The Wardman Wire

In the last 24 hours Robert Murat - a “suspect” in the disappearance of four-year-old Madeleine McCann in Portugal on May 3rd - has been at the centre of a whirlwind of reporting in the British media. This is damaging to the investigation, and to the wider campaign against child abuse offences.

Robert Murat in the News

Google News is reporting 1237 news stories mentioning Robert Murat in the past 7 days.

A few sample headlines:

• Daily Mirror: A TANGLED LOVE LIFE (Warning: Spammy Website)
• Daily Express: SEX SECRET OF MADDY SUSPECT
• Daily Telegraph: Madeleine suspect: I’m just a scapegoat
• Melbourne Herald-Sun : ‘Maddy case has ruined me’
• The Age Australia : Maddie probe ‘ruined my life’
• Times Online: I have been made a scapegoat, says Briton named by police as suspect
• Guardian: Report: Suspect In Missing Girl Hunt
• Forbes, NY: Report: Suspect Freed in Girl’s Disappearance
• Reuters, UK: Report: Police identify suspect in Madeleine kidnapping
• Daily Mail: Madeleine police knock down wall in suspect’s villa

Why is this a problem

1 - The rights of the “Suspect”

A suspect is - by definition - innocent until proven guilty. So much news coverage across the world damages that person’s life.

2 - Victimisation of the “Suspect”

Many news reports carry implications - even if subliminal - about the guilt of the suspect, and make minor character flaws seem major.

3 - Undermining the Investigation

Attention given to a suspect who has been “found” diverts attention away from the need to continue looking.

And Sarah’s Law?

I have previously blogged about the populist campaign to have personal details of people convicted of an offence involving paedophilia published. I see at least two serious problems:

A good number of these convicted individuals may be innocent

Consider the results from Operation Ore - large-scale international police operation that commenced in 1999 intending to indict thousands of users of websites featuring child pornography.

The results looked impressive (source: Wikipedia ):

In the United Kingdom, it has led to 7,250 suspects identified, 4,283 homes searched, 3,744 arrests, 1,848 charged, 1,451 convictions, 493 cautioned, 879 investigations underway, 109 children removed from suspected dangerous situations

However, the story is far more complicated. Such is the stigma of being investigated, that there have been more than 35 suicides. We have no idea how many of these suicides were guilty. Think about it.

Consider just two newspaper articles. Firstly from the Times (July 2005), Child porn suspects set to be cleared in evidence ‘shambles’:

DOZENS of men accused of downloading child pornography from the internet may have been wrongly prosecuted, according to expert prosecution and defence witnesses.

New evidence suggests that Operation Ore, Britain’s biggest child pornography investigation, may have prosecuted innocent men on the basis of discredited American police testimony and questionable forensic methods.

Jim Bates, a computer expert who has served as a witness for the prosecution or the defence in more than 100 child porn cases, says many Ore cases are now likely to collapse or be overturned in the Court of Appeal. “It has been a shambles from the word go,” he said.

Now from the Guardian less than a month ago, Operation Ore flawed by fraud:

Operation Ore has become embedded in public consciousness as the landmark police operation that tracked down people - almost always men - who allegedly paid to access child pornography via computer. In all, 7,272 British residents were on its target lists, more than 2,000 of whom have never been investigated; and 39 men have killed themselves under the pressure of the investigations. Ore has dragged big names into the spotlight - such as the musicians Pete Townshend, the Who guitarist, and Robert del Naja of Massive Attack, both falsely accused of accessing child pornography.

New evidence I have gathered for my work as an expert witness in defence cases shows that thousands of cases under Operation Ore have been built on the shakiest of foundations - the use of credit card details to sign up for pornography websites. In many cases, the card details were stolen; the sites contained nothing or legal material only; and the people who allegedly signed up to visit the sites never went there.

Many of the people investigated and convicted may only be guilty of having their credit cards stolen.

Imagine the lives of all the innocent victims of this investigation if their details had all been available to self proclaimed vigilantes who are so careful and discriminating that they managed to attack paediatricians .

This truly makes me shudder.

The Sarah’s Law Campaign is barking up the wrong tree anyway

I blogged this aspect in more detail in my previous article.

Very simply, the vast majority of child abuse cases happen involve offenders known to the family. Sarah’s Law addresses so-called “stranger danger”, which are a tiny minority of overall cases. To put it another way - Sarah’s Law will divert attention and resources away from dealing with the real problem.

Therefore, it may actually make the problem worse.

Wrapping Up

I’m keen to encourage debate on this subject - please leave your thoughts in the comments box.

Tags: robert murat, sarah’s law, madeleine mccann, for sarah, forsarah.com, news of the world, notw, operation ore

[tags]robert murat, sarah’s law, madeleine mccann, for sarah, forsarah.com, news of the world, notw, operation ore[/tags]