It used to be that mugshots were kept well out of the view. Despite being public records in many states, walls of bureaucracy and simple physical inaccessibility (due to the photos being locked in a police station somewhere) kept them largely out of the public eye.
But the Internet has changed that. Now, those same photos are uploaded to the web on tens, maybe even hundreds, of police and sherriff websites, giving rise to two new online businesses: the mugshot aggregation website and its opposite number, the mugshot removal website. But as David Kravets wrote in Wired, the interaction of these two types of website is more complicated than it seems. And their dealings call into question the reluctancy of states to centralize public records online in the first place.
Kravets explains that reputation companies, like RemoveSlander.com, are players in an emerging “mugshot racket” that feature websites with millions of photos and a convenient way to remove them: money. For $399, RemoveSlander will remove a mugshot featured on the popular — but apparently unaffiliated — site, Florida Mugshots, for example. According to the article, the company does this by paying part of that fee to the mugshot site’s owner. “On the surface, the mug-shot sites and the reputation firms are mortal enemies,” Kravets wrote. “But behind the scenes, they have a symbiotic relationship that wrings cash out of the people exposed.”
These companies are now emerging in Florida due to the state’s broad public record laws that allow individual mugshots to be easily obtained. When it comes to these photos, most states consider your face — be it beat-up, distraught, or half-shaven — to be a public record. (Click here to run a 50-state comparison.)
All this openness isn’t necessarily a bad thing. I could quote Justice Brandeis about how well sunlight disinfects, but ultimately it’s a matter of providing information to the public about police activity and those who are arrested for crimes. The lack of privacy is a worthwhile price to be paid for such accountability. But what about the price to be paid for keeping public records, well, less public?
According to Wired, Rob Wiggen, who runs the Florida Mugshots site, is an ex-con now making money legitimately via mugshot-takedown fees. Power to him. But as Wiggen readily admits, his own mugshot will not be found on his site — and neither will those of others who pay up. What bothers me about this isn’t so much the exploiting of state public record laws, but the lack of a central repository for public records that allows such exploitation to occur. Wiggen uses scraping software to collect the mugshots from about 60 different searchable websites run by local law enforcement. When aggregated, those photos can become a valuable database.
But this one is obviously incomplete. The site is missing the faces of all those who have the financial means and desire to pay for their mugshot’s removal. With Wiggen’s site ranked far higher in “Florida mugshot” searches than any police department, only the wealthy and informed get to limit their indiscretions to the relative obscurity of a single county website.
When it comes to open records, these varying degrees of publicness are bothersome. While all Florida mugshots are public under the law, some are more visible than others. In the words of Kravets, companies can choose which mugshots stay hidden behind police CGI search scripts, and which will display prominently in Google searches. We can debate the merits of certain open record laws, consider the balance between transparent government and individual privacy, but if the law makes a record public, it should be visible as well. What good are records that no one sees? Given the way most people get their information, Google has become the gatekeeper here, not some county sheriff.
Kravets told the story of Philip Cabibi who typed his name into Google one night and found his mugshot listed on the first page of results. The 31-year-old had been arrested a few years earlier for driving while drunk in Florida. His face now featured prominently in Google search results because of Florida Mugshots. Cabibi hired RemoveSlander, paid $399 and voilà, no more mugshot. Cabibi’s photo is still a public record. There is nothing preventing another publisher from posting it on his or her website, but to Cabibi at the time, the fee was money well spent. Most people get their information via a Google search, not from requesting the records of an individual police department. While public, Cabibi’s photo was essentially no longer visible. It’s as if the only newspaper in town left a name out of its weekly police blotter because it was paid by that person to do so. It’s the publisher’s prerogative to play favoritism, but the public deserves a better way to obtain information.
The best access to records — be them town board meeting minutes or mugshots — shouldn’t be through a site that is paid for protecting the privacy of one individual over another. It should come from a government body that prohibits that patronage in favor of accuracy and context. There should be a central hub for all public records and not their current scattered online state. Without such a repository, the public is left with private enterprises like Florida Mugshots. It’s a reality that is likely to remain, as state offices are quite fond of collecting FOIA fees. (Consider this bill being proposed in Illinois. If passed, the legislation would actually discourage local governments from posting information online.)
Until the states get involved in aggregating public records, we're left with private entities like these mugshot websites to fill the gap. And while these sites make a great deal of public information readily accessible — Florida Mugshots alone has more than 4 million mugshots in its possession — I can’t help but think of the smaller number that are missing. States need to get better at turning their public records into visible ones.
Justin graduated from Suffolk University Law School in 2011, and is currently a law clerk at the Boston firm Prince Lobel & Tye. You can contact him through his website, JustinSilverman.com, and follow him on Twitter at @MediaLawMatters.
