Most readers don’t want The N&O to name complainants in sex crime cases. But most do want the paper to name the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case.
That’s the somewhat anomalous reading I got from an informal, unscientific survey of News & Observer readers last week. A number of you responded to my column in which I said the paper should not identify the accuser, unless she herself is charged (That’s my opinion; N&O editors have not decided what to do.)
I asked members of the Reader Advisory Panel two questions:
1) Should The N&O identify the accuser if the case is resolved in favor of the Duke lacrosse players accused of sexual offense and kidnapping?
2) Do you agree or disagree with the paper’s general policy of not naming complainants in sex crimes?
Of the 177 who answered the first question, two thirds (113) said The N&O should name the accuser. One third (59) said don’t name her, and five weren’t sure.
But nearly 90 percent said the paper should stick to shielding accusers’ names in sex cases. Of 156 respondents, 130 said don’t identify accusers, 12 said do, and 14 were ambivalent.
Many of the responses were quite thoughtful, so let’s turn over the rest of today’s column to the readers. (For more readers’ thoughts, go to www.newsobserver.com, keyword: vaden):
Name the Duke accuser:
“I realize this would be a difficult decision, but at this point the individual’s right to privacy is subservient to the public’s right to know who is behind the accusations made about the defendants and the community.” — Richard Usanis, Raleigh.
“Why wait to see if the case is resolved in favor of the students? Because of all the inconsistencies in her story, she should be identified NOW to take some of the heat.” — Frank Schiermeier, Cary.
“Nothing can ever put the lives of these young men back in order, but there should be at least some public consequences for anyone who makes false accusations.” — Clark Rounds, Spring Hope.
“There should be as great stigma against making false accusations, particularly in a sex crime where anonymity protects the real criminal, as there is in the actual commission of the crime itself.” — Paul King, Raleigh.
“After all, bearing false witness against one’s neighbor is a major no-no in the Ten Commandments.” — Darlene Parsons, Raleigh.
“I went back to Google and plugged in her name and came up with 18,300 hits. I had never imagined that the publication of the name appears almost universal except in my prime source of news, The N&O.” — Gerry Cohen, Raleigh.
Don’t name her:
“If The N&O were to make an exception in this case, then you are embarking on a slippery slope that will come back to haunt you in the future. Do you make an exception to the policy when an accusation becomes very suspect (?), mildly suspect (?), slightly suspect? Bottom line: Stick with the policy; the greater good outweighs this poor result.” — Warner Hall, Raleigh (retired obstetrician).
“Many people are justifiably angry at her, and many probably want her name in the paper as a way of getting back at her. The N&O, though, should not become a forum for publicly tar-and-feathering someone.” — Preeti Aroon, Duke ’06, Washington, D.C.
“As it stands now, she’ll probably have to move to some obscure place in the Midwest to rid herself of the stigma of bad press, regardless of whether or not she is innocent, guilty or simply had bad judgment.” — Pamela Mullins, Raleigh.
“If she is not charged, I think you still have to withhold her name, as unfair as that seems. A finding of ‘not guilty’ in the students’ cases doesn’t mean they are innocent.” — Nancy Lee, Chapel Hill.
“While I find false accusations of this nature to be as offensive as the crime they allege, there simply is no overriding public benefit in punishment through the media — that is the job of the courts, and there is simply too much to be lost if an editor (or a court) judges incorrectly.” — Pete Rau, Durham.
“There will undoubtedly be some women who are/will be protected and don’t deserve to be, but that’s preferable to naming some women who deserve to remain anonymous but are revealed. We don’t need to know this woman’s name. Leave her alone.” — Deborah Horvitz, Durham.
Keep the policy of not identifying sex crime defendants:
“This case has done so much damage to the privacy issue that I can’t make myself type in the words: I agree with The N&O’s policy.” — Dale Sherman, Raleigh.
“As long as there remains a stigma associated with sexual crimes, victims’ anonymity should be protected to ensure they come forward. Too few do, which allows sexual predators to continuing preying on others.” — Mandy Matson, Cary.
Change the policy:
“Women wish equality in everything including Title IX athletics. Let’s give it to them. Publish names.” — John Lenkey, Littleton.
“I am proud to call myself a feminist. I understand the stigma that comes with accusations of sexual crimes, but so long as newspapers say, ‘we’re not going to print that person’s name because of the stigma,’ the media only serves to perpetuate that stigma.” — Steven Greene, Raleigh.
“The rule is disclosure. When in a given case a good argument can be made for suppressing the name, then you are free to make an exception. The presumption should always be in favor of publishing, but no policy needs to be followed out the window. Your duty is to be fair, not to be foolishly consistent.” — David DuBuisson, Beaufort (former newspaper editor).
Other opinions:
“I disagree with naming either party in such a case until the trial is complete and a verdict is rendered.” — Dave Engelhart, Raleigh.
“I am very tired of seeing this case on the front page of The N&O — or on any page, for that matter. I think The N&O has given it way too much space. It has brought shame on all the main players — the students’ hiring a stripper was shameful, the way she behaved was shameful, Nifong’s behavior has been shameful. There are no winners and many losers.” — Ann Howe, Raleigh.
“I think all parties involved need to apologize to the rest of us for annoying us.” Hank MacKnee, Durham.
