tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597569938038396009.post7096126287372970621..comments2009-03-02T16:19:26.418-05:00PCMnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597569938038396009.post-82694935013642583412009-03-02T16:19:00.000-05:002009-03-02T16:19:00.000-05:00Peter---We've been told down here that the New York City Police also don't release the names of officers who kill; is this true, to your knowledge? (Also, the FBI supposedly doesn't).<BR/><BR/>Simon used to be one of the Baltimore Police's biggest supporters--not necessarily the brass. And it's a real downer to see him in the Baltimore City Paper calling the decision to not name "cowardly"--as well as writing the piece in the WashingtonPost.com yesterday.<BR/><BR/>Further, about a couple of years ago, the Baltimore County Police quietly announced that they would only be releasing first names of officers who kill. Hardly a ripple in the press about it.buzoncrimehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00222344932427990980noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597569938038396009.post-52216027275876423422009-03-02T01:06:00.000-05:002009-03-02T01:06:00.000-05:00No. I think names should be in the paper.<BR/><BR/>I'm just saying I understand why hard working men and women who risk their lives at work don't want the media to portray them as trigger-happy racists.<BR/><BR/>But I also wish that more police would see that in the long run it's good for police to be open to the prying eyes of outsiders. That's how things change. And sometimes, just sometimes, change is good.PCMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13647097472236933108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597569938038396009.post-48045616505844251662009-03-01T20:22:00.000-05:002009-03-01T20:22:00.000-05:00While you're correct that once something is published the full truth may be difficult to discover, should we really go back to the days when things like this were swept under the rug?lynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10161408309969900515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597569938038396009.post-22920749805833427352009-03-01T19:05:00.000-05:002009-03-01T19:05:00.000-05:00But there is assumption that once something is in the papers there's at least a grain of truth to it. <BR/><BR/>Without further proof, I don't think my name should be in the papers if a student said I did something (and I didn't!)<BR/><BR/>Charged with a crime is one thing, but just accused? Should your name be in the paper--and with a negative light--for doing your job correctly? That's what police often have to deal with.PCMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13647097472236933108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7597569938038396009.post-52860923725496829282009-03-01T18:40:00.000-05:002009-03-01T18:40:00.000-05:00A friend and I were just discussing the demise of the daily paper the other day when the Rocky Mountain News folded. David Simon's article was much scarier than anything we were contemplating. The public has a right to know when any public servant (cop, teacher, whoever) does something to hurt the public trust. As a teacher myself, I can imagine that people wouldn't want the teachers charged with sexual associations with students to be allowed to have their names withheld from news reports.<BR/><BR/>I realize that there are always people who will be falsely accused, but that is what our courts are for. Police and school administration should not be the decision makers.lynnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10161408309969900515noreply@blogger.com