Mug shots don't go away easily

[AGDLynn]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/29/us/mug...iref=allsearch

[Mevara]

The flip side is how the publication affects the people showcased. Broderick recalled a man who was a sex offender and had finished serving his sentence. The man was trying to rejoin the community but felt he couldn't with his mug shot in the paper and online. Broderick said she and her team discussed the issue, but ultimately felt their need to inform was more important than helping the man overcome his past.

That is a harsh stand.

[Kevin]

I got the basis for a motion I'm arguing in a few days after seeing the opposing party turn up in the Just Busted paper. I'm great with it.

[33girl]

I love how every time someone is being a total douchecanoe they can throw the phrase "it's for the safety of the children" into the conversation and there are actually people out there asinine enough to think that makes it OK. Parents are responsible for the safety of their children. Period.

I've seen this piece of garbage in such upscale establishments as my local Speedee convenience store. Anyone deluding themselves into thinking it's "journalism" or that this is anything other than a crime version of Girls Gone Wild needs to wake up.

[Kevin]

It's got some legitimate professional uses for some of us in the non-ivory-tower legal community.

[33girl]

That could be.

But you have to admit it's kind of like when Lennie Briscoe gives a hooker a "get out of jail free" business card. It's not in any way honorable or non-sleazy. Were I an opposing lawyer and I found out that's how you got the information on my client, I would spin it in a very negative way.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

That could be.

But you have to admit it's kind of like when Lennie Briscoe gives a hooker a "get out of jail free" business card. It's not in any way honorable or non-sleazy. Were I an opposing lawyer and I found out that's how you got the information on my client, I would spin it in a very negative way.

Not sleazy at all. Without revealing too much about a case, I'm pursuing a case right now where very serious facts came to light about the non-custodial parent because of this paper and I am now able to take appropriate steps to make sure the child is safe.

[Mevara]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not sleazy at all. Without revealing too much about a case, I'm pursuing a case right now where very serious facts came to light about the non-custodial parent because of this paper and I am now able to take appropriate steps to make sure the child is safe.

This is all public record but could you have done the same thing without the service of this website? The idea is good but does it have to be open and searchable for search engines?

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not sleazy at all. Without revealing too much about a case, I'm pursuing a case right now where very serious facts came to light about the non-custodial parent because of this paper and I am now able to take appropriate steps to make sure the child is safe.

Originally Posted by 33girl

I love how every time someone is being a total douchecanoe they can throw the phrase "it's for the safety of the children" into the conversation and there are actually people out there asinine enough to think that makes it OK.

Ditto Mevara's post. Lawyers have found out these things for the past hundreds of years without this rag, quit being so lazy and thinking it's OK that someone who's turned their life around doesn't get a fresh start because of it.

Not to mention the effect this can have on the innocent children of the mug shot-ees. I guess those children don't count.

[AGDee]

I would think the biggest problem is when someone is arrested but found not guilty. They still have a mugshot, but could be cleared of all charges.