Should arrest records be publically available?

LikeOhMyGawd! · 10-04-2006 03:40PM #1

I have just stumbled across this website http://thestumponline.com/infamous.htm
which contains the mugshots and various details from jail booking reports in some Idaho counties. Presumably there are many more similar sites originating in the USA. AFAIK this particular one only reports the charges cited so these people might ultimately be found innocent in a court of law.

Do you think simlar information should be made known in this way to the public in Ireland and what do the people of this forum think the pros and cons might be?

Eru · 11-04-2006 08:43PM

In the states they love ths system and believe it or not, if your living in America you can go too certain sites, type in your address and it will pinpoint sex offenders in your area. It will name them, tell you the crime and sentence and give you their exact address. Think its 'Sara's law' or something. Basically a paedophile babysat and killed a girl and the parents claimed had theyknown they could have protected her. Thus it became public knowledge.

This site is rare because most official sites only put up details concerning people actually found guilty.

Personally I am not in favour, for starters people are innocent until proven guilty so therefore I think names, etc should not be allowed into the public domain until a person is found guilty.

For paedphiles, as a parent yes I want that information but its true that in Ireland the police would lose touch with many if their details were public knowledge and they would go too ground.

Sangre · 11-04-2006 09:07PM

Arrest records? Not a chance. The presumption of innocence is constitutionally enshrined in Ireland (art. 38.1) so there is no way this would hold up. Not to mention the right to good name.

Turner · 11-04-2006 09:10PM

How about a persons previous convictions.

Should they be made public?

It happens in a public court, should the public have access to them.

The fact of whether the conviction is published in a newspaper depends on whether a journalist was present in court or not.

Should a government web address exist where you can enter a persons name and DOB and up pops up their previous convictions and any details of appeals on convictions ?

Thomas_S_Hunterson · 11-04-2006 09:13PM

Previous Convictions should definitely be made public. It would serve to an extent as a deterrand
If you dont want your name all over the place, don't commit the feckin crime type thing

Eru · 12-04-2006 12:12AM

Im on the fence with previous convictions. Remember, many judges will only want a summery of previous, such as the amount, general types and most recent. If even that much detail.

Heres a question, if it became possible to log on and get previous plus the papers ran stories on a regular basis about career criminals how many cases would fall flat because you couldnt get an unbiased jury????

Turner · 12-04-2006 12:15AM

How many judges release people on bail because they dont ask to hear the defendants 100+ previous convictions??

Eru · 12-04-2006 12:25AM

Chief--- wrote:

How many judges release people on bail because they dont ask to hear the defendants 100+ previous convictions??

whoooow daddy, whos mentioning previous before they have been found guilty??????

Im shocked at the suggestion :eek:

Under Section 2 bail Act you can appose bail because they will re offend in your opinion but thats only for indictable offences and you need a genuine reason besides "Judge hes a scumbag!"

Turner · 12-04-2006 12:30AM

hahaha

Judge i know hes a scumbag, you know hes a scumbag..... God even his legal aid solicitor knows hes a scumbag and that he would stab any one of us to rob our mobile phone!!!

If only you could say it.

But everybody is entitled to due process................

Even the person who is remanded on bail, only because his legal aid solicitor wants another €150 or so from the next court sitting and the person will probably be involved in 3-4 serious indictable crimes in the meantime....

bla bla bla welcome to the irish justice system.

Our man in Havana · 12-04-2006 12:36AM

I thought that since the bail referendum, it was supposedly much harder to get bail?

Eru · 12-04-2006 12:39AM

Lugs would have said it, in fact I heard he did on more than one occasion.

Personally I am a firm believer in the Blackstone theory. I can live with due process meaning I lose cases and if I gave it an honest effort then so be it but I could never live with myself if I sent an innocent man too jail, even for a minor offence.

I saw a case once where the guy wanted bail, the conversation:

Accused "Judge Im a changed man, I dont want to go back inside, its thought me a lesson"

Judge "Yes your an angel in my court but unfortunately a devil outside it. I am thinking off 6 months but I will make a deal with you, 6 month remand on bail, if you dont reoffend, no custodial sentence but if you do re-offend, 1 year all too be served"

Accused "can I take the 6 months now"

Credit where credit is due, the judge called his bluff big time but he still came back with a good one!:D

Eru · 12-04-2006 12:41AM

Bond-007 wrote:

I thought that since the bail referendum, it was supposedly much harder to get bail?

Despite the papers, most people dont reoffend when on bail. A large slice do but you canot punish a 1st timer for what the career guys do and anyway, even if they got custody, it would count against their sentence anyway.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 12-04-2006 12:42AM

So, if this imformation was publically available, what exactly would you use it for? And if you got arrested (and convicted) for being, say drunk and disorderly or dangerous driving and you lost a job because you boss looked you up, would it change your stance...?

(Ok, you might have a case for unfair dismissal, not sure what the law says, but you get the idea)

Eru · 12-04-2006 12:48AM

Ikky Poo2 wrote:

So, if this imformation was publically available, what exactly would you use it for? And if you got arrested (and convicted) for being, say drunk and disorderly or dangerous driving and you lost a job because you boss looked you up, would it change your stance...?

(Ok, you might have a case for unfair dismissal, not sure what the law says, but you get the idea)

well Im pretty sure my job would be gone anyway

But Im against the idea anyway. I do not however think you have a good case, its not fair because criminals would lose their jobs? Your supposed to declare a record anyway and I dont think a boss would sack you unless it effected your job. Drink driving truck drivers or taximen should be sacked. A security guard that robs should be sacked.

Sangre · 12-04-2006 08:59AM

Can't fire someone for a crime that doesn't affect their job.

Anyway, if previos convictions were widely know would that not deny any belief in the reform power of sentencing?

Our man in Havana · 12-04-2006 09:55AM

Are certain minor convictions "spent" after a number of years?

Turner · 12-04-2006 10:36AM

Sangre wrote:

Can't fire someone for a crime that doesn't affect their job.

Anyway, if previos convictions were widely know would that not deny any belief in the reform power of sentencing?

What about a man convicted for drunk and disorderly or drink driving..... does he have a drink problem...

Would you want him in charge of your finance department??

grumpytrousers · 12-04-2006 11:40AM

Chief--- wrote:

What about a man convicted for drunk and disorderly or drink driving..... does he have a drink problem...

Would you want him in charge of your finance department??

I probably wouldn't. But that's not the point. Does his drink problem affect his ability to do the job for which he was hired.

If Yes - you (also) have a problem and you'll need to take this up with your errant employee.

If no - it's none of your fookin' business; if the matter wasn't an issue at the interview stage, then tough...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 12-04-2006 05:26PM

On another note...

...are we responsible enough to have access to these records...?

Should arrest records be publically available?

Comments