January 26: Talking about the Katsav case

The accusers are known to us only as "initials" - to protect their privacy, we are told. What about the privacy of the accused?

By
January 25, 2007 22:03
2 minute read.
letters to the editor 88

letters to the editor 88. (photo credit: )

Talking about the Katsav case Sir, - To me as a layman, one of the more worrying aspects of this case, and that of Haim Ramon, is that while the names of the accused are freely bandied about, the accusers are known to us only as "initials" - to protect their privacy, we are told. What about the privacy of the accused? Once people come forward and accuse a public figure of a serious personal offense, they too should either lose their anonymity, or no names at all should be published. After all, the media know the accusers' full names. They interview them and try to garner sympathy for them, while generally decrying the accused. Could the investigating authorities be worried that if the accusers' full names and pictures are published, they might be shocked by what crawls out of the woodwork? ("Katsav's rending battle cry," January 25.) EMANUEL FISCHER Jerusalem Sir, - I was appalled to read that "Peres says he could have exposed Katsav in 2000" (January 25) and chose not to. It was a totally irresponsible act of concealment. Mr. Peres could have prevented much pain and suffering - and damage to our country. Why did he choose to remain silent? Shame on him. RENA M. ISAACSON Jerusalem Sir, - "Katsav: I have never hurt any man or woman" (January 25) sounded to me like "I did not have sex with that woman." Bill Clinton wasn't lying, technically, but men who play around do hurt their wives, however discreet they think they are being. At the time I made a mental note when outsider and backbencher MK Moshe Katsav was elected president so quickly. Something didn't seem right. Did they let him in because they already knew how to get him out - as suggested by Simon Peres's fresh revelation that he knew about the sexual harassment allegations all along? And why now, his critics ask? My take is that first Attorney-General Menachem Mazuz needed to be firmly in place. The powers that be learned from the Aryeh Deri case: A Sephardi had to indict the accused to dispel allegations of racism. I think The Jerusalem Post, and especially your Beit Hanasi reporter, have always been very fair and respectful toward this president. You have balanced elegantly your different objectives and obligations: to guard democracy against the abuse of power by reporting all potential wrongs, while minding the dignity and vulnerability of possible abuse victims and giving the president the benefit of the doubt as long as he has not been indicted. I believe he is innocent of criminal wrongdoing, and hope justice will prevail. M. HAGENAUER Jerusalem Sir, - The MKs seem to have their priorities backwards ("Knesset House Committee to vote on suspension today," January 25). They are willing to get rid of Moshe Katsav before a trial, but not Peres, Beilin and Co., or Olmert, Peretz and Co. Katsav may have "done it" to a few women. The others "did it" to the whole country. D. FEIGENBAUM Netanya


Related Content

General view of the Eiffel Tower in Paris, France
May 20, 2018
15 years too late: French manifesto against Muslim antisemitism

By MANFRED GERSTENFELD, IRENE KURUC