JWC r*** Update

Baby Black player Nathan Harris has had charges against him dropped

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10837216

Happy to hear that.

If he has the charges dropped isn't it a bit wrong that he has been named, but the person who made the accusations has not? I never understand how that works.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:If he has the charges dropped isn't it a bit wrong that he has been named, but the person who made the accusations has not? I never understand how that works.

He named himself at the time of the accusation (SA police just said "an NZ JRWC player").

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:If he has the charges dropped isn't it a bit wrong that he has been named, but the person who made the accusations has not? I never understand how that works.

He named himself at the time of the accusation (SA police just said "an NZ JRWC player").

Ah, I withdraw my comment.

He was quite 'noble' about it in coming forward as he didn't want the other members of the team nor their families getting embroiled in all of it. Probably also to make a statement of intent regards innocence.

Can't comment on the case but wonder what effect it will have on touring teams setting stricter protocols and closing themselves off even more to the public.

He broke protocol but what will the protocol be in the future? No interaction at all with locals? That would be a shame. Rugby can do without the yobbish behaviour or illegalities but putting players in bubbles isn't healthy either.

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:If he has the charges dropped isn't it a bit wrong that he has been named, but the person who made the accusations has not? I never understand how that works.

He named himself at the time of the accusation (SA police just said "an NZ JRWC player").

That maybe right, it might not. But normaly in a case like this it is usaly the "MAN" that get his name in the papers on the telly. While the Woman always seem to keep heir indentity a secret. Then when this happens (THE MAN) is found not guilty. The damage is aready done to the man that is. While the Woman walks away Identity intact.

Surely both people in this case should have their identitys protected untill the case is over. Then if the man is found not guilty his ID is protected and the Woman should be named.