Naming names, arrests and charges

[Free Press Editor Joe Spear]

Should a newspaper publish the names of those arrested before they are officially charged. The Free Press policy has generally been yes, but other news organizations contend police can make mistakes in arrested people who are innocent. If the newspaper publishes the information, we have published the information and in their view damaged their reputation. At the same time, do neighbors and the community want to know "right away" who was arrested and why?
We find ourselves balancing the rights of the accused to a fair trail yet informing the public about public safety issues that may directly affect them.
Thoughts on the fairness or appropriateness of our policy?

[Bob Jentges]

Should a newspaper publish the names of those arrested before they are officially charged. The Free Press policy has generally been yes, but other news organizations contend police can make mistakes in arrested people who are innocent. If the newspaper publishes the information, we have published the information and in their view damaged their reputation. At the same time, do neighbors and the community want to know "right away" who was arrested and why?
We find ourselves balancing the rights of the accused to a fair trail yet informing the public about public safety issues that may directly affect them.
Thoughts on the fairness or appropriateness of our policy?

It's a tough balance, but since I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty I think I would prefer waiting with publishing names.

[Dan Conner]

It's a tough balance, but since I believe a person is innocent until proven guilty I think I would prefer waiting with publishing names.

Hey, here is one on which Bob and I both agree. I think papers get so carried away with freedom of the press that they want to trample on a person's right to privacy. If a newspaper feels compelled to run stories that falsely damage one's reputations and respect, then maybe laws should be restructured to make it easier to win defamation and libel claims against the media. That might just be the countervailing force needed to be equitable.

[Free Press Editor Joe Spear]

Not to through a wrench into this newfound harmony, :) but let me add a twist to this dilemma.
Person suspected of abusing children, former sex offender, is arrested. Now, do you want to know names right away and where he was living etc.? What if he makes bail and goes back home to his house just down the street from yours? Should families with kids in that neighborhood be told of the arrest? Does that change whether you want to know his name at arrest versus waiting a few days or even weeks for formal charges?

[Bob Jentges]

Not to through a wrench into this newfound harmony, :) but let me add a twist to this dilemma.
Person suspected of abusing children, former sex offender, is arrested. Now, do you want to know names right away and where he was living etc.? What if he makes bail and goes back home to his house just down the street from yours? Should families with kids in that neighborhood be told of the arrest? Does that change whether you want to know his name at arrest versus waiting a few days or even weeks for formal charges?

Do not worry about any "newfound harmony". After I saw Dan agreed with me on this issue I immediatly re-thought my position, but still came down on the side of privacy. If the person was a "former sex offender" i.e. convicted sex offender, I think he/she would have been required to register his/her wherabouts with authorities and those authorities in turn notify people in the area. Correct me if I am incorrect because I am certainly no expert in that area. Like I said in my initial post, this is a difficult balance.

[Ben Willaert]

With all the technicalities that people get off on these days, is being found guilty really a gage of what the person did or didn’t do? I don't have a problem with names being published before the verdict. If the courts can’t discourage anti-social behavior maybe public humiliation can.

My father always preached to me about guilt by association. If you get arrested for something, there is a pretty good chance you were involved in some way. If you steer clear in the first place, you shouldn’t have much to worry about. If you choose to walk the line, don’t be surprised when you get burned.

Although, there is the problem that sometimes the early information can be wrong or blow out of proportion. The case of the girl killed on third ave. comes to mind. Sensationalizing stories needs to be kept in check. Informing the public of a danger is one thing, but preying on fears and contributing to ignorance is another.

[Bob Jentges]

With all the technicalities that people get off on these days, is being found guilty really a gage of what the person did or didn’t do? I don't have a problem with names being published before the verdict. If the courts can’t discourage anti-social behavior maybe public humiliation can.

My father always preached to me about guilt by association. If you get arrested for something, there is a pretty good chance you were involved in some way. If you steer clear in the first place, you shouldn’t have much to worry about. If you choose to walk the line, don’t be surprised when you get burned.

Although, there is the problem that sometimes the early information can be wrong or blow out of proportion. The case of the girl killed on third ave. comes to mind. Sensationalizing stories needs to be kept in check. Informing the public of a danger is one thing, but preying on fears and contributing to ignorance is another.

My parents talked to me about the guilt by association factor, as did I with my children. But as I think back, what if the person I steered my kids away from was actually innocent? In my senior years I am beginning to think the guilt by association position says more about those who pre-judge others than it does about the person being judged.

[Ben Willaert]

My parents talked to me about the guilt by association factor, as did I with my children. But as I think back, what if the person I steered my kids away from was actually innocent? In my senior years I am beginning to think the guilt by association position says more about those who pre-judge others than it does about the person being judged.

Good point, I guess I was referring more to actions then the actual people someone associates with. I understand what you are saying though. I had quite a few friends from the wrong crowd, but I couldn’t understand what was so bad about them. They were all good people, just making some poor choices. Like them, I was a good person, making poor choices in my actions, not my friends.

[Ben Willaert]

Here is some of that public humiliation I alluded to earlier. Granted these people are either convicted or charged with a crime. At any rate, maybe Mankato could use the billboard idea in the bar district so everyone would know who the trouble makers are.

Putting people charged with soliciting prostitution on a billboard:
http://www.startribune.com/local/41084482.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD 3aPc:_Yyc:aUac8HEaDiaMDCinchO7DU

Website featuring those charged with soliciting prostitution:
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/police/prostitution-convictions/convictions.asp

[Dan Conner]

Again, I think it would be a terrible injustice to destroy someone's job, as well as realtionships with neighbors and friends, just to be able to exercise a freedom of the press. I think these freedoms come with a responsbility.

Maybe, a compensating or countervailing power could be offered to the subject of such a report. Maybe if a person was aquitted or found not guilty of the charged offense, and if significant damage was done to his/her character, job, or relationships in the community, legal liabilities for the media could be considered. Maybe more responsibility would be exercised if the media knew this in advance. It would be like compensating someone for wrongfully imprisoning an innocent person.

If someone had a prior conviction for the same offense, then I would ask the same question Bob did - was there already notice given to people in the community about the convicted person? This would diminish the press' interest to inform the community.

[Liz Ratcliff]

Do not worry about any "newfound harmony". After I saw Dan agreed with me on this issue I immediatly re-thought my position, but still came down on the side of privacy. If the person was a "former sex offender" i.e. convicted sex offender, I think he/she would have been required to register his/her wherabouts with authorities and those authorities in turn notify people in the area. Correct me if I am incorrect because I am certainly no expert in that area. Like I said in my initial post, this is a difficult balance.

Grudges only waste energy... I agree with you on the point, but not on the spite.

[Bob Jentges]

Grudges only waste energy... I agree with you on the point, but not on the spite.

No spite on my part. Maybe a weak attempt at humor, but not spite.

[Dan Conner]

No spite on my part. Maybe a weak attempt at humor, but not spite.

Bob, you're right..a weak attempt at humor.