Row rises over revealing suspect's identity
Cho Seong-ho, a murder suspect, is taken by police officers from Ansan Danwon Police Station, Gyeonggi Province, for a court review of an arrest warrant, Saturday. / Yonhap
Police disclose murder suspect's face, name
By Chung Hyun-chae
Public opinion is divided over whether the police were right to publicly identify a 30-year-old murder suspect arrested Thursday.
The suspect, Cho Seong-ho, is suspected of killing a man who lived with him before mutilating and abandoning his body.
Cho allegedly stabbed his roommate surnamed Choi, 40, to death in late March at their home in Incheon. He then allegedly cut the body in two before abandoning the upper and lower sections 10 days later at different locations on Daebu Island in Ansan, Gyeonggi Province.
Right after detaining Cho, Ansan Danwon Police held a meeting to decide whether to disclose the suspect’s personal information including his name and age, and decided to make it public.
When taking Cho to a local court for a hearing on whether to issue an arrest warrant for him, Saturday, police officers did not allow him to cover his face with a mask or a cap.
Police said Cho’s identity was made public based on a clause of the law relating to specific violent crimes, which allows the prosecution and police to disclose personal information on a criminal suspect if four requirements are satisfied ― inhumane manner of killing, sufficient evidence that the suspect committed the crime, a need to guarantee the people’s right to know, the criminal not being a minor.
The clause was adopted in 2010 following the conviction of Kang Ho-sun, who was sentenced to death for killing 10 women including his wife and mother-in-law.
But some point out there is no specific standard about how “cruel” and “inhumane” the case should be for the requirements.
Social discussion on Cho’s personal information disclosure mainly focuses on whether it goes against fairness compared with other atrocious crimes.
“Why did not the police reveal the faces of other brutal criminals?” wrote one Internet user on a portal site.
“Even those who killed their children were wearing masks to hide their faces, including a woman who abused her seven-year-old stepson to death,” another user wrote.
Some people voiced concerns over the damage to innocent people related to the suspects.
“The families of the criminals do not need to be blamed,” a blogger wrote.
Another Internet user also opposed the disclosure, saying, “I stand for the presumption of innocence.”
Some also pointed out that police are too swayed by public sentiment.
Meanwhile, those who agreed with the disclosure stressed the positive aspects.
“If the criminal had committed additional crimes previously, the victims will be able to report it to police after seeing his or her face,” another blogger said.