What's wrong with doxxing this person?
If he got it wrong, he'd be facing a lawsuit. He's also incentivized to retract and apologize in that case to preserve his credibility as a journalist. Very different story than an unaccountable anonymous troll with a grudge on Twitter/Reddit/4chan.
Do you see that is likely to ever happen?
Just so we are on the same page. Here we "can't get a conviction" because the person resides in a country which doesn't care about the crime he committed. Not because the evidence does not pass the required evidentiary level.
> don't have the right to ruin a life.
Please explain to him how a life is ruined here?
> Any deviation from this principle leads to mob rule.
Where a mob is a single high profile individual with his reputation on the line, and this singular "mob" performed a through analysis and provides the full reasoning how he come to the conclusion. This "mob" rule does not look like the ones I usually hear about.
Most things in life are, thankfully.
I don't want to become the subject of a New York Times expose, either, but that's no reason to ban journalism.
I feel I have a right to make my decisions based on such information also.
That doesn't mean the publisher shouldn't have liability here also. They are damaging someone's reputation, and should be held responsible if the claims are untrue.
But if the claims are true, then the damaged reputation is warranted. That's one of the consequences of doing something bad. You only have a right to have a good reputation if you don't do anything bad.
It’s realpolitik. It’s ok for Russians to steal from Americans, and likewise it’s ok for Americans to dox Russian criminals. There is no international law here, and even if there is it cannot be enforced and no one cares about. There might some moral high ground, but morals usually stay away from politics.