[boomboomsubban]

The potential benefits here are that it's possible the assumed culprit has committed other crimes, and this knowledge could solve other cases, some where potentially the crime has been pinned to an innocent person.

I'm unsure how this potentially positive match would enter databases though, and find it very unlikely that any potentially "solved" case would have DNA tested against such a database.

Publishing the assumed culprit's name and details seems fairly egregious though.

[lolinder]

Yes, the publishing of the details is what gets to me. Throughout the article they treat the case as solved and the man as the guilty party, which they would never do to a living person before a verdict. To thousands of NPR readers, this man is not only the prime suspect but also the guilty party, in spite of the fact that charges will never be filed and guilt or innocence will never be formally determined.