| |
|
AFAIK someone who is charged with any crime has their name made public. The only reason the victim's name in a rape case is kept private, unless the victim waives anonymity, is because it's the only crime where the *victim* is likely to be vilified, abused, and further fucked over if hir name is known, regardless of the outcome of the case.
Any celebrity involved in any crime is going to be all over the papers. I don't see why being charged with rape should win you anonymity over being charged with anything else.
And I don't think saying "the suspect's name is published while the victim's isn't" is quite fair: it seems to me to be close to assuming that suspect and victim are on a level playing field, which they're not. Surely the suspect should be being compared to people suspected of other crimes, not people who have been the victim of a crime.
From the statistics, which I used to know, I would say the risk to men of being falsely accused of rape by hysterical/malicious people - and that accusation then getting as far as court - is low enough for those charged with rape not to need special protection under the law, where victims of rape do. |
|
|
