By releasing his photo and full personal details, the prosecution achieved its goal of arresting suspect Jos B. in Spain within a short time. Good detective work.
Partly with the help of the media who picked up and circulated the press release and press conference en masse. Unfortunately, the media did not stop there.
As with the reporting on the parole of Volkert van der G., the Netherlands has a new example of 'Trial by Media'. Without knowing the facts, some media assumed the role of prosecutor again by portraying Jos B. as the perpetrator without any nuance. RTL news wrote e.g. "Finally caught: how Jos B. escaped the dance for 20 years". The reader might actually think that the culprit has been caught. However, that remains to be seen. He has not even made a statement about the possible DNA match yet. This firm interpretation, in the absence of file knowledge, can be called premature and even careless. All the more so now that his personal data is on the street. A number of media outlets even continue to mention his full name.
Media such as the Telegraph, AD and L1 even very deliberately choose to call Jos B. by his full name because everyone would know his name anyway. For example, it would be 'ludicrous' and 'hypocrite' to refer to him by his initials despite his fame. These media seem unaware that it is extremely annoying for the person concerned and his family members if his full name is always mentioned.
Such reasoning also fails to recognise that further intrusions on his privacy do not (any longer) serve a reasonable purpose. After all, he has already been arrested and detained. He no longer needs to be traced. A weighing of interests in publication should therefore be in his favour. In 2006, a news medium was summoned before the Press Council because the medium (BNR news radio) continued to use a wanted person's full name even after his arrest. In that case, the medium would have found it "droll" to suddenly use the initials after the arrest, while his personal details had already been widely published.
The Council judged that the complaint against the medium was well-founded with, inter alia, the following recital: "The mere fact that it would be 'droll' to refer to the complainant by his initials now that his details had already been published earlier is insufficient in this respect and does not demonstrate the required balancing of interests in the above sense.".
Media that do not want to refer to Jos B. by his initials stand a good chance of being reprimanded by the Press Council in the event of an indictment. Further infringement of Jos B.'s privacy is not necessary in the context of open reporting. Not even if the use of his initials would be ludicrous, hypocritical or droll. Freedom of the press is simply not unlimited and journalism should
be carefully handled. Even, or perhaps especially in the case of reporting a serious crime.
Mr D.M. Penn