This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/soccer by /u/Sparksquidme on 2025-07-04 16:58:31+00:00.
> Telegraph Sport first reported on July 4 2022 that a Premier League footballer had been arrested for rape – but only now can Thomas Partey be named after he was charged with five counts of rape and one count of sexual assault.
Why has it taken so long? There is no law stopping media from identifying suspects, but recent legal precedent has ensured editors now rarely choose to name prior to charges.
What is the biggest hurdle stopping editors from naming a suspect before charge?
Despite “secret justice” concerns raised by victims, editors, lawyers and campaigners, naming suspects pre-charge has become increasingly fraught with risk for media outlets over the past 15 years. Argument rages between politicians and even police over the merits of naming those arrested. But a landmark Court of Appeal judgment is now the biggest worry for media outlets wanting to identify suspects regardless of public interest arguments in the case.
In February 2022, the Supreme Court, the final court of appeal for cases in the UK, ruled definitively that a person who is under criminal investigation has a reasonable expectation of privacy prior to charge. The unanimous judgment was delivered in the case of Bloomberg LP v ZXC [2022]. ZXC was an unnamed American business executive claiming misuse of private information over an article relating to a criminal investigation into the activities of a company in his division. The court ruled that even high public interest in publishing information about alleged corruption was not sufficient to displace the right to privacy.
While not a universal rule, “those who have simply come under suspicion by an organ of the state have, in general, a reasonable and objectively founded expectation of privacy in relation to that fact and an expressed basis for that suspicion,” the judgment says. The court adds that “the reasonable expectation of privacy is not in general dependant on the type of crime being investigated or the public characteristics of the suspect (for example, engagement in politics or business).”
Are there other factors dissuading editors from publishing? =============================================================
It had already been an uphill battle for outlets attempting to name prior to charge because of the likelihood of facing costly lawsuits. In July 2018, Sir Cliff Richard won a High Court caseagainst the BBC over its coverage of a police raid on his home. The singer was never arrested or charged and claimed the BBC’s reporting of the 2014 raid, which was part of an investigation into historical child sex allegations, was a “serious invasion” of his privacy. The BBC’s then director of news and current affairs Fran Unsworth declared the outcome a “significant shift” against press freedom, adding an “important principle” around the public’s right to know was at stake.
That came after the Leveson Inquiry, prompted by the phone-hacking scandal at News International, intensely scrutinised relations between police and journalists in 2011 and 2012. As a result, forces faced new guidelines from the College of Policing which severely limit off-record guidance around arrests pre-charge.