Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that • Hacker News Board

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#131

Post by stevenicr » Sat, May 15, 2021, 1:59 AM UTC

tablespoon wrote: post #84

andrewla wrote: post #39

I like that the proposed bills here are not attempts to force sites to remove mug shots (which seems like a losing battle) but instead just resists posting mug shots at all, which seems like something that police departments have complete control over. Unless it serves a legitimate law enforcement end, either as part of a punishment for being convicted of a crime or to aid the public in the search for a fugitive, it…

> I like that the proposed bills here are not attempts to force sites to remove mug shots (which seems like a losing battle) but instead just resists posting mug shots at all, which seems like something that police departments have complete control over. I suppose they could also release future mug shots with a license that the images can't be distributed past such-and-such a date.

thinking similar..

mugshots still available to the public - however they must be obtained on an individual request basis, that comes with a license not to republish at all.

This way anyone can get a mugshot - but no one can legally republish it -

tech can give them tools to embed hidden artifacts to prove a republished pic was shared by person 1032 or whatever.

This protects people from being dissipated and can help with lawyers and such, while protecting privacy from republishers that would be subject to dmca and such.

I suppose similar could be done with names being posted online to some extent(?) - proprietary intellectual property?

A way for family and lawyers to keep up with people but keeps others from profiting on public shame / ransom to take down..

legally could expand on laws similar to "it is illegal to photograph a person when that individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy if that photograph would "offend or embarass an ordinary person" or if the photograph was taken for the "purpose of sexual arousal or gratificaiton of the defendant." Tenn. Code Ann. §39-13-605. "

Having and republishing 'illegal' photos or something.

All this reminds me of a saas idea I had some years ago about bail/lawyer/and notify your saved list of people - if your name is found in public arrest records online.

Now I'm also thinking about people just iframing the police site - may need to hide photos on screen and only show if click/tap to agree to terms then show.

I've had many thoughts on these things, should complete them more one of these days.

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#132

Post by ajdlinux » Sat, May 15, 2021, 1:59 AM UTC

Are there any other democratic countries apart from the US where posting arrest mugshots is standard police practice?

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#133

Post by alistairSH » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:01 AM UTC

boomboomsubban wrote: post #104

pmcollins wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why not give the suspect a choice? would you prefer your mugshot be published online, google-able for years, or would you rather not, and risk getting ‘disappeared’ by your local police dept without a trace. i know which one i’d choose.

That would provide no protection against being disappeared, and potentially make things more dangerous for people in that situation. Assume police do disappear people. Opting for your record to be public would show police that you're willing to cause problems for them, making the prospect of getting rid of you more appealing. Further, if some associate of yours goes to find out what has happened to you, they can just…

* Assume police do disappear people. *

Chicago PD says hello.

No assumption needed. American police do disappear people, at least temporarily.

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#134

Post by kumarsw » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:08 AM UTC

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #7

errantspark wrote: post #5

I wonder in the discussions surrounding these sorts of things (Right to be Forgotten, etc) if the issue isn't that there should be a right to be forgotten but rather that culturally we should be far far more tolerant of people fucking up. It feels like the perception of how much the average member of society transgresses its rules is totally out of sync with reality, though this may be by design to create space for e…

A problem with mugshot sites is that they often detail the charges, and sometimes the charges just aren’t something people are going to be tolerant of. For example, I know a young man who traded nude photos on his phone with a girlfriend who was just below the age of consent, got caught, and was arrested and charged with "sexual exploitation of a minor". Once in court, those charges were easily plea-bargained away, b…

My sister once decided to look up if a particularly lousy co-worker had an arrest record. Turns out he was arrested on charges of domestic battery, but not convicted. Which is why he's been around her workplace so long, it's a big red flag for a hiring manager so he isn't getting a job anyplace else. Now he probably deserved to be arrested, but there's always the chance that he really is innocent, in which case the US justice system has failed him.

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#135

Post by nradov » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:16 AM UTC

dodobirdlord wrote: post #123

nradov wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such a law probably wouldn't be Constitutional. Speech can't be compelled.

It would probably pass muster if framed in terms of defamation. Making it statutorily defamation (i.e. you automatically lose civil suits, regardless of your intent to defame) to distribute someone’s arrest record without also distributing their conviction record with equal prominence would probably strike the right balance.

