The accused should not be named in harassment claims

The accused should not be named in harassment claims
Recently, the news has been filled with different names of celebrities that have been named and shamed for sexual harassment. The problem with this for me is that the accused have not actually been convicted of anything yet they are named and shamed without any proper proof. I understand that some of these celebrities will have taken advantage of their fame and position to harass these people. The problem is that I believe they should only be named and shamed once they have been convicted or some proof of their actions have been shown.

Agree

Alexa

Innocent until there is proof

False allegations that are proven to be so still end up damaging people because of the stigma and also people wondering if there was any truth in it.

I do think it should remain private until there is a case, and then it should be announced. I can see why some say it's good as it encourages others to come forward, but if it is false, and done as an act of revenge then you can't turn back the clock, even if you are proven to be innocent as people will still wonder.

Posted by Alexa on 02-03-2018
limberg

Not yet guilty

It's so easy nowadays to point a finger to a man and accuse him of sexual harassment. The accused is usually paraded in the open while the accuser is protected by anonymity. I believe that this is unfair since these are still merely allegations.

If a person is found guilty of the crime, that's the time when his identity should be brought to light. But if there's still no verdict, I believe, in my humble opinion, that the accused should also be held in anonymity.

Posted by limberg on 02-01-2018
overcast

Women Making Money and Fame

By accusing any random person many women are making fame and money. Also the society gets blind support for such women. So this is really bad. Any random person can get accused. And women can make money and fame out of it. Who is going to stop that chain then?
Posted by overcast on 02-02-2018
gata montes

Agree

As the majority of sexual harassment claims are generally found to be only allegations - I too would agree that until someone is found guilty - meaning there is actual concrete evidence to say that the accused did actually commit the alleged crime - it is extremely unfair to name them.

Particularly bearing in mind the fact that once someone has been named for sexual harassment it can ruin not just their livelihood but their life too - as the label – even if they are proved innocent - never ever goes away.

Posted by gata montes on 01-31-2018
Wubwub

until proven guilty

I agree because it has happened too much in recent years where people are shamed for actions that aren't really all that bad or sometimes the accusations are even false. I do think it's important to believe and protect those that stand up and ask for help but it's also important to protect the other side when they haven't really been proven guilty yet, as sometimes the accuser's side also has sinister motives.
Posted by Wubwub on 11-25-2018
Barida

You're right.

I always have this opinion that the people being accused, not only celebrities but other common people, shouldn't be shamed publicly as long as there is no proof that they did what they are being accused of doing. I have heard stories where most of these accused were later judged to be free of the crime they are being accused of, but since they have been mentioned publicly, that tag will remain with them forever. For me, I don't think that is really good of the prosecutors.
Posted by Barida on 02-01-2018
mitan143

Somehow agree

I somehow agree that those celebrities should not named immediately before they proven to be guilty or not. People can get easily believe whenever they hear about a celebrity with an issue especially about sexual harassment. But being a celebrity is not easy and I guess it is a common thing for them to have issues even not yet proven to be true or not. Well, naming celebrities with issues can easily get people interested so they don't care about the celebrities' reputation. Hot issues matter after all.
Posted by mitan143 on 11-04-2018
stbrians

Agreed

Normally one is innocent until proved guilty. Conviction should be done and then the victims named. That is what should happen.

However, celebreties are very influential people. They will influence even the outcome of cases. The weak have no justice really

Posted by stbrians on 10-19-2018
emiaj55

Until proven true

Anybody should always be considered innocent until proven otherwise. And yet people have the tendency to judge way before there is a definite verdict. So even though the accused is proven innocent later on, their reputation is already tinted with scandal and life is never the same again.
Posted by emiaj55 on 12-08-2018

Disagree

kgord

Let them be embarassed

It is true that you are innoccent until proven guilty but in most cases, where there is smoke there is fire. I would tend to believe most of the accusers. If the person is indeed innoccent they can have a public apology and retraction printed.
Posted by kgord on 01-31-2018
foxchannel

I Disagree But My Reasoning is "Sticky"

This is a sticky one. (Sticky. Touchy. Sorry. Couldn't really find an appropriate word.)

Some of the claims of sexual harassment go so far as to include sexual assault. We can't just use a “one size fits all” and say not make the matter public UNTIL ...

Consider this.

If the ACCUSED is innocent but was NAMED PUBLICLY BEFORE the accusation had been proven to be false … won't that make The ACCUSER look really really really GUILTY?!! Won't that dirty nasty trick that they tried to play on an innocent person, try to sully and ruin their good reputation and case them unnecessary emotional stress and possibly financial hardship, backfire in their faces? Can't the ACCUSED use that “proof of their innocence” to now go after the ACCUSER for the damage they've done?

If the ACCUSED is guilty and was NAMED PUBLICLY BEFORE the accusation had been proven to be true … will that make any less GUILTY?!! The public accusation and humiliation was part of the punishment they deserved. What they did in the dark was brought into the light.

