21 ms·

Trials are public. This is a feature. This means everything can be reported unless the court puts a ban on it. Note, too that the guy pleaded guilty in this cas

Trials are public. This is a feature. This means everything can be reported unless the court puts a ban on it. Note, too that the guy pleaded guilty in this case and I think it is right to publicise the court's reasons for the penalty, or lack thereof. In the UK they release mugshots, full names, and approximate address in the media, after a guilt verdict. Names and approximate addresses are published before since trials are public. Finland, Germany, France, etc. have gone to another extreme. In France they now even withhold the names of people arrested in the act of murder or terrorism because "people are presumed innocent" and "their privacy must be protected"... which is pushing it beyond sensible and common sense, and is fairly recent practice that seems to have spread from Germany.

Svip 2y ago
Hard disagree. It's well known that people who are falsely accused of such crimes end up having to live with the damage to their reputation even after a court finds them innocent, because that's not the news story people remember. In such societies, one's life is effectively ruined the moment one is accused. Innocent until proven guilty, and the same goes for the court of public opinion.
- trallnag 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - lazyasciiart 2y ago
    How does that disagree with the comment you are replying to?
    - trallnag 2y ago
      [flagged]
- mytailorisrich 2y ago
  There is a big difference between being accused and going to trial. I agree that identities should not be published based only on "accusations". There is a big difference between being caught in the act and charged following an investigation. Currently Europe is moving/has moved to an extreme position beyond common sense as it has done on several other issues based on "good intentions". In some cases there is also a pressure to charge and go to trial just based on accusations (e.g. rape cases), which is another issue.
  - KoolKat23 2y ago
    You are still innocent at trial. There's no good from this only figurative village mobs and witch hunts. From my experience something culturally more common in the anglosphere too.
  - KoolKat23 2y ago
    You are still innocent at trial. There's no good from this only witch hunts. Something more common more recently in the anglosphere too.
  - Svip 2y ago
    This is probably also an instance of a significant cultural difference. Continental Europe generally believes in rehabilitation, whereas the Anglosphere - and the US in particular - strike me more as having a vengeful justice system. Public shaming of people at trial is incompatible with the belief in rehabilitation.
    - mytailorisrich 2y ago
      Shame of being convicted of a crime and rehabilitation are separate issues and this is not a cultural difference between continental Europe (which isn't even an homogeneous entity) and the "Anglosphere", either per se.
      - lazyasciiart 2y ago
        A trial is held before any conviction.
jampekka 2y ago
Trials are public in Finland, Germany, France etc. In some very severe crimes the name of the suspect may be published. For publicly discussed crimes the names can be usually found in some crime related discussion forums. People are presumed innocent and their privacy must be protected. The mugshot porn is not good for anybody or the society in general.
- boredhedgehog 2y ago
  This seems to introduce a lot of ambiguity to the concept of being public, in the sense that physical presence is being distinguished from a mediated, virtual presence, and the latter is considered somewhat tainted. The same peculiar notion was present in the moral panic around Google Street View in Europe, where the exact view anyone can have from a public street was considered dangerous once digitized and copied.
  - jampekka 2y ago
    There is a difference of information being public vs publicized. There's a huge difference in consequences for individuals of how widely information is distributed and how easily available it is. This of course predates the internet. Publicizing generally available information about individuals or compiling them into databases for no acceptable reason has been illegal for ages at least in most of Europe. The easier distribution by internet does cause some new questions in this and I'm not sure if restricting to "meatspace access" is optimal, but it is mostly what we have now.
immibis 2y ago
[flagged]
- Melonai 2y ago
  That's great and all but it's also just not true. Take it from someone living in Germany for the past decade.
d1sxeyes 2y ago
Even if you are arrested in the act of killing someone you may have some defence that means you are not committing murder (e.g. self-defence, diminished responsibility, I think France still has ‘crime in the heat of passion’ as a defence)
- mytailorisrich 2y ago
  The replies are getting absurd but unfortunately very illustrative of the state of Europe in 2025. The "good intentions" have indeed led to a situation in which criminals are protected beyond the level of protection and rights afforded to victims and law-abiding citizens. People can get in trouble by publishing CCTV footage to identify criminals, to give one basic example. But that's to be expected if some people think that even convicted criminals'privacy should be protected...
  - d1sxeyes 2y ago
    > The "good intentions" have indeed led to a situation in which criminals are protected beyond the level of protection and rights afforded to victims and law-abiding citizens. Is this true?
  - jampekka 2y ago
    > The "good intentions" have indeed led to a situation in which criminals are protected beyond the level of protection and rights afforded to victims and law-abiding citizens. Have you compared the crime rate between e.g. Europe and USA? People who have been sentenced of a crime are people too and (should) have rights. Its better for everybody.
    - mytailorisrich 2y ago
      That's whataboutism, red herring, and strawman in a single comment, I'm afraid.

