The johns accused of buying sex from a high-end prostitution ring should be punished if found guilty, but what about those who are cleared?

Should the convicted be held accountable? Of course.

But where will they go to get their names and reputations and families back if they are never charged with a crime?

These are key questions after the Supreme Judicial Court agreed that the show cause hearings for the alleged 28 clients of the brothel network should be held in public to avoid the hint of favoritism.

The court ruled that the concerns of favoritism outweighed concerns for the men’s privacy.

The high-profile case smacks of a publicity grab by U.S. Attorney Joshua Levy, who could not prosecute the men in federal court but instead had their cases moved to the state courts.

He tantalizes the public and bloodthirsty media by saying the accused includes the rich and powerful and public officials but then walks away to leave the cases in the hands of a clerk magistrate. And lets the media salivate over opening the cases to the public.

Attorneys for the alleged sex clients cited the media hysteria around the Karen Read case – filled with “vigilante ‘journalist’ bloggers” – to argue that the hearings should be closed.

“If this Court allows the Clerk-Magistrate’s order (opening the hearings) to stand, it is onto this apocalyptic media hellscape that the accused – before any formal adjudication – will be pitched,” an attorney for one of the alleged sex buyers wrote in a brief filed with the SJC.

The high court did not buy that argument.

Let’s be clear: what these men are accused of – enriching a sex trafficking ring — is not ok. No one wants to see women exploited.

But do you really trust the federal government?

Everyone involved, including the media and public, should take a deep breath before engaging in finger-pointing and scolding. The media should use caution and fairness in covering the cases.

Ha. Highly unlikely.

It’s clear that lives will be ruined in this case, in some instances without a guilty verdict. These accused men will be wearing the scarlet letter if their names are made public, regardless if they’re never convicted.

Do you really trust the mainstream media to ensure fairness to the accused? After the biased way they just covered the presidential campaign?

If some of these men are never charged, it will be too late. The media will be there covering their every move and won’t hold back rendering judgment.

There are bound to be leaks even before the hearings.

Everyone wants to see people held accountable, and if you’re a politician or rich you should not be above the law

But you’re also entitled to fairness and not have your life completely destroyed for something you’re not even convicted of.

Vigilante justice should not prevail.