Justice is served either way. Sure it was hard for the innocent person but when proved innocent they must feel so vindicated. It was a public trial and a public triumph!

What do you think?

Posted by foxchannel on 02-22-2018
quiet

Courtroom standards need not apply.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a decision ultimately made in a courtroom. The standard required in legal proceedings allow for an outcome that is as fair and judicious as possible, as consistently as possible.

It would be unreasonable to expect that everyone must change their standard of accepting guilt over any matter that doesn't require them to enact judgment upon the accused. They're going to have their opinion, and unless they are serving on the trial, they're going to be the ones to decide what evidence is compelling by their personal standards.

Posted by quiet on 02-16-2018

Comments

1000vultures
It's tough. Innocent until proven guilty is a really important legal standard to maintain, and I think the mentality is shifting a little bit closer towards the mentality of accusations being as good as proof, and that's a terrifying prospect. Just because these people have public lifestyles, we feel entitled to be privy to their lives, where if they didn't have such public personas we might never know about what has happened. Sexual harassment happens in every single industry but the names of those people don't get dragged through the news. The ones we see on the news is only because of their celebrity status.
Posted by 1000vultures on 01-31-2018
Corzhens
Especially in sexual harassment cases it is sad when you are named in the media as one of the accused because people will already look at you as guilty. I don’t know if there is someone who would say Bill Cosby is not guilty or some other celebrities who are accused of sexual molestation like the film producer. I am not saying that they are not guilty. My point is the public’s perception that they are guilty even before the trial.
Posted by Corzhens on 12-14-2018
jaymish
This is a very different situation. If these women do not name these men in this manner, what they 'did' will go unpunished! You have a point but for this case, this rule shouldn't apply.I recommend you read Rose Mcgowan's Brave. She alleges to have been raped by one of the men. Over 60 women have come out claiming some kind of assault by him. Hollywood acknowledge that it was a well known secret, that he does this to women. This man is very powerful and he blacklisted her in Hollywood for years and ruined her career. This was the only way to make sure that his 'crimes' were known, he was too powerful. This also lead to more women coming out.
Posted by jaymish on 01-31-2018
babyright
I also agree because there is need for a proper evidence or proof to show it that these celebrities actually harassed others sexually then they can now be named and shamed.
Posted by babyright on 01-31-2018
Adesuwa08
I think that because you guys think they are celebrities so they just have to be tempered with mercy but let's not forget that this people arw guilty of it but because we like them we can vouch for them, let's be honest with ourselves these guys are humans like us and there is nothing special about them just their celebrity status, judge them like the way you will judge other people maybe it would help.

