> It seems to me that a person of known identity (to some degree of 'known') under investigation and suspected of having perpetrated a crime, or perhaps already charged but not yet tried, is a suspect, ...
How do you know the person brought into the police station (say) as a suspect was the correct person to have under suspicion, and not a person of the same name brought in by mistake? That may sound like a ridiculous thing to have happen, but think of the jokes that would run around the Internet if a guy who happened to be named William Gates were arrested for robbing a convenience store of $20.38, and remember that anything ridiculous that does not actually violate a physical law will eventually happen.
I would expect that padding things with ``alleged'' comes out of a reflexive desire to avoid any chance of a libel suit: even if the wrong guy was brought in, you can't dispute that the person brought in was alleged by the police to be a suspect, and truth is the golden standard absolute defense against libel, at least in the United States, which is drilled in every journalism textbook or style manual I ever encountered. So you can include it at no cost and be guaranteed safe, or omit it and sound infinitesimally less defensive but leave an opening to potentially career-wrecking danger.
This may sound defensive, but libel law is in a generally satisfying state, with pretty clear signposts to make sure one stays on the safe side, so there isn't a lot of motive to mess with things.
(no subject)
> It seems to me that a person of known identity (to some degree of 'known') under investigation and suspected of having perpetrated a crime, or perhaps already charged but not yet tried, is a suspect, ...
How do you know the person brought into the police station (say) as a suspect was the correct person to have under suspicion, and not a person of the same name brought in by mistake? That may sound like a ridiculous thing to have happen, but think of the jokes that would run around the Internet if a guy who happened to be named William Gates were arrested for robbing a convenience store of $20.38, and remember that anything ridiculous that does not actually violate a physical law will eventually happen.
I would expect that padding things with ``alleged'' comes out of a reflexive desire to avoid any chance of a libel suit: even if the wrong guy was brought in, you can't dispute that the person brought in was alleged by the police to be a suspect, and truth is the golden standard absolute defense against libel, at least in the United States, which is drilled in every journalism textbook or style manual I ever encountered. So you can include it at no cost and be guaranteed safe, or omit it and sound infinitesimally less defensive but leave an opening to potentially career-wrecking danger.
This may sound defensive, but libel law is in a generally satisfying state, with pretty clear signposts to make sure one stays on the safe side, so there isn't a lot of motive to mess with things.