(Image of mugshots from Glasgow's Barlinnie jail circa 1890 courtesy of Flickr user angus mcdiarmid licensed under a Creative Commons BY NC license.)
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Technorati
Print Me!
Send via Email
Post to Twitter
So in other words, I, a
So in other words, I, a nobody, not only can but should copy a neighbor’s or anyone’s mugshot off sheriff's websites, then post the mugshot onto my very own blog with the clear attempt to make some megabucks under the guise of—ehem—“public interest?”
I can be sure, with gusto, to include all the “arrestees” identifying info? That is date-of-birth, place-of-birth, full name, full address, so on and so forth.... Ooh, ooh, ooh... and then I can even install that handy-dandy Google “street-view”application (like mugshots.com uses, very efficiently I might add) showing the “arrestees” home turf all the way up to their very own front door, or whoever might have the misfortune of dwelling behind the “arestees” front door long after the fact; a gift that will ultimately keep on sticking it to future occupants, owners, or buyers. Whoo Hoo!.
The verbage/plan/business model: ‘Mugshot removal information: Please contact a “vendor” from the provided “vendor” list for removal extortion fee for this mugshot’ (the “vendors” being like-minded hapless “nobodies” like my cousin or brother, neighbor, old college buddy, or even some hapless tool with a law degree - all with el-cheapo-per-month .com’s - all trying to look and act all professional like).
The “vendor” arrangement: I remove the mugshot, then I receive the lion’s share of the removal extortion fee from that 3rd party "vendor." Sounds like a plan. A business model. In this economy every single mugshot has the potential of being a big, fat dollar-sign in my slimy, unconscionable pocket! Coolio!
Hey, I can even register several mugshot websites (@ $7.99 each - its's just that easy) with differing names, then once the fools pay the initial extortion fee, I’ll wait a few short months before making their mugshots magically appear on the other mugshot websites! Coolio again! On-going mugshot extortion! Marvelous!
I’ll even call it a "legal business model," a "legal redistribution of mugshots" all for my financial benefit. And if the “arrested” dare email me through my site only to tell me what a monster or predator they think I am or in anyway make be feel bad about myself, why then... I’ll just have to show them who’s boss: I’ll contact all my other internet mugshot website buddies to get them to "redistribute" the mugshots even further - blast them all over the place. I won’t even wait! Good times!
Foshizzle, I’ll make sure their mugshot appears on all my other .com’s in addition to the other “nobodies” mugshot extortion sites. That way, when the “arrested” Google his/her name, Google’s 1st page will be littered with their mugshots and all that other identifying info the identity-theft-experts warn us to keep off the internet. But again, for as little as a $7.99 a month (not including hide-my-domain-ownership fees or SEO fees) a mugshots.com extortion site can be yours for the making! Brilliant!
Hey, maybe I won’t get any extortion money from them after all, but, perhaps, I’ll have shamed them to the point of insanity or self-destruction then they’ll eventually kill themselves - hopefully before they get all psycho and lash out at society after I’ve messed with their livelihood and entire life. Who cares, right? Who needs them! The world be rid of them. They shouldn’t have gotten arrested, the fools. Now their life and money IS MINE! All mine!! bwwwwwwahhhahahah!!!
Good times!!!!
Aside: Question: Do I have to pay taxes on my extortion “business/industry/ model/plan” revenue? Hmm?
********FYI: This is not a “mugshot business” or “mugshot industry.”
This is extortion by intent via the internet. This so-called “redistribution” of mugshots is no different than me posting ANYTHING about anybody on the internet with the intent of demand payment through another entity to take it down! The demand: Pay up or it stays up.
It’s an extortion CRIME! And I for one will be watching and waiting for mugshots.com domains inevitable bubble to burst and their house to come tumbling down.
Btw, who owns Mugshots.com and mugshot posting websites like them? Their anonymous ownership only serves to compel speculation. That, in itself, can’t be a good thing. Where’s the regulation? Do these for profit websites have business licenses? Do they have federal tax id’s? Where’s the accountablity?
In answer to your question
I had the displeasure of finding out all about bustedmugshots.com and mugshotsonline.com, after I discovered they were advertising my mugshot from college. I found a news article online titled "Austin Firm “Star Nine Ventures Inc.” Acquires Mugly Media Inc."
I wrote Star Nine an email expressing my concern about this situation. I also reported the company as unethical and inaccurate on ripoffreport.com.
The story was redacted from the "news" site and coincidentally I received a phone call from Kyle Prall of Citizens Information Associates. He said that the information in the article was not true and eluded to a possible lawsuit against me. Mr. Prall would not answer questions regarding the source of the information or the journalist who wrote the article. My mug was removed free of charge before this conversation. Mr. Prall's reasoning was that since he removed my information that was inaccurate that I should remove or update the information I posted online. Taking his word as a gentleman, I obliged and updated the report along with the news article noting at his request that "The following article contains information that is false in its entirety and is only being provided to disprove any and all claims being made within." He seemed a bit surprised that I had saved the article when I offered to include it with the caption above.
I contacted the "news" website and they gave me the press release that had been written by a Star Nine employee. I emailed Star Nine asking for an explanation as to how a press release containing false info left their office. I haven't heard from them since.
I figured in retribution of having the original article removed, they should have a new article.
Fort Worth Weekly: http://t.co/rfaXtT6i
The anonymonity of mugsites is cleary an issue that needs to be addressed considering they brag about "exposing the true faces of crime." I feel if they are going to promote themselves as a news organisation they should be held to the accepted standards of media transparency and accountability.
I wouldn’t quite say
I wouldn’t quite say “power to him” in this article. Most likely these mugsite websites are operating illegally. In the case of mugshots.com, they don’t seem to have a business license, therefore, they're probably not paying federal taxes on all the money they’re taking-in for mugshot removal.
A touted big-business unregistered? Paying federal and state taxes is required for every business taking-in money, including those operating online. In the case of mugshots.com, report them to the IRS for suspected tax evasion. I’m sure the IRS would love to hear from you. The more the merrier; everyone concerned should call. Then after you report them to the IRS (who can and will unearth their anonymity like gangbusters), and you should, call the FBI and do the same.
@ Timbo, They're not a "News Organization" by any stretch of the imagination. They have zero/zilch bona fide news media credentials. These anonymous, online, unregistered "businesses," most likely evading required federal and state taxes, promoting themselves as "News Media," break every accountable, professional, bona fide News-Media/News-Reporting 'Code of Ethics' out there. They tout themselves falsely. Is it any wonder? They're mugsites in hiding! They hide. They lie. Ooh... {{{shocker!}}}
How to Solve the Problem?
@Telly You and I have a different perspective on this issue than the author. However, we all agree it is a problem. I am interested in hearing a solution to mugshot commericialism from the perspective of someone who believes we shouldn't limit public information AT ALL.
Ethical Criticism: Mugshots- http://brianbaugh.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/baugh_100609_Ethical-Cr...
Correction(s)
[Correction(s)]: A touted big-business unregistered? Paying federal and state taxes is required for every business taking-in money, including those operating online.
In the case of mugshots.com, [you might want to talk] to the IRS for "suspected" tax evasion, [if you know that is the case]. [The IRS might want to hear from you]. The more the merrier;[In my opinion] everyone [concerned] should call. Then after you [talk] to the IRS [about your concerns] (who [probably] can and [may] unearth their anonymity like gangbusters), [then you might want to] call the FBI and do the same.
Refusing to be caught in the mugshot trap
here is a link to my blog relating to the mugshot extortion racket. It explains how I did not commit a crime and was arrested anyway. Now having a mugshot published across the net is an attempt to tarnish my name.
http://mugshotextortion.blogspot.com/
mugshots.com, as of august
mugshots.com, as of august 2011, is a website operating out of belize (probably leased to someone in the US). This would be how they are not paying taxes. If you go to the web site and click "about" at the top of the screen, you will come to a page where they name off REAL public service employees who they claim have "endorsed" their web site and/or what they are doing. However these quotes are fictitious. I know this because I contacted some of the folks that were "endorsing" this, and they had no idea their names were on the site and said they NEVER said those words. a day later the quotes from those folks were removed at their request.
Everyone who has a mugshot on a site like this needs to report it to the FBI.
FYI
FYI: According to online reports, mugshots.com is owned and operated by Moniker Privacy Services LLC. Look it up on the internet. Somebody put a lot of effort into getting this detailed info out. If this is true, then further inquiry reveals Moniker Privacy Services is 1) active and 2)its principal address in Pompano Beach, Florida.
A business license search at sunbiz.org reveals Todd Greene is the managing member. This would be the same Todd Greene with Moniker Privacy Services LLC, who according to this captured news report, was involved with the unlawful porn distribution of a minor - featured here: blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2011/04/bieyanka_moore_moniker_privacy_services.php
Now this wouldn't surprise me one iota. Just the kind of people I imagine would extort arrestees with their mugshots.
Investigation about arrests.org
here is a link to an investigation of arrests.org
http://www.scribd.com/doc/58921958/An-Investigation-Of-arrests-org
Your experience is very interesting
Could you tell me more details on how you were able to remove your mugshot?