Why has the Tory minister arrested for rape not been named?

[Dervel]

Just that really. Does your party being in power shield you from this sort of thing?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53625829

It really isn't that uncommon that it is possible for at least some people to work out who a rape victim is. Look at the many instances of rape of spouses/partners, for instance.

It would also be near-impossible to report on the trial whilst completely concealing the link. As soon as it became obvious that facts were being suppressed, people would put two and two together and would work out that the victim must have some sort of connection to the accused.. The only way to avoid it would be to prevent any reporting whatsoever at the trial, but even then it's inevitable that it would come out that the MP had suddenly resigned/been sacked and had subsequently gone to prison - and people would work out that it must have been a sexual offence due to the reporting ban. There is also the issue that secret justice is inherently dangerous anyway.

So I don't think you can necessarily blame the press. It's just a dreadful fact that, if you are raped by a famous man, there is a good chance that your anonymity won't be fully preserved. It's one of the reasons that famous men get away with it. I wish I knew the answer.

Exactly pobble
For most of the population, naming the MP won't stop the victim being anonymous. Because we have no clue who works for what MP.
It's only an issue for people who are closer and guaranteed they know already because of office gossip.
I think this is all a red herring to distract from the fact the party are prioritising their mp over womens safety.
Employers deal with this stuff all the time, he could have been suspended but noone know why or for what.
Instead they've ignored it and we are blaming the press. Lets not forget this happened in January and she told the party. Its 6 months later, they've done nothing. That is not because they are protecting her anonymity

The victim has said she didn't work for him, and she's an ex parliamentary worker, so no longer working with/near him.

FWIW the Tories, Labour, Lib Dems, SNP each have their own pooled research companies. Hence MPs do not in fact directly employ staff but pay a subscription fee in order to access such services at a fraction of the cost of employing a researcher.

The Tories actually have TWO pooled research companies, one a general one, and one focused on leaving the EU, though the latter has only a couple of dozen subscribers.

@ShootsFruitsAndLeaves that's not the full picture.
Each MP employs their own staff, and can also subscribe to pooled services If they want.
Most MPs DO directly employ staff.
It’s rare to have an MP who doesn’t.
Pooled services don’t do casework.
(I work for an MP- employed directly)

You can see how many staff each MP employs online- and if they’re full or part time, and their total staffing bill.