Local police post mugshots on Pinterest, leading to a 57% boost in arrests

Post by notatoad » Mon, Dec 10, 2012, 8:08 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #17

crikli wrote: post #3

Blog spam, inaccurate headline. Original article on npr: http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2012/12/07/166678... The boost was in 57% of "warrant services" whatever that means, not arrests. No numbers given for the increase in arrests, just that they "actually got more people."

Thank you for that. The Pinterest page is here ( http://pinterest.com/themercury/wanted-by-police/ ) I'd be interested to see if Google (or anyone) tried their face recognition on these photos and provide information to the police.

Post by jacquesm » Mon, Dec 10, 2012, 8:27 PM UTC

oes0 wrote: post #15

guylhem wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denonciations are a good thing if you believe a criminal should be arrested as a consequence of his initial actions. Denonciations are a bad thing if you believe that someone who didn't get caught in the act should be able to escape 972 - est-tu de Martinique ?

There's also a third option, people who can't (at the time) afford a lawyer to represent them. Even in minor court cases, to plead not guilty and take a case to trial costs thousands of dollars. In jail-able offenses, some municipal courts don't have public defenders. And if you are innocent and unwilling to take a plea deal, your only option can be spending $3000+ to defend yourself against a minor misdemeanor charg…

Post by zupreme » Mon, Dec 10, 2012, 8:58 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #49

zupreme wrote: post #45

I wonder what the privacy-law impact of this will be. While all of us will probably agree with a system like this to help locate convicted felons, what about people who simply miss Jury Duty, forget about a court date, and so on. In an era where every HR professional worth her salt Googles every applicant with a serious shot at the job, this could prevent some people from getting much-needed employment. Worse yet, in…

To the extent that employers want to screen candidates who skip out on jury duty, it's hard to argue that there's a "privacy" issue in outing them. Skipping jury duty should be a matter of public record. You are obligated to serve as a juror when required. Willfully avoiding a jury summons is in fact a misdemeanor crime. Don't skip jury duty. The bigger problem with posting wanted signs on social networks is that the…

Post by tptacek » Mon, Dec 10, 2012, 9:18 PM UTC

zupreme wrote: post #56

tptacek wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the extent that employers want to screen candidates who skip out on jury duty, it's hard to argue that there's a "privacy" issue in outing them. Skipping jury duty should be a matter of public record. You are obligated to serve as a juror when required. Willfully avoiding a jury summons is in fact a misdemeanor crime. Don't skip jury duty. The bigger problem with posting wanted signs on social networks is that the…

That is, at it's core, my point. What happens if the case is thrown out? Even if removed from Social Network X, your fugitive status will live forever in the Wayback machine, on scraping sites, and so on.

Post by PotatoEngineer » Mon, Dec 10, 2012, 9:37 PM UTC

engtech wrote: post #22

The craziest thing about looking through the warrants is the amount of charges that are either about property or drugs. The media focuses so much on violence and sexual assault that I thought there would be more violent offenders in the mugshots.