Jimmy Saville - how come some of the people arrested are being named and others aren't?

[ceebeegeebies]

Are they only naming the famous ones or are the ones they haven't named but just released vague details (eg man in his 80's...) because they have got injunctions out??

I think with the man in his 80s, it was because he was questioned not arrested. But I'm puzzled too, as some of the arrested men have been named, whereas the one arrested today (man in his 60s) hasn't. So not sure how it works.

they are probably not celebs and not worth the lines in the paper. (cynic emote)

It probably is to do with fame. And the police may be seeking info on the ones they name. It is very unfair.

Surely they shouldn't be naming anyone until they've been proven guilty in a court of law. Blind justice and all that. How can they have a fair trial when they've been named? Not trying to defend anyone but you've only got to look at the whole Lord McAlpine saga to know mistakes can be made.

I'm thinking super injunctions.

Thanks for the replies

If it was a super injunction, then why would the others that have been named not have got one aswell - it is not as if Max Clifford doesn't know about such things is it??

The man in his 80s from Berkshire has a super-injunction out, don't know why the others haven't, maybe he has more to hide?

Superinjunction. The man in his 80s was named on Twitter, and only questioned under caution, not arrested. And if he is charged I want a refund on my childhood :(

The one arrested yesterday I havn't seen who that is yet, but I assume it's also a super injunction.

It costs thousand and thousands of pounds, sometime £100k to get a super injunction and you may well spend all that and not get it and sometimes they back fire and it looks terrible from a PR point of view so it is not as simple as I am in the potential line of fire so I must take out a super injunction.

It is interesting - wonder why the man in his 80's managed to get one I think I know who that one is as I have been following threads on this - tbh, that would probably be the biggest shock of the whole scandal

We don't know that the man in his 80s did get one. He was being questioned. He wasn't arrested. They don't normally name people unless they are arrested as per "A man is helping police with their enquiries" do they?

Or are they not named unless they are charged?

Max Clifford was named as soon as he was arrested so it is not that they are not named until they are charged...maybe it is if they are only helping police with their enquiries rather than actually being arrested.

There is SO much that we don't know and probably never will!

This explains it

"Surely they shouldn't be naming anyone until they've been proven guilty in a court of law."

That would make court reporting a bit more challenging, wouldn't it?

The link includes

"In what it terms ?exceptional circumstances?, the ACPO guidelines accept that police may release the name of a suspect prior to a charge, if it is in the public interest to do so. Moreover, when a media organisation has already discovered the suspect?s name through investigative journalism and seek confirmation of it, the police are permitted to confirm the name. "

Not all leaks are intended or known about by the investigating officers. In many cases rank and file PCs sell the information to journalists, irrespective of whether it helps or hinders the investigation and what their superiors might want. It is very common.

The police bend the rules; because there is little chance of them being caught.
"secret" filming of the police is a revelation. Playing cricket in the corridors on one famous film. Watching porn on mobiles.