Re: HPD's online DUI pics
You have brought up an interesting dilemma. The public wants to know who is the "suspect" when the neighbor woman is stabbed. They want to know who is the "suspect" in a DUI that results in a death. They want to know who is the "suspect" when someone in an official capacity is charged with a crime [say, a politician is charged with embezzling]. The newspapers usually report the names, which is what the public wants.
So, when someone is charged with a DUI, what is the difference between the HPD putting those names online, and the newspapers putting suspects names of other crimes in articles (which also goes online)?
Where is the line drawn between "presumed innocent until proven guilty", (thus the right to privacy), and the right for the public to know who is charged with crimes (which is information that is available to the public through the police blotter)?
A man tosses a baby off a freeway. We [the public] want to know who the suspect is. An man is charged with a DUI. Should the public NOT know?
Or, is it that the HPD was running the site? Is that the objection?
Just wondering aloud here.
Originally posted by bjd392
View Post
So, when someone is charged with a DUI, what is the difference between the HPD putting those names online, and the newspapers putting suspects names of other crimes in articles (which also goes online)?
Where is the line drawn between "presumed innocent until proven guilty", (thus the right to privacy), and the right for the public to know who is charged with crimes (which is information that is available to the public through the police blotter)?
A man tosses a baby off a freeway. We [the public] want to know who the suspect is. An man is charged with a DUI. Should the public NOT know?
Or, is it that the HPD was running the site? Is that the objection?
Just wondering aloud here.
Comment