Do you think we should get rid of criminal records secrecy?

Not sure what is behind the OP. Where does honesty come into it?

Seems from the comments this is an 'honesty' too far.

The one that I consider supremely unfair is that if a guy is accused of rape, the girl's name is kept secret, but the guy's name is splashed all over the papers. Fine if he's proved guilty, but can lead to ruination of career and life if he's innocent - there are still people who will think "no smoke without fire". Double standards there methinks.

The simple answer to this question has to be NO, for many reasons some already mentioned.

My goodness judging by the trail by fire on FB and Twitter it would be a nightmare I have just seen a photo on fb of three young 12/13 year old boys apparently committing some vandalism and someone has named them (completely wrong names apparently), and everyone is calling for them to be practically hung drawn and quartered, three young innocent boys could be harmed

No, they should not be public unless there is a clear need for public protection.

Far too many people are censorious and judgemental and the universal, in its full sense, change of attitude that would mean that everyone would smile benignly on youthful follies and help the reformed criminal make a new life will never happen.

Does a young man, who was involved in mindless vandalism at 18, want everyone knowing about and judging him when he is 50? The woman caught shop-lifting at 40, coping with grandchildren taunted at school because grandma is a thief?

There is nothing dishonest about this. Most of us sometime in our lives has done something non-criminal that we are deeply ashamed of. We learn from our mistake and put it behind us. Would you want everyone to know, that you were part of a gang of bullies at school, or stole money from your grandmother's purse?

Those who need to know will be told of criminal convictions when necessary. I am quite happy with that.

I do see what you mean - there would have to be very big changes in attitude - among them, understanding that a charge is not a conviction. I am sure there are very many figures in public life both national and local who would find themselves on a level with 'ordinary' people who have skeletons in the cupboard. I don't think really it could ever happen because we are hung up on the notion of people maintaining unrealistically good public personas. Just have the idea that it's not an honest way to go on.

But what if, at the end of those criminal court proceedings, the defendant was found not guilty sandelf? Their name, age, address and details of charges, would be in the public domain, whether they were found guilty or not. Your suggestion would turn "innocent until proven guilty" on its head! The current legislation protects those who are accused of a crime, but have been proven to be innocent, from the stigma of a criminal record. Anyone who does have a criminal record has that on their DBS file for up to 20 years and it is revealed to any prospective employer who carries out basic or enhanced CRB checks in their recruitment processing.