A matter of principle

One of the changes I've made since I came on board here in September was to remove the names of people accused of crimes from our police briefs.
I know it's not a popular idea, but there's reasoning behind it.
The police regularly send us press releases saying a person was arrested for, let's say, drunk driving. They outline the basic details, name the person and then say if there's a court date coming.
Here's the problem.
While many small Canadian newspapers readily print the name of the accused, they don't necessarily follow the case to court. So while we tell readers someone has been accused of a crime, we don't say if they've been found guilty or innocent before a judge months later.
Sure, we could devote more resources to court coverage. But for small papers, it's difficult.
Many times we go to court and spend a good part of the day waiting for our local case only to learn it's been put off a month. As an editor, I'm not pleased that my reporter just wasted a whole day and is returning without a story.
So here's our compromise.
We tell readers the details of an arrest and don't print the name of the accused. However, if the story is of importance, we print the name and then dedicate a reporter to follow the case through the courts.
We're doing that now involving a Carleton Place man who's facing Internet luring charges. He had a court date in Perth earlier this month, which resulted only in getting yet another court date.
While it may not satisfy all readers, it's the responsible thing to do. I think it also avoids the very real possibility of publicly accusing a resident of a misdeed and not telling the public he was later found innocent.
That would be a crime.