one rule for us ...
Aug. 11th, 2006 08:12 amso ... those arrested yesterday on suspicion of trying to blow up bombs have had their assets frozen. And the Bank of England has published their names on its web site. Amongst them is
by my calculation, he is 17. And this confirms my thought that Section 44 of the 1999 Act (if brought into force in full) would automatically prevent reporting of any matter which might lead the public to identify a person under 18 as a potential defendant, victim or witness as soon as a criminal investigation has begun.
so this boy surely should be afforded the same protection.
PATEL, Abdul, Muneem
DOB: 17/04/1989
Address: London, E5
by my calculation, he is 17. And this confirms my thought that Section 44 of the 1999 Act (if brought into force in full) would automatically prevent reporting of any matter which might lead the public to identify a person under 18 as a potential defendant, victim or witness as soon as a criminal investigation has begun.
so this boy surely should be afforded the same protection.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-11 09:03 am (UTC)It is interesting the way the details of the names have been released - the freezing of bank accounts allows quite a lot of information to be revealed where ordinarily we would expect the usual "a 25 year old is helping police with their enquiries" or "a 25 year old was arrested". Already on the BBC this morning Victoria Derbyshire has read out a number of names from the Bank of England list with the caveat that the names weren't provided by the police but are available from the Bank of England. So, why release them? If the police aren't revealing names to the media surely there must be a reason.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-11 09:13 am (UTC)