Isn't it unusual for newspapers to publish the photos of...

...juvenile offenders? This news story was in the state forum for Florida and I asked the question there and got now response:

http://www.local6.com/news/5024272/detail.html

But this is broadcast news, not a newspaper. It can be a bit more uncaring.

...I thought that even the TV news and their websites also refrained from publishing photos of juveniles accused of crimes.

It happens a lot in felony cases...particularly if juveys are charged as adults.

My family owned a newspaper for more than a quarter century. In the beginning of our tenure no juvey pic would have ever been published and no names printed either. Things have changed.

Now juvey names are often printed and pictures accompany stories if the charges are serious.

In my last year before leaving journalism for good I printed the name of a 17 year old who organized a theft ring at a local dept store (kmart, walmart like store but not those)...the 17 year old was a shift manager who had co-workers and friends drive up to the loading dock during the night shift and leave with TVs and other goodies. Thousands of dollars worth of stuff was stolen and fenced before they were busted. The 17 year old's younger sibling was also involved. Their dad screamed at me that one of them hoped to be a police officer someday and that I was ruining their lives by publishing their names.

I told him he was lucky I didn't have a picture and that felony convictions are what ruined their career aspirations. :eyes:

And I've never worked for one that printed photos of juveniles, whether suspects or victims.

the paper competing with us didn't print photos either...but others that we exchanged with did.

it varies by which paper (or TV station), where they are, the age of the defendants, and what the crimes were. Generally victims get more leeway than the accused.

I thought it was prohibited across the board. In fact, I can't recall a time when I've ever seen the photo of a young offender--especially one as young as 12. I was really surprised when I clicked on that link.

I've never worked at a paper that published photos of juvenile victims or suspects.
Victims, however, get the added protection that their name is also not released.

I guess you'd have to check to see if this outlet has done it before....

I'm guessing that means the gloves are off.

While such pictures are thankfully uncommon, there is no restraint on the press if they are able to get such a photo on their own and choose to publish it.

In most states, it is the Court and Law Enforcement that are constrained from releasing information regarding Juvenile Offenders. But even this restaint has been weakened over the past decade.

...it looks as though law enforcement might have released them to the media.

It's up to Law Enforcement to decide whether a name/photo is released for a juvey. But if it is, or if a journalist can get ahold of their own (photo), there is no law preventing publication that I know of.

At least now the community knows what their future rapists/murderers look like and can avoid them.

They should get 20 years.

fuck them.

...not out of concern for "the privacy of these monsters" but simply because I'd assumed that publishing their photos was prohibited. I couldn't recall ever seeing it done before. It was just a question. I wasn't leaping to the defense of these guys.

Would you react the same way if these were the blond, blue-eyed sons of suburban lawyers and accountants?

Sometimes pictures of juvenile offenders are published. After the Sprinfield, Oregon school shooting, there were pictures of 15-year-old Kip Kinkel all over the place, at least in Oregon, where I was living at the time.

However, something about publishing the photos of four African-American youths accused of sexual assault just doesn't feel right. Would the photos have been published if the youths had been the sons of wealthy white doctors and lawyers? Did we ever see pictures of the Spur Posse, or of those suburban youths who raped a retarded girl a few years back?

A Florida TV station shows photos of four black youths accused of sexual assault. Can you say "feeding the existing prejudices of white people"?

I am NOT condoning the youths' behavior, having been the victim of some sexual harassment during my own early teen years. Just so we're clear on this.

HOWEVER, this looks like adolescent mob behavior, in which one powerful but warped personality gets a bunch of weaker personalities to do his bidding. This scenario is more likely than the notion that a group of future sexual psychopaths just happened to be on the same school bus.

The ringleader should probably be incarcerated and treated as a possible sex offender. Anyone who would instigate such an attack is a menace.

The other three should be given probation and counseling, and definitely split up and sent to different schools so that their victims don't have to see them anymore. I predict that without their ringleader, the remaining three kids would be pretty harmless. No use ruining their lives for succumbing to the kind of psychological pressure that a sociopath can exert on insecure kids.

Honestly, the hard-nosed attitude towards juvenile offenders here disgusts me almost as much as the assaults, and that's saying a lot. Before we throw the book at a bunch of pre-teens, let's first find out something about each of the individuals and his degree of guilt.

...I did remember some of the school shooters whose photos had been published, so I guess it's not unheard of but I share some of your apprehensions. Coming on the heels of the sensationalist coverage of the black victims of Hurricane Katrina these photos gave me pause--especially the one of the 12 year old.

I think it's a nasty act of the police to have put their pics out..if they are found guilty it's sure a henious crime and they should be punished but they are young enough to be given a chance to rehabilitate..come on guys the oldest is only 14..they're still kids who do not quite know the awful results of their actions.