I think we need to ask the question – where should open justice occur? As far as I am concerned – and it has been the way since the advent of our current justice system – the only place is in a court of law – not at a police station nor at the time someone is arrested.

To that end is it right that the police name a suspect after arrest? At the point someone is arrested they are subject of an investigation – not the judicial process and this clear distinction must be given due regard. Once someone has been charged with an offence they then enter the justice system and it is right that in pursuance of open justice their details can be released to the media.

There are times when it is necessary to name a suspect before arrest or charge – for example where there is a risk to the public from a suspect who needs to be detained as soon as practicable to protect the public or vulnerable sections of society from a specific threat. I agree with this whole-heartedly as this is rarely done and only in cases where the evidence already gathered could be considered as sound.

A case study: For a man, one of the worst accusations they can be subject of is one of sexual assault. Sadly, I have experienced cases where women make false allegations of sexual assault who have various ulterior motives for doing so. For the man involved this then leads to arrest, humiliating forensic examinations and the prospect of being on police bail while the investigation is pursued. When the allegation is found to be unproven many find they cant then pick up their lives where they left off because they’ve had their names plastered all over the media.

If that wasn’t bad enough for them they then become a “subject” under the Management of Police Information (MoPI). MoPI came about as a result of the Bichard report into the Soham Murders. It is a standardised system by which police record and share information between forces. Anyone who is arrested must be categorised under this system which designates the risk of harm they are deemed to pose to the public. The groupings range from 1 to 4 with 1 being the top end of the scale and 4 is given to anyone who reports a crime or is involved in a collision where no offences have been disclosed and therefore of no perceived risk to the public. Anyone arrested for a sexual offence goes into group 2 which is deemed to be “of medium risk of harm to the public”. So, “Mr Nice Guy” who has never been in trouble with the police in his life gets arrested, released without charge and applies for a job where a CRB check is a requirement of employment suddenly finds this incident coming back to haunt him. He remains in group 2 under MoPI for a minimum of 12 years (some forces extend to 15 years). There is an appeal process but I have yet to hear of someone being removed from or having their group status changed in the MoPI system.

The women who behave in this reckless way with no regard for the consequences of their actions are never identified – unless of course they make a habit of making false claims in which case they are prosecuted. Not only do they wreck the lives of the men they accuse they also undermine genuine victims of sexual assault.

Short of serving a prison sentence, men who are falsely accused of sexual assault are penalised in the same way as those convicted of such heinous crimes.

Those who abuse children should rightly face the justice system. But for similar reasons above they should not be named until they are charged in my opinion. Many, prior to charge are held on police bail while investigations continue. Sadly, there are those in society who lack the patience and understanding of the justice system and become judge, jury and in some cases executioner because they have been able to identify the suspect, where they live and then administered their own form of “justice”. Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe suggested that naming suspects gives confidence to hitherto unknown victims to come forward and I agree with him but there is nothing in the criminal justice system to say that those victims cannot do so after a person has been charged with an offence.

We must vigorously protect the victims of crime – especially serious crimes and we should support those victims through the entire justice process. Everyone has the right to life however. Whether we like it or not, this includes anyone arrested, on bail or in custody and we have an obligation to protect them also.

Bosco

So, yet again, we are expected to swallow the tripe that crime in the UK has fallen…Sooner or later, the lid will be prized off this statistical can of worms and the public will learn, once and for all that the senior officers of UK policing have been fiddling the figures mercilessly for years.” (Read more)