INSIDE STUFF: Arresting a tarnished reputation often proves an impossible task

Stories about our criminal justice process are particularly difficult for reporters and editors, not only for legal reasons but also moral and ethical issues.

The legal obligations are weighty, and the penalties severe if we don't understand the law or, worse, err because of zeal, laziness or incompetence.

However, the moral and ethical issues concern me the most and, over the years, have caused me the most emotional anguish and lost sleep. Journalistically and legally speaking, we can do everything correctly in reporting an alleged crime and still destroy the reputation of innocent people.

Police arrest people on suspicion of committing a crime. Note that word: SUSPICION. However, convincing eyewitnesses can be mistaken in stressful situations. Circumstantial evidence can lead to incorrect conclusions. And people with individual grievances can use the police to wrongfully punish innocent people.

And yet many -- if not most -- people believe when someone is arrested by the police, that person is guilty. If the accused later is released or cleared, a common belief is the person got away with something.

In my first job as a managing editor, we ran a short story in the local news section about two brothers who had been arrested for rape. We named the brothers, but not the woman making the allegations because the policy of most newspapers is to protect privacy of sex crime victims. The woman told police a very convincing story, and the article we wrote was completely accurate based on the police report which protected us from any libel action.

The only problem was the woman was lying. She was the spurned former girlfriend of one of the brothers and had manufactured the story out of spite. We ran the story of charges being dropped in the same location as the original story. We had fulfilled our journalistic and legal duty.

About a week later, I got a call from one of the brothers. In a voice charged with emotion, he explained he was moving from the only home he had ever known because neighbors would tell people that those are the two guys who got away with rape. "I just want you to know, Mr. editor, what you and your newspaper caused."

That bothered me then, and still does. I was naive. We had done everything right and yet bad things happened to innocent people because of my decision to run the original story. There have been more such instances, but this one sticks in my memory because it was the first time the moral dilemma had affected me directly.

There have been more egregious examples over the years. A person's reputation, once stained, can never be fully restored. The fact that we as newspapers are protected from libel in those instances or that we have followed correct journalistic procedures does not ease my conscience.

Should we ignore crime stories until someone is found guilty in a court of law? That isn't a very practical solution in fulfilling our constitutional role. We will continue to report on crimes, such as the story in today's Daily News on a suspicious death.

Reporters and editors around the country have discussed this issue with no clear resolution. One suggestion that appeals to me is withholding the names of people who have been arrested until they have been charged by the county prosecutor. A lot of cases are weeded out of the justice process at this stage, including some who are innocent.

Our criminal justice system says people are innocent until proven guilty. I ask you to remember that when you read stories in this newspaper about people who have been arrested. It's a naive hope, but it might ease my conscience.

Roger Kendall, managing editor of the Daily News, may be reached via e-mail at or by calling (208) 882-5561, ext. 209.