If a suspect in a high profile case is pictured and named on the front pages of newspapers

[Bubble99]

But is later found to be totally innocent. Do they have the right to sue?

I remember Elton John and The Sun back in the 80's, but I wonder if the man in the McCann case has a similar chance of sueing, if he is uninvolved?

I've noticed that 'retractions and apologies' often seem to turn up on page 22, when the original feature was a screaming front-page headline.

The media can scar people for life, IMO. 'No smoke without fire' and all that.

The notion of Secret Family Courts has always disturbed me, TBH, edam.

That something as important can be discussed and decided without public scrutiny is totally wrong, IMO.

Yes, on reflection, I agree that it was the police in 'Sweeney' mode who decided the fate of the Guildford Four and others.

And 'anonymity' could still be maintained (child X or Y) but the details of the case and the decisions could be made public.

Legally, they can name the suspect in Uk papers because the case is abroad so it wouldn't necessarily affect any trial.
if he was in the UK, the papers would be allowed to name the suspect until he was charged, then they would have to be very carful because of the chance of influencing any possible jurors under contempt of court laws.
As the jurors will not be selected from the UK public, the papers can pretty much say what they like.
whether its right or wrong to name him, UK contempt of court laws do not affect foreign cases
I don't know what the law on this is in Portugal, but I suspect the Portuguese papers will have to be a lot more careful than our papers.

I have no idea but am very uncomfortable about how the media pull apart the lives of suspects. I think it is really unforgivable sometimes. Robert Murat has essentially been convicted by the public because he lives with his mother, has a glass eye, has a 4 year old blonde daughter and, according to a Sunday Mirror reporter and someone at Sky News "is a bit too helpful." OK, so the police were searching his house, but I was once staying in a house which was raided by the police and they had made a mistake - they needed 2 doors down! The broadcasting of so many details about suspects makes me very worried to be honest.

Thanks Bubble. Don't know if you remember the past threads but ideas like that always make me think of the MNers who suffered.

You can report someone's name once they've been charged, usually, it's one of the (IIRC) ten facts that reporters have always been told you could report safely. It's the previous phase, when someone is 'helping police with their inquiries' that is tricky.

No idea how it works with Portugese law, though, but the internet means you can't rely on 'Oh, it's in a UK paper.'

You can report their name, address, age etc and what they've been charged with but not go into more detail once the case is 'active', even if its been previously reported.
Again this is UK law, may be different in Portugal.

Those are some of the ten facts, Lycra, yes, also the date of the next court hearing. But can't remember all of them.

Oops! Lyra, even.

Lycra!