COMMENTARY BY THE HON. RUFUS PECKHAM - The rape allegations against three Duke Lacrosse players has refocused attention on the widely accepted practice among news sources of not reporting the names of sexual assault accusers. In the Duke case, the three young men accused of the most vile crimes were subsequently declared "innocent" by the state's attorney general (not merely "not guilty"), and the D.A. who brought the baseless charges was disbarred and has admitted there was no credible evidence for the charges. The names of the young men were freely aired by every news source in America for more than a year while the false charges hung over their heads.After the accuser's claims were declared unworthy of belief, most of the elite news media pondered long and hard as to whether to name the accuser, and for good reason, most decided against it. For example, NPR reached its decision only after taking into account the accuser's mental history and possible motivations.
This news source completely agrees with this rationale. Unstable persons, such as the Duke lacrosse accuser, who make false allegations of rape should not be named by the news media because naming them would only discourage other wackos, nutcases and liars from making similar wholly unfounded claims against other innocent men. Such fabricated claims are to be encouraged at all costs, even if the cost is an innocent man's reputation. The only thing that matters is that we get a good, titillating story out of it, truth be damned.
But this news source wouldn't stop there. For future cases, the wacko's pimp also should not be named because naming the pimp would render identification of the wacko easier.
It is for all these reasons that this news source joins the others and will not report the name of the Duke lacrosse accuser, Crystal Mangum.
