S F, I have to disagree with your comments regarding the NOTW’s coverage of the tragic death of Sarah Payne in July 2000. You may recall that the rag led a campaign for a change in the law (“Sarah’s Law”). In essence, introduction of such a law would have meant that residents with children would have had the right to access information relating to the names and addresses of known paedophiles living in their locale.
In my view, the tactics adopted by the rag to bring pressure to bear on the government of the day was one of the most irresponsible examples of journalism I have ever seen. As part of its “name and shame,” policy the NOTW published the names and photographs of 49 sex offenders.
As a direct result of the NOTW action, lynch-mobs across the country decided to take the law in to their own hands. I remember watching the reports of numerous cases of misidentification, where innocent people were terrorised by the mobs. 60 people waving banners and shouting abuse attacked a house in Plymouth. The mob threw paint at the house which they had mistaken for the home of a paedophile. The family with small children were moved for their own safety. In another case, a man from Manchester was attacked by his neighbours who thought he was one of the 49 individuals named in the paper. Even the “Victims of Crime Trust” condemned the NOTW’s campaign.
Ironically, MPs opposed to the proposed “Sarah’s Law” repeatedly referred to the NOTW article as ammunition to further their argument against its introduction.
