The state does the arresting. While it’d be cool if the state couldn’t use, say a drug charge, to deny someone housing assistance, it would be silly to imagine policing agencies wouldn’t share info with other policing or national security agencies.
It seems reasonable to me to be allowed to search these records. Why shouldn’t I be able to see if someone’s been repeatedly sued or repeatedly sued others before I enter into business with them? Why shouldn’t I be able to see if the person who fled the scene of my accident has a criminal record?
I could see limiting it to offenses for which someone has been convicted, so that it’s only easily accessible public record if they are found guilty by a jury of their peers, but once that happens I don’t know why they should have any right to privacy regarding the basic facts.
The problems with our legal system, criminal justice, etc are a related but separate issue in terms of what the best system to have is in this regard. Like, neither is going to change, so if we’re discussing what we think is best obviously we all think reforming the system is best - but in a well functioning system the only people protected by hiding this info from the public record are criminals. The people harmed are innocent people seeking background information.
So in the world we’ve got, you could argue about who is helped/harmed by each possibility and what is best - but nothing is going to change in this regard. And in an ideal world in which we can put our changes into place, fixing the criminal justice system alleviates any problems with having records available.
This is sort of neither here nor there, but a pet peeve I have with public criminal records is the expungement process. In Maryland you can apply to have any charges that were dismissed or that resulted in a finding of not guilty expunged immediately - meaning they don’t appear on the public record, although the police and courts can still see them. You can also have certain convictions expunged after a few years depending on the type of sentence.
My problem is that the expungement should be automatic. Every private criminal defense attorney automatically files the expungement forms for their clients as part of their representation - I used to file the forms before we even left the courthouse on a not guilty or dismissal. The 50 people in the courtroom without lawyers who accept pleas with no jail time or have their cases dismissed almost certainly don’t file those forms and follow up on the expungement. It’s just more bullshit that throws up unnecessary hurdles to people.
3 Likes
That’s a great point and would be a good fix to alleviate any reasonable concerns about privacy.
What a way to go
I’d check with the writers of Succession to see if any of them know something.
Fourteen days in prison. Lol, why even bother?
Actually way more than I thought she would get.
Honestly that seems fair to me. Incarceration is terrible and the fact we over incarcerate POC doesn’t mean we should be in favor of over incarceration in other areas.
2 Likes
Are there fines?
14 days in prison is actually a huge deterrent for most people.
Information is my weapon. Don’t take away my ability to defend myself.
To whom it may concern…we’re still going to keep taking our kid to those softball camps! So for any of you “bleacher bitchers” chatting that it’s silly or unimportant, I’ll make sure to invite you to her 1st college game!
#educateyourself #campsareimportant #buildtherelationships#letthemseeyou
Facebook Mom got something to say!
1 Like
Hoe many times has she posted “He’s Just a Little Boy?”
The parable of the Good Samaritan is a good one for immigration.
I’m fine with Huffman getting the book thrown at her, but can one of you lawbros explain to me what law she actually broke? Some cursory reading suggests that she was actually convicted of some forms of mail fraud. If that’s the case, does it mean that she would have been untouchable if she just paid for everything in person with a sack full of hundos?
Not a lawyer but…
The charges: Huffman pleaded guilty in May to conspiring to pay $15,000 to a fake charity that facilitated cheating when her daughter took the SATs.
Yeah, I’ve seen that. But looking into it further suggests that it was only illegal because she mailed or wired the 15K.
They all wrote off their brides on their taxes because the guys scamming the rest set up a charity.
True, but I saw no charges for tax evasion. Have you seen any?