TURIN — Everyone knew that Australian politician Rachel Carling-Jenkins had filed for a divorce, but nobody knew why. She explained it herself, a few days ago, standing up to speak before the state parliament of Victoria, of which she is a member. In February 2016 she had found images on her husband's computer of children forced into sexual acts with adults. Carling-Jenkins did not wait for her husband to come home, instead heading straight to the police to turn over the evidence.
In a voice tinged with emotion, she explained that she hadn't said anything publicly until this moment to avoid it damaging the investigation. No one in the magistrate's office forwarded any information on the case to the press, and the trial went forth anonymously, ending in a guilty verdict on charges of possession of child pornography and a sentence of four months in jail.
Carling-Jenkins said she shared the story with the public to render justice — the little that she could provide — to the young victims whose faces are forever etched in her memory, who would not be victims if it weren't for men like her ex-husband feeding this vile market. Her fellow members of parliament applauded, and walked over to give her hugs of support. It's a moving story, no?
Looking at the story here, in Italy, what's particularly moving is to discover that in Australia, an investigating magistrate does not make public the private matters of a politician, while a politician chooses to make those private matters public herself: The magistrate safeguards the rights of the guilty, while the politician safeguards the rights of the innocent.