There are two very good posts on Name Suppression that are must reads.
Both of them are from people who are , let’s say not big fans of me, Poneke and Steven Price. Poneke just hates….anyone, me included, that said he is a professional journalist and is worth listening to. Steven Price was once conned by Pearl Going into trying to sue me. The case went nowhere predictably once Steven found out how mad and unreliable his client was not only with the truth but probably also with paying. Nevertheless Steven is acknowledged by all to be a Media Law expert.
The Horse Has Bolted – Poneke
Though the details have been removed several times from the main entry (once within three minutes of being posted), they remain for all to see in the history section. My understanding of how Wikipedia works is they cannot be deleted.
Sorry, Inspector Winter, but there is nothing you can do about it â€” finding the identity of anonymous Wikipedia updaters is a completely different matter to finding a blogger who wants to be found.
A whale of a campaign – Steven Price
What has the presumption of innocence got to do with it? The defendants are all still presumed innocent, whether theyâ€™re publicly named or not. Lots of people donâ€™t get name suppression. Sometimes itâ€™s clear lots of people think theyâ€™re guilty. Is the presumption of innocence less for them?
What has a fair trial got to do with it? In very rare circumstances, suppression is imposed to protect a personâ€™s right to a fair trial, usually when there are parallel proceedings involving a jury. I havenâ€™t seen anything to suggest thatâ€™s the case here.
Sounds like police blather to me.
I respect both of their opinions even though we often lock horns. Both however are strong advocates for Freedom of Speech. These posts are worth the read.