I came across this story about two teachers accused of having sex with minors, as well throwing sex & drug parties students, but what struck me as odd was the reporting of the home address of the two accused teachers.
Check it out here: http://www.goupstate.com/article/20100921/ARTICLES/9211025/1051?tc=ar
It struck me as odd that the address would be used, especially in something that involves a "sex with a minor" charge. I brought this up to Jeremy and he mentioned that this is standard practice, but there are certain cases where they wouldn't do this (dometic violence cases, etc...)
What do you all think of reporting the home address of the accused person in a story? The information that is reported is public information and is available to everyone...but is it too invasive? Do people have a right to know?
It's not a common practice to publish the subjects' addresses in the news here in Malaysia. The most we do is mention the town they live in, and nothing more. I am surprised that this news article included the accused's addresses. While I'd say that the public do not need to know their addresses (to prevent them from disturbing the accused's families, for instance), I recall a story about the government sending letters to every household in a town in Seattle, informing them a rapist has recently finished serving his sentence and has moved into their town. His photo and address were included in the letter as well. I believe this was done for the safety of the residents, but address of an accused who has yet to be found guilty? I think it's unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteMy impression was that the town was all that was generally published, or sometimes the street and town. We do, now, barbaric as it seems, have a sex offender registry, which makes public the address of every person convicted of a sex crime -- for the remainder of his or her life. But there is a difference between being accused of a crime and being convicted.
ReplyDelete