LogFAQs > #962317969

LinkPizza posted...

Hes 20, but they still blurred out his face I understand blurring the baby (even though many look like almost the same in many cases)

Standard protocol for victims of sex crimes that were committed when they were minors. It's also why he isn't named. Around here, there was a particularly notorious case a decade ago where a 17-year-old girl was raped while drunk at a party, bullied horrifically after a video of the incident was circulated throughout her school, and ended up committing suicide. Her name was published pretty broadly during the campaign to have the incident properly investigated (spearheaded by her parents, who chose to publish it), but once charges were actually laid against her rapists, a publication ban came into effect and her name was no longer allowed to be said in the media, resulting in a whole lot of "a 17-year-old girl that we're not allowed to name but you all know who she is" sort of euphemisms.

It was very silly, with her parents objecting very strongly to the decision not to publish her name, and the judge presiding over the case (who's actually a member of my church) ultimately chose to blatantly ignore the ban in any public discussions of it because he felt the need to make a statement about how stupid and arbitrary it was in this particular case. Officially, I believe her name is still barred from being published, but I don't think any actual penalties have been levied against anyone violating that ban because of the pretty sizable movement to call it out for being stupid.