Svip 2y ago

Hard disagree. It's well known that people who are falsely accused of such crimes end up having to live with the damage to their reputation even after a court finds them innocent, because that's not the news story people remember. In such societies, one's life is effectively ruined the moment one is accused. Innocent until proven guilty, and the same goes for the court of public opinion.

trallnag 2y ago
[flagged]
- lazyasciiart 2y ago
  How does that disagree with the comment you are replying to?
  - trallnag 2y ago
    [flagged]
mytailorisrich 2y ago
There is a big difference between being accused and going to trial. I agree that identities should not be published based only on "accusations". There is a big difference between being caught in the act and charged following an investigation. Currently Europe is moving/has moved to an extreme position beyond common sense as it has done on several other issues based on "good intentions". In some cases there is also a pressure to charge and go to trial just based on accusations (e.g. rape cases), which is another issue.
- KoolKat23 2y ago
  You are still innocent at trial. There's no good from this only figurative village mobs and witch hunts. From my experience something culturally more common in the anglosphere too.
- KoolKat23 2y ago
  You are still innocent at trial. There's no good from this only witch hunts. Something more common more recently in the anglosphere too.
- Svip 2y ago
  This is probably also an instance of a significant cultural difference. Continental Europe generally believes in rehabilitation, whereas the Anglosphere - and the US in particular - strike me more as having a vengeful justice system. Public shaming of people at trial is incompatible with the belief in rehabilitation.
  - mytailorisrich 2y ago
    Shame of being convicted of a crime and rehabilitation are separate issues and this is not a cultural difference between continental Europe (which isn't even an homogeneous entity) and the "Anglosphere", either per se.
    - lazyasciiart 2y ago
      A trial is held before any conviction.

jampekka 2y ago

Trials are public in Finland, Germany, France etc. In some very severe crimes the name of the suspect may be published. For publicly discussed crimes the names can be usually found in some crime related discussion forums. People are presumed innocent and their privacy must be protected. The mugshot porn is not good for anybody or the society in general.

boredhedgehog 2y ago
This seems to introduce a lot of ambiguity to the concept of being public, in the sense that physical presence is being distinguished from a mediated, virtual presence, and the latter is considered somewhat tainted. The same peculiar notion was present in the moral panic around Google Street View in Europe, where the exact view anyone can have from a public street was considered dangerous once digitized and copied.
- jampekka 2y ago
  There is a difference of information being public vs publicized. There's a huge difference in consequences for individuals of how widely information is distributed and how easily available it is. This of course predates the internet. Publicizing generally available information about individuals or compiling them into databases for no acceptable reason has been illegal for ages at least in most of Europe. The easier distribution by internet does cause some new questions in this and I'm not sure if restricting to "meatspace access" is optimal, but it is mostly what we have now.

immibis 2y ago

[flagged]

Melonai 2y ago
That's great and all but it's also just not true. Take it from someone living in Germany for the past decade.

d1sxeyes 2y ago

Even if you are arrested in the act of killing someone you may have some defence that means you are not committing murder (e.g. self-defence, diminished responsibility, I think France still has ‘crime in the heat of passion’ as a defence)

mytailorisrich 2y ago
The replies are getting absurd but unfortunately very illustrative of the state of Europe in 2025. The "good intentions" have indeed led to a situation in which criminals are protected beyond the level of protection and rights afforded to victims and law-abiding citizens. People can get in trouble by publishing CCTV footage to identify criminals, to give one basic example. But that's to be expected if some people think that even convicted criminals'privacy should be protected...
- d1sxeyes 2y ago
  > The "good intentions" have indeed led to a situation in which criminals are protected beyond the level of protection and rights afforded to victims and law-abiding citizens. Is this true?
- jampekka 2y ago
  > The "good intentions" have indeed led to a situation in which criminals are protected beyond the level of protection and rights afforded to victims and law-abiding citizens. Have you compared the crime rate between e.g. Europe and USA? People who have been sentenced of a crime are people too and (should) have rights. Its better for everybody.
  - mytailorisrich 2y ago
    That's whataboutism, red herring, and strawman in a single comment, I'm afraid.