A few of you are now making the point I tried making a few days ago.
It's completely unfair that this woman (really, anyone in a situation like this) can say "Ben did this"...
Then, the media can release Ben's name...
But not hers....
As a few of you have said- there should be some protection for the accused as well, until they become CONVICTED.
Until that point, we get what we have here- a complete character assasination on Ben, who will forever be tainted with this. Another thread suggests he settles. Ok, he does that & then we will all forever believe the rich guy bought his way out of trouble. Not that he didn't do it. Let's say he goes to court & wins- then we will all believe Ben had better lawyers that got him off. Not that he didn't do it.
Ben can't win this, regardless of his guilt or innocence. His character has, forever, been tarnished.
I suggested (perhaps foolishly) a few days ago that if found not guilty, Ben should sue every media outlet that named him in this case for slander. Maybe damages would be better? Because, regardless of the outcome, for the general public, Ben is guilty.
This will effect his social life & financial options for the rest of his life.
Based on an ACCUSATION.
It stinks, and is completely unfair.
That said, if Ben is guilty, give him the whole box & dice.
Bookmarks