|
In Reply to: Re: A lesson for all. posted by Joseph on February 05, 2003 at 05:09:15:
Taking all that into consideration, it would have been best to not have mentioned names to Sam (or other people), wouldn't it? I do believe that this person came on strong to a lot of people in emails and on the board because someone was publicizing this act as fact. I know the way it was presented, it appeared that it was a very well known fact and anything said to the contrary was dismissed as ludicrous. That's how it was presented to me. Sam also did apologize for naming the name of this particular minor and said he did not realize it was in the email. I believe what he is talking bout in this text is known victims who have already made statements. If you notice in newspaper accounts of criminal events, minor victims names are named because it is the act of a crime. I don't quite understand why, but it's the law. I do remember a sheriff being criticized by a family whose daughter was a victim of kidnapping and rape and he published her name. He did nothing illegal, but they were upset nevertheless. It turns out the victim later came on national television and boldly talked about her ordeal. There was a lot of talk about protecting the victim yet on the downside it made the victim feel like they had something to hide. This is when it's all known fact by the authorities of course. I don't quite understand all the legalities because if you have a lawsuit or minors involved, their names are kept from the public and protected. I think I'll ask about that today at work. In any event, yes, this was a lesson for all and I don't think one person is more guilty than another in this whole scenario. Can we drop it now and learn from it instead of continuing to trash each other?
