Been thinking about this for a while and then this topic brought it to mind again.
I’ve always thought that those accused of crimes like rape or child molestation are treated very unfairly. Even if they are eventually found to be innocent, the stigma can persevere and damage their reputation for years. To me, this completely destroys the whole “innocent until proven guilty” foundation of criminal justice because oftentimes, even if there is little or no evidence in the accuser’s charges, public opinion quickly turns against the accused.
I believe that to make things just, a similar protection must be put into place for those accused of these crimes.
Those against this proposition may say that such a protection may make victims less likely to come forth. That could be true, I have no doubt that it may figure into the minds of some people. But I believe that this anonymity is more in line with our laws, our beliefs, and our concept of what is fair. My response to this criticism is that eventually, the courts will render a decision one way or another. If the accused is not guilty, then publishing his name in the papers would have been a miscarriage of justice, as an innocent person would have been tarnished. If he was found guilty, then you can publish it all you want, so it evens out.
Perhaps one is worried about other victims coming forth. If a person is accused and he is a rapist, other victims may come forth. That could be a benefit of publishing his name. But wouldn’t the same apply to the accuser? If she has accused others with no merit before, or blackmailed people with threats of allegations, wouldn’t that induce victims of her deceit to come forth as well? Our society wants to protect those who have been harmed by this heinous crime, but not all of them are real victims. Given that justice is supposed to be blind, this asymmetrical publicity seems anathema to the very idea of justice.
It’s worth it to note that in most other crimes, the accused isn’t protected with anonymity. We know why it happens with rape: it’s a stigma, sex is still taboo, the crime is very personal, and victims often feel shame. We wouldn’t want others who are victims to not come forth if they think their names will be all over the news.
Practically, there would be problems for sure and anonymity cannot be guaranteed. In famous cases like Kobe Bryant, people are going to notice he’s disappearing before and after games to go to Colorado, missing games, etc. I think such a thing is avoidable, but represents a best case scenario situation: courts will do what it can to make sure his name doesn’t get leaked out, but he will have to make up the excuses to his own family, friends, and job.
So what do Dopers think? Should the accused have anonymity?