**** The official AND ONLY 'Albion players arrested' thread ****

[fork me]

Although now Elphick could be seen as the victim of a case of deformation of character by the girl and the Argus. Does he now get name suppression, and her name put on the front page of the paper?

Sent from my phone cause I can

She is still a potential victim. We don;t now anything about who she named or even if she named Tommy at all, and I'm not going to guess and make suppositions.

To go outside of this particular case, it is essential for the victims of sexual abuse cases to be allowed to remain anonymous. Many victims feel shame even though what happened isn't their fault and less would come forwards otherwise.

Having said that, it's my personal opinion that the accused should ALSO remain anonymous until (and if) they are proved guilty, of found not guilty they should have the option of remaining anonymous. It's also my opinion that people who make proven malicious false accusations (not just a "not guilty" verdict, that could just mean there wasn't enough evidence) should be named.

However, British law doesn't agree with me the victim gets anonymity, the accused doesn't.

 

[hitony]

if the argus reported that though it would read "Tony - bought his first Argus 30 years ago!"

Sadly it would be just about correct.......

 

[Dominoid]

To go outside of this particular case, it is essential for the victims of sexual abuse cases to be allowed to remain anonymous. Many victims feel shame even though what happened isn't their fault and less would come forwards otherwise.

Having said that, it's my personal opinion that the accused should ALSO remain anonymous until (and if) they are proved guilty, of found not guilty they should have the option of remaining anonymous. It's also my opinion that people who make proven malicious false accusations (not just a "not guilty" verdict, that could just mean there wasn't enough evidence) should be named.

I agree wholeheartedly with both of these statements. The law should be about protecting the innocent in all cases. The case of Christopher Jefferies demonstrated this and it appears that we've learnt nothing from that event.

 

[Fef]

So you're suggesting we BUY a copy to tear up, in the process giving the Argus one of it's record circulation days of all-time?!?

No need really. Spend your money on something more worthwhile. Take any old newspaper, shred it, and just say it's the Argus. No-one will be any the wiser as it'll be in small pieces!

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Some clot on Twitter suggested that Tommy Elphick should sue the real Andy Naylor. I'd love to know what for ...

Since there's a bucket load of injustice flying around today, why don't we take it out on any old journalist who happens to loom into sight?

Seriously, though, amongst the rubbish that has been published, NSC has had some very sound contributions from real journos. Most of them called Nick, as it happens. I, for one, thank you for this.

 

[fork me]

So you're suggesting we BUY a copy to tear up, in the process giving the Argus one of it's record circulation days of all-time?!?

You could always s***l a copy, or ask you friendly newsagent for the previous day's copies he couldn't sell because of the boycott!

 

[Woodchip]

She is still a potential victim. We don;t now anything about who she named or even if she named Tommy at all, and I'm not going to guess and make suppositions.

To go outside of this particular case, it is essential for the victims of sexual abuse cases to be allowed to remain anonymous. Many victims feel shame even though what happened isn't their fault and less would come forwards otherwise.

Having said that, it's my personal opinion that the accused should ALSO remain anonymous until (and if) they are proved guilty, of found not guilty they should have the option of remaining anonymous. It's also my opinion that people who make proven malicious false accusations (not just a "not guilty" verdict, that could just mean there wasn't enough evidence) should be named.

However, British law doesn't agree with me the victim gets anonymity, the accused doesn't.

I was playing devils advocate. I know how the law works in sexual assault allegations, and I also believe both the accused and accuser should have the right to name suppression until charged.

Sent from my phone cause I can

 

[ewe2]

Becoming a farce........

 

[Bwian]

Yes, but at least they had the balls to say that Tommy has been cleared and had nothing to do with it

Whereas the arsegas has disabled the comments feature for all Albion stories.

 

[severnside gull]

Whereas the arsegas has disabled the comments feature for all Albion stories.

It was enabled earlier for a few minutes after they put up the current 5pm story but you had to log in with email address and password.
I managed to get a comment accepted but it was immediately taken down and the loophole closed

 

[Dandyman]

I was playing devils advocate. I know how the law works in sexual assault allegations, and I also believe both the accused and accuser should have the right to name suppression until charged.

Sent from my phone cause I can

Although I can understand the thinking, this needs to be considered BBC News - Worboys case

Suppressing the identity of the accused runs a serious risk of preventing other victims coming forward.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

It's also my opinion that people who make proven malicious false accusations (not just a "not guilty" verdict, that could just mean there wasn't enough evidence) should be named.

And how's that going to be policed then? Simple Daily Mail rhetoric but give us plans. Are you inventing a new finding that's not "Not Guilty" but more "filthy slag"? I think we, the Great British public, deserve more details oh wise one

 

[The Large One]

It's also my opinion that people who make proven malicious false accusations (not just a "not guilty" verdict, that could just mean there wasn't enough evidence) should be named.

There are many cases where that does already happen. It's reported because they've been convicted of 'perverting the course of justice'.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Told you. What this NEEDS is Max Clifford!

 

[Zeff]

Think the Q & A session with Mr Naylor might be suspended for a couple of years! Oh well, it wasn't exactly informative to be honest. Could you imagine the abuse he would get, not that he had anything to do with the front page today.

 

[ifuhatepalacestandup]

Told you. What this NEEDS is Max Clifford!

anyone got his number i think the arsegus might need it

 

[Dominoid]

Although I can understand the thinking, this needs to be considered BBC News - Worboys case

Suppressing the identity of the accused runs a serious risk of preventing other victims coming forward.

From that article:

He said: "We have anecdotal evidence from rape crisis centres and havens to say word is getting round that you will be treated with respect and dignity.

"I think there is something about every time the issue of rape comes into the public domain, good or bad, people come forward."

I can't really agree with anecdotal evidence, that's not particularly helpful. The second part though, I'm inclined to agree with. That doesn't mean that the individual accused should be named, but bringing attention to the issue is a good idea. There are so many ways that the issue can be publicised though, and people made to realise that they will be treated with dignity and respect when reporting it. It needs to be publicised in a more positive way, rather than this rather destructive way we have at the moment.

 

[brightonrock]

Disgrace of a headline - if it had said 'named - 5 men arrested" I wouldn't have had such a problem with it, but the loaded use of the word accused is what really pisses me off. They really do bite the hand that feeds them, if it weren't for Albion in the winter or Sussex in the summer they'd have shit all to write about, godawful rag.

Not going to comment on the story itself as I don't trust myself not to get carried away and end up with a ban - but will say that whilst Naylor had nothing to do with this particular report and obviously the Twitter abuse of him is uncalled for, I for one won't be changing my opinion of him in general any time soon. No mention of when an atmosphere is electric like Burnley or Southampton, oh no- all the man writes is how Albion fans are moaning and petty and miserable. "It's time for the abuse of Harding to stop" and "Stop being negative about Palace". No mate, or football would be utterly sanitised and we might as well sit in a library. Football is tribal and about passion, love and hate, you take the hate out and for me, you take the love out. Man's a prick and he should f*** off back to Stoke. Albion don't need the Argus, if it didn't exist something else would replace it. Maybe by Christmas 2012, the shit will just close and we might even get some decent journalism for once?

Dear Santa...

 

[hitony]

I am going to make this a sticky just overnight I will unstick it early in the morning, I dont want anyone to say they did not see it should they come in during the early hours and it has slipped right to the bottom or even off the main page.

I appreciate stickies are not the most read threads sometimes, but it does have more chance of being seen than if it did slip into the second page, anyway I will be about during the night again should there be any issues regarding this.

 

[pottert]

Why are the argus allowed to name them but the police not.