Unlikely. The Constitution contains no exceptions for defamation.

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#136

Post by ma2rten » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:17 AM UTC

HighPlainsDrftr wrote: post #114

pmcollins wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why not give the suspect a choice? would you prefer your mugshot be published online, google-able for years, or would you rather not, and risk getting ‘disappeared’ by your local police dept without a trace. i know which one i’d choose.

I don't think this is as easy as we would like it to be. If they are posting mugshots online, maybe they should also be required to post all police interaction's with the public online (including bodycam footage, etc). Or maybe none of it should be posted online, and if you are interested in it, you have to go to the courthouse and get the record. I think the problem really is deeper than that. I think all government…

That’s already the case. You can file a foia request.

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#137

Post by samatman » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:27 AM UTC

kumarsw wrote: post #134

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A problem with mugshot sites is that they often detail the charges, and sometimes the charges just aren’t something people are going to be tolerant of. For example, I know a young man who traded nude photos on his phone with a girlfriend who was just below the age of consent, got caught, and was arrested and charged with "sexual exploitation of a minor". Once in court, those charges were easily plea-bargained away, b…

My sister once decided to look up if a particularly lousy co-worker had an arrest record. Turns out he was arrested on charges of domestic battery, but not convicted. Which is why he's been around her workplace so long, it's a big red flag for a hiring manager so he isn't getting a job anyplace else. Now he probably deserved to be arrested, but there's always the chance that he really is innocent, in which case the U…

When it comes to domestic battery there's a lot of middle ground between guilty and innocent.

America has adopted what's called the Duluth model, which recognizes, correctly, that men are the more dangerous partner in a domestic relationship with a man and a woman in it. This has... consequences, in terms of who gets arrested, and who can therefore press charges.

When a couple get into a physical altercation, it's pretty common that neither of them looks very good, behavior-wise, to an outside observer. But it has to be pretty open-and-shut assault by the woman, usually with a weapon causing serious injury, for arrest and charges to fall on her shoulders.

Although if the guy was the kind of dude where your sister thought "hey, I wonder if this guy has a record?" well, that tells its own story, doesn't it?

Pretty good argument for not publishing mugshots, though: if a woman starts throwing shit at her boyfriend, and comes at him with her fists, and he pushes her away, he's probably going to spend a night in jail if the police get called due to all the hollering. No court date or (additional) jail time, though, just gets his stuff back and goes home.

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#138

Post by boomboomsubban » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:41 AM UTC

david-gpu wrote: post #111

boomboomsubban wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would provide no protection against being disappeared, and potentially make things more dangerous for people in that situation. Assume police do disappear people. Opting for your record to be public would show police that you're willing to cause problems for them, making the prospect of getting rid of you more appealing. Further, if some associate of yours goes to find out what has happened to you, they can just…

> Assume police do disappear people. Then it is also easy to imagine that the same police would not take mugshots of the people they want to disappear.

Meaning if you could prove police arrested someone and they could not produce a mugshot, something is wrong. Providing them a way to deny the mugshot without being suspicious gives them more options.

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#139

Post by boomboomsubban » Sat, May 15, 2021, 2:41 AM UTC

R0b0t1 wrote: post #113

boomboomsubban wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would provide no protection against being disappeared, and potentially make things more dangerous for people in that situation. Assume police do disappear people. Opting for your record to be public would show police that you're willing to cause problems for them, making the prospect of getting rid of you more appealing. Further, if some associate of yours goes to find out what has happened to you, they can just…

You can only protect people in general, not one specific person. If the police want to kill you they'll get away with it.

Still it's better to make it harder for them.

Re: Online, mug shots are forever – some states want to change that

#140

Post by ravel-bar-foo » Sat, May 15, 2021, 3:36 AM UTC

freeone3000 wrote: post #110

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> resists posting mug shots at all, which seems like something that police departments have complete control over Note that these laws originated from a civil rights perspective. Requiring the publication of arrests makes it harder for the police to disappear people.

In what way? As long as it's a small enough number of people needing to be disappeared, it can be done while still publishing arrests of everyone else! It's not as if the person under detention can check.

Before the Great Lockdown, that would result in the friends, family, and coworkers of the disappeared person contacting police and then media to find them.