a "John Smith" being arrested on suspicion of terrorism!!!
2007-07-02 07:28:07 · answer #8 · answered by Gurpegi 1 · 4⤊ 5⤋
Do you want to run for Office????? Very nice piece!!!!!
Five stars
2007-07-02 07:26:57 · answer #9 · answered by cactus 2 · 7⤊ 0⤋
You were given personal details about the "SUSPECT"
Suspect being the key word. As long as the media include that word there is no legal problem.
.
2007-07-02 07:24:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 8⤋