Crime

I am not sure as I do not work at the media outlet, but I can tell you this...

You know why you get so many "Florida man" stories?

It's because there is some law or policy that forces the police of Florida to disclose all the details in criminal proceedings. This is quite unique in the US. Resutlingtly, we get all these absurd crime stories since the details are publicly available very early without some journalist having to go and spend hours sitting through trials.

This case it out of Georgia.. I have no idea what their policies are. I decided to look around, and I did find some interesting legal precedents at this Reporters Committee webpage:

Even where juvenile proceedings are closed, the Supreme Court has made clear that a court may not “punish the truthful publication of an alleged juvenile delinquent’s name lawfully obtained by a newspaper.” Smith v. Daily Mail Publ’g Co., 443 U.S.97, 105-06 (1979). In Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court, 430 U.S. 308, 308 (1977), the Court likewise reversed an order that “enjoined members of the news media from ‘publishing, broadcasting, or disseminating, in any manner, the name or picture of [a] minor child’ in connection with a juvenile proceeding involving that child then pending in that court.”

OK, interesting - this appears to be on the Federal level.

There apparently was a law prior to 1977 that prohibited it:

Even where juvenile proceedings are closed, the Supreme Court has made clear that a court may not “punish the truthful publication of an alleged juvenile delinquent’s name lawfully obtained by a newspaper.” Smith v. Daily Mail Publ’g Co., 443 U.S. 97, 105–106 (1979). In Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court, 430 U.S. 308, 308 (1977), the Supreme Court likewise reversed an order that “enjoined members of the news media from ‘publishing, broadcasting, or disseminating, in any manner, the name or picture of [a] minor child’ in connection with a juvenile proceedings involving that child then pending in that court.”

But it seems to be the case when no crime has been committed, it may be illegal to photograph and identify juveniles in certain jurisdictions:

The Eleventh Circuit has not issued a definitive ruling on photographing or identifying juveniles. This will vary by jurisdiction.

1st Circuit ?Even where juvenile proceedings are closed, the Supreme Court has made clear that a court may not “punish the truthful publication of an alleged juvenile delinquent’s name lawfully obtained by a newspaper.” Smith v. Daily Mail Publ’g Co., 443 U.S. 97, 105-06 (1979). In Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court, 430 U.S. 308, 308 (1977), the Court likewise reversed an order that “enjoined members of the news media from ‘publishing, broadcasting, or disseminating, in any manner, the name or picture of [a] minor child’ in connection with a juvenile proceeding involving that child then pending in that court.”

Specifically for Georgia, we see the following:

As a matter of statute, Georgia courts may permit electronic recording, transmission, videotaping, motion picture and still photography of judicial proceedings involving minors. O.C.G.A. § 15-11-700(h). The Georgia juvenile code purports to authorize judges to “order the media not to release identifying information concerning any child or family members or foster parent or other caretaker of a child involved in hearings open to the public.” O.C.G.A. § 15-11-700(i).

Some states are strict, though... For instance, here's North Dakota:

Juvenile proceedings are closed under N.D.C.C. § 27-20-51, including records identifying the juvenile. However, general information not identifying any juvenile, witness, or victim can be requested and released under N.D.C.C. § 27-20-51(7).

So, i twould appear to be the case that if this crime had occurred in North Dakota, there is a chance that nobody would know the identity of the girl. However, SCOTUS has seemingly ruled that if the identity was leaked, it could more or less be published.

I then decided to just throw this big question to Grok, some quick points:

• juveniles are protected officially by the state of Georgia unless their case has been transferred to adult court.
• in rare cases of open courts for juvenile cases, the identity may be disclosed.

In the proces, I found out that there is actually a federal precedent for all this (probably should have took time to organize this and put it at the top):

Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act (18 U.S.C. § 5031 et seq.): This act governs federal juvenile delinquency proceedings and emphasizes confidentiality. It restricts the public release of juvenile names and records in federal cases unless the juvenile is tried as an adult. For example, 18 U.S.C. § 5038 mandates that juvenile records in federal proceedings are sealed, and the identity of the juvenile is not disclosed publicly unless specific exceptions apply (e.g., transfer to adult court for serious felonies). This sets a precedent that influences state practices but does not directly mandate state-level confidentiality.

Yet, you also see this:

No Mandatory Federal Standard for Public Identification: Unlike some federal privacy laws (e.g., FERPA for educational records), there is no comprehensive federal statute requiring states to prohibit the public identification of juvenile suspects. States have discretion to set their own policies, which is why Georgia’s strict confidentiality rules are primarily grounded in state law.

So, a suspect who is being pursued or hasn't been charged can apparently have their infomation released to be tracked down.

Grok