The entertainment industry is being run by perversely inclined men, they do virtually anything just to get people bow down to them and these have hurt the lives of a lot of adults, let's not dispute that kids are often among.
Posted by Adesuwa08 on 01-31-2018
JoeMilford
I think that it is anyone's right to call someone out in public, but I also think that an investigation needs to follow such a claim, and if proof is not established for the claim, then the person who made it should seriously be reprimanded. However, sometimes a wrong is done, and proof can not be established, so this is completely problematic. i worry on both sides of this issue, and I think that there are potential victims on both sides. We are all innocent until proven guilty, but plenty of people are guilty and never get "caught" and many people are innocent and take the fall for crimes they did not commit. The system is adequate, but far from perfect.
Posted by JoeMilford on 01-31-2018
NickJ
The accused have to be named in sexual harassment claims. That's how the system works. They don't have to or maybe, shouldn't be named in public or on social media. But if the case is big enough, once it hits the courts... it'll slip out eventually. Also the accused being outed early helps people make important decisions. For example, not hiring said person for new projects. It could get quite embarrassing if the accused attends a charity function on Tuesday, and then is named as a defendant in sexual assault case much later. Had the event organizers had that information beforehand, they could've scrapped that persons attendance at the event. Now, they look complicit, and that's bad for them.
Posted by NickJ on 01-31-2018
vinaya
The OP is only talking on the behalf of celebrities. Same thing happens to a commoner and no body cares. Let me exemplify, a man is accused of rape, the media and the society begins to call him rapist. However, the court proves him innocent. However, the tag "rapist" will not wash away. People will never believe him as an innocent. In the case of celebrity, he will easily get away with that. Many people beging to sympathize with him,
Posted by vinaya on 01-31-2018
vhinz
This is a big problem in every society. People would easily give their negative opinion as the heard for someone is being accused. And with the presence of social media and other websites, it would be so easy to express ones thought on the matter and spread it on the internet like a virus. Sadly, we cannot control other people from saying what they wanted to say.
Posted by vhinz on 02-01-2018
Denis_P
This is a situation where it is really tough to make a decision. Going by my own instinct, I feel like it would be more fair to not release the names of accused until they are definitively proven guilty. These allegations can have a substantial impact on the reputations, lives, and careers of the accused, regardless of whether or not the claims are true or false. However, at the same time, I'm sure it occurs that accusations are made and nothing is done about them until it gains traction through media attention. I don't really know where I stand on the matter, but I lean more towards not releasing the names until proven guilty.
Posted by Denis_P on 02-01-2018
ballyhara
Sexual harassment has to be punished, and all those people found guilty must get what they deserve. They have made others suffer and ruined their lives. However, anyone should be consider innocent until found guilty, so it's also embarrassing to feel the target of guilt when you didn't do anything wrong. It's not the first time that people just want to ruin someone else's life by telling lies and accusing, so before condemning anyone, please be sure you can demonstrate that accusation. In other words, named someone guilty, after you can prove he/she really is.
Posted by ballyhara on 02-01-2018
Pixie
It is actually a bad thing to blame those celebrities without any proofs. If they are indeed not guilty then we are tarnishing their images for nothing. This may negatively affect their personal and professional lives.
Posted by Pixie on 02-01-2018
overcast
I think this victim gaming is going way too far. I hope that society wakes up and see the difference between the genuine and the people who are really under some sort of the burden. You can see that it's not going to be easy for many people to work around that part. I guess legal hassles are too much. And such accusation only going to put the people into such harassment.
Posted by overcast on 02-02-2018
lovely
You know humans are judgment beings, they don't mind casting the first stone even when themselves are also guilty of the same offense but their own is hidden, so they crucify those that theirs came to the open.I strongly support your assertion, why shame a person that the accuser hasn't a substantial proof to nail or the law court haven't convicted.Humans are so lawless that is why some innocent people rot in jail over nothing.Let the law take it full course before one is blamed and shamed.
Posted by lovely on 02-03-2018
treecko142
The media is mostly to blame for this one. They are always on the look out for sensational news that they forget that everyone accused of something should be treated innocent until proven guilty. Problem is that news articles are already biased and present the accused as already convicted and guilty of something even when it is not the case. In addition, when someone accuses another of something, they should take a statement first from the accused to show two sides of the story, if they really want to let the reader decide which is real or not.
Posted by treecko142 on 02-08-2018
JMS
Not just to be named and shamed as they are innocent until proven guilty. The public should know however that the certain person is being investigated and going through a case. I would rather know in advance and watch the outcome than not know anything at all. I think that the whole cases should be televised as well so we can make up our own mind.
Posted by JMS on 02-11-2018
gavinci13
It is a good thing in a away that known people will be conscious of doing bad things because they don't want their name to be put in a shame. But I understand the point that naming them during the trial is a little bit unfair. But it is what it is, you wouldn't be involve to something if you stay away from things that will put in trouble. Court trial doesn't have a special treatment if you are accuse of something you can't keep it private specially if you are a known person.
Posted by gavinci13 on 02-26-2018
gavinci13
It is a good thing in a away that known people will be conscious of doing bad things because they don't want their name to be put in a shame. But I understand the point that naming them during the trial is a little bit unfair. But it is what it is, you wouldn't be involve to something if you stay away from things that will put in trouble. Court trial doesn't have a special treatment if you are accuse of something you can't keep it private specially if you are a known person.
Posted by gavinci13 on 02-26-2018
Corzhens
Over here, our president has been naming elected government officials who are suspected of being involved in drugs. When the name is mentioned, think of the shame that those people will feel. One police general cried in front of the camera when the president mentioned his name in the list of drug protectors. The police general said that his family will be greatly affected. Shaming a person by accusation is wrong. A case should be filed in the proper courts to prove that they have proof of their allegations.
Posted by Corzhens on 07-11-2018
chatbox
The accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. When someone is accused of sexual harassment, it has to be proven in court before he can be convicted and penalized. The same is true in all other cases. Should the law offer the protection of anonymity to those accused of sexual harassment? If it does, then this protection should be extended to the accused in other cases. I don't think that this idea has the welfare of the public in mind. Withholding the name of the suspect or the accused will deny other people the opportunity to bring their own case against the suspect. Being involved in a legal case is unfortunate but the accused will have a day in court and that's the perfect opportunity to prove one's innocence.
Posted by chatbox on 09-15-2018
jpk0007
Well, I think if the person who claims to be a victim should not be stopped in naming the accused. As it is the victims of sexual harassment find it very difficult to accept and come out and tell this story to the world. Most of the times the victims prefer to keep quiet and suffer all there lives. The oppressor is always much more powerful and influential than the victim. I think that it takes a lot of courage and determination for the victim to stand up against the oppressor. I agree that sometimes innocent men can also get dragged in this by women who are not real victims, but the proportion of such aberrations will be very small as compared to the real sexual harassment cases.
Posted by jpk0007 on 11-18-2018