Naming sex offenders

Worrying inconsistencies came to light after we made a Freedom of Information request to find out how many registered sex offenders were missing in our region.

It transpired that four had gone underground, but there were distinct differences in the approaches taken by local police forces.

Cleveland Police had no hesitation in issuing an appeal, along with a picture, to find Suraj Shyani Wijekoon.

Days later, he handed himself in to police in London.

North Yorkshire Police initially refused to identify a missing rapist, citing human rights, but later reviewed that decision and issued a photograph and details of Yuan Wei Zhang.

That left Northumbria Police still refusing to name two runaways on the grounds that it would breach their privacy.

However, the Northumbria force has now announced a review of its policy after it emerged that one of their men had been arrested in Leeds and the other had died abroad.

It remains our view that it is clearly in the public interest for missing sex offenders to be identified. Indeed, we fail to understand why their identities should not be disclosed.

Thankfully, the four missing sex offenders in this region have now either been tracked down or are the subject of a public appeal.

We hope that the Northumbria Police review is swiftly concluded and that it becomes policy for those who have breached the terms of the sex offenders’ register to be identified in the media.