Not sure if this is the right forum but…
Why is it (and this is one thing that does [zb] me off) that if a child commits a crime (DNA, video etc evidence. No doubt that it IS them) like murder or something, the news will always say “A 12 year old was charged with murder today. The child, who can not be named for legal reasons….” WHY THE [ZB] NOT!!! They have committed the crime so [zb] them. Name the little brats. It just annoys me. I can understand it if they have not been found guilty or if an investigation is on-going, but when “guilty” is heard, so should the name.
[rant mode off]
I can’t give a legal reason because I have no knowledge. However I would assume its just a question of wether or not the law considers you a child (up to 17) or an adult (18 and over). As to why they aren’t identified…Imagine your young lad had been charged with murder, but was innocent. Would you want his name in the paper decrying him “Murderer” before he had been given a fair trial? A child is still a child due to its legal age, not its understanding of morality.
Would imagine the no name bit also applies because jeuveniles appear before a different court to adults, at least in the early stages of a trial, and the public are not permitted to sit in a Jeuvenile court.
Thanks for the reply. I see you point. But when you say “Would you want his name in the paper decrying him “Murderer” before he had been given a fair trial?”, Thats why I said:
Geezah:
(DNA, video etc evidence. No doubt that it IS them)
and
Geezah:
I can understand it if they have not been found guilty or if an investigation is on-going
I have no problem with people not being named due to lack of evidence etc, but when they show CCTV video (blured face) etc so there is no doubt at all. All caught on tape, or with DNA or whatever, they still say “can not be named…” and thats what annoyes me.
why would it bother you?
does it make an iota of difference to your life not knowing?
not having a dig at you but why get upset at something so trivial
Well, it just seems stupid to me thats all. What legal reasons have been put in place to protect these law breakers (like I say, with CCTV proof etc). You dont get the same said about somebody in there 30’s or 40’s say who has comited the same crime.
I just think its stupid… 