In the United States only 42 percent of sexual assault victims actually report their crimes. Why is that when the numbers of rape are significantly higher of other crimes like robbery and murder?

Could it be the fact that people do not want their names out to the public? But why is that when a murder occurs everyone wants the people to know the name of the deceased or the place that was the victim of the robbery.

The following will provide information both for and against releasing the names of people who are victims of sexual crimes, as well as describe the recent situation of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger as he has been accused who two sexual assault cases where in one the victim’s name was released and in the other, the name was withheld. There is no reason, unless the victim is under the age of 18, that his or her name should not be named.

Sexual crimes is a matter that few like to speak about, however what about the press? Does that not intrude on a First Amendment right to freedom of speech and press?

Some feel that releasing the victim’s name, regardless of age, in a case of a sexual crime only does more damage to the victim.  In the 60’s and 70’s when this became big it was said that the victim was raped twice, once by the rapists and once when the media released their identities.

However, aren’t we, as journalist supposed to get both sides of the story? Is it not the job of journalists to give all the facts that we can in the story? Why publish the criminals name when they won’t give the victims?

“It seems unfair to me with the presumption of innocence to report one party of a trial and not the other, you’re not doing your duty if you make an exception,” said Henry Gay of the Shelton-Mason County in Washington which is one of the few papers that still publishes victims names of sexual crimes.

The situation has come up again in the news as Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger has been accused twice in less than a year of sexual assault.

In one instance in Nevada, the victim’s name, Andrea McNulty, was released into the public, and she herself was very public on the matter.

However in Roethlisberger’s case in Milledgeville, Georgia the victim’s name has not been released and she has stayed as far away from the investigation as possible.

Why does the victim not want her name released?

Now the argument can arise that there is a stigma that comes with sexual crimes and it is not a good one. It is a terrible crime that takes a very terrible person to commit and can effect ones life that is the victim of the crime.

“And the argument was if the victims’ names were made public, other victims would be less likely to come forward… It’s good because it protects them from unwanted stigma and scrutiny, it’s bad because it possibly feeds into the cycle that there is something to be ashamed of,” says Kelly McBride a journalism ethics expert at the Poynter Institute.

Now the feeling of most parents would be the same when given the option of having their son or daughters name in print or heard over the evening news.

“The big question is, ‘Do you want to see your daughter’s name in 28-point type on the front of The New York Times as a rape victim?’,” said Victoria L. Lutz of the Pace Women’s Justice Center.

In the case against Roethlisberger in Georgia, the reason was given by the prosecutor not to release her name was that she did not want to be looked at differently since the case involved a big name athlete.

But at the end of the day it is our duty of the journalist to provide information, and in this case it is to release these names. And after all, in most cases there is not a law that says the media is not allowed to release the names, in most cases it is a company policy.

With the McNulty case, at one point wanted to settle with Roethlisberger for only a few simple things, Roethlisberger to admit to the crime, an apology, and a $100,000 donation to the Committee to Aid Abused Women which is a non-profit in Reno helping victims of domestic violence.

Why can this not happen more often? No one is asking a women who was the victim of a sexual crime to just automatically go and be the face of efforts to stop the crime, but just because something terrible has happened to you does not mean that you have to crawl into a hole and not help others before their crime ever occurs.

When the media withholds information on reports that they are giving, it does not give the full effort that they would in any other case by withholding the information.

It also shows a bit of human quality and opinion in the media organization when not releasing the name, which is not supposed to by there. Journalists are main job is report the facts, without getting their personal opinions in the way.

There are exceptions to the rule like editorials and certain talking heads you might see on national TV. But the fact is that journalists are not supposed to influence the story but by not releasing the name they are doing just that.

”The newspaper publisher is big daddy saying, ‘Don’t you worry, little lady,’ ” says Gay.

This is a very good point; it is like saying to the victim and others that the media feels bad for the victims of sexual crime so we will not release your name because you have already been through a lot.

Regardless of what the victim has been through, it is not the journalists decision whether the person has been through too much, they are to report the news, and by withholding information, they are not doing their job.

The media should release victims of sexual crimes names; they should be shouted from the hills.

And in the case of the victims and the victim’s families, they must know that the media has a job to do, and not to get in the way of that, and realize that being a victim, is not an embarrassment.

“In the long term, it is our goal and our hope that most victims will be comfortable letting their names be known publicly, as is the case with victims of most other crimes. After all, being a victim of sexual assault is nothing to be ashamed of,” said President and Founder of Rape, Abuse, Incest National Network Scott Berkowitz.

Berkowitz is right, being a victim is nothing to be ashamed of. The media will take care of you in instances like this; they will not scrutinize the victims. Most journalists will take extreme caution to make sure of it, but in that same thought, make sure the job gets done, and do it to its fullest, not withholding any information. The names should be released, there is no reason why they should not be.