Arrestees pay heavy price to keep photos off Internet

  • Article by: Abby Simons , Star Tribune
  • Updated: November 23, 2013 - 10:41 PM

The websites, which demand payment to take the photos down, have become big business.

  • 34
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
sifl09Nov. 24, 13 2:43 AM

It seems like the obvious answer to this moral dilemma, should we let websites have these mug shots or deny their requests, is to seal mug shots by default. Does it really serve any purpose to have them in the public domain? Besides shaming, that is. Also, I hope legislators tackle next the dozens of websites that compile personal data from public records and social networking websites. Some of them don't have an option to remove the profile they've created for you.

kwirkyNov. 24, 13 6:18 AM

can gov't agency copyright the photo(s) ?

ralph6767Nov. 24, 13 7:23 AM

Mugshots deserve to remain in the public domain for good reason, but without bulk electronic data feeds provided by the government these sleazy websites would not exist. I recently needed to access my own driver's license records and was required to: 1) visit the government center 2) take a number 3) stand in line and 4) pay a nominal fee. If I needed another record, I needed to repeat the process. If everyone had to do the same thing, the information would still be available to the public, but the websites would no longer be profitable.

formergopNov. 24, 13 8:12 AM

Plain and pure extortion. Make it illegal to receive any money or thing to remove it.

BroonieNov. 24, 13 9:08 AM

Sex offenders, bank robbers, burglars, scam artists are some who should have their photos published on the internet - unless they're innocent. Mayhaps the websites should institute a pay-per-view fee for those with prurient interest in these unofficial mug shots instead of a fee to remove them as the government has its own legitimate sources.

upnorth85Nov. 24, 13 9:20 AM

Mug shots are good when some one is convicted of a crime. But if some one is arrested and then released without charge after an investigation it does not make sense to release mug shots. Example, a false domestic violence arrest.

ishikawaNov. 24, 13 9:46 AM

Another waste of tax dollars. How about shrinking govt?

mchristiNov. 24, 13 9:54 AM

The answer is simple: mugshots shouldn't be public information until someone is convicted of a crime.

jjsbrwNov. 24, 1310:36 AM

ishikawaNov. 24, 139:46 AM Another waste of tax dollars. How about shrinking govt? ---------------------------- Isn't it the government's role to also protect liberty?

nick40Nov. 24, 1310:57 AM

Let's get real and stop the Minnesota Nice. True story-con artists across 5 states turn to burglary and one of them gets a reputation changing company to bury it. After arrest for burglary of my home, starts another scam in another state While out on bail -who's to know, without the internet? Now the guy is in prison but the same BS on the internet. Check it out-Richard Rinaolo. Mug shots, arrest records, inmate locator-they help.


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters