theVladiator
Registered User
- May 26, 2018
- 1,189
- 1,332
Frankly, I don't see why we need to know anyone's names at this point. We're so addicted to information that we've fooled ourselves into believing we 'need' to know. Honestly, we're nothing but voyeurs. How does outing anyone help the case? Our gossip doesn't help justice, nor does it help the victim. So what are we really doing here? Do we actually believe we're striking a blow for morality by haranguing people online?
Sorry if I'm taking this out on you. Lol... you had the bad luck to trigger a thought that led to a lecture. At the end of this case, I expect justice to punish the guilty, despite the billion peeping-toms acting as a self-appointed jury.
I am not sure we need the names, but the rest of your rant I think is off base. Where you see peeping toms and self-appointed jury, I see a much needed, and clearly overdue, public scrutiny and oversight of public institutions.
The case outrages the public for many reasons, not the least of which is attempted coverup of the allegations. This outrage and the scrutiny of the facts of the case that is happening is precisely what's supposed to happen when the public institutions stumble, that's what drives the change. This exposure and public discourse is what holds the feet of those in power to the fire. Without it things continue as they did before.