Haunted by a mugshot: how predatory websites exploit the shame of arrest

[theguardian.com – 6/12/18]

Gregory Rakoczy was asleep in his van at a Maryland campsite when six police officers knocked on his door. A fellow camper had Googled his name and found a mugshot indicating he was a felon on the run. He was not.

Rakoczy was arrested and held for 20 hours. Afterward he immediately Googled his own name and found that his picture had recently gone up on Mugshots.com for criminal charges he had faced 15 years ago.

At that time Rakoczy ran a company that installed audiovisual equipment in homes. He was charged with fraud after his firm sold dozens of clients one model of TV but installed a different one – a mistake he said was made by a distributor, but one he should have noticed.

Most of the 90 charges – one for every person sold the wrong TV – were dismissed after he replaced the TVs, and he spent five years on probation for the remaining ones.

He contacted Mugshots.com to take the picture down and they demanded $399, which he paid. But the next day he saw his picture was still on the site and he called them again.

Read more

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

7 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

If you are a victim of this kind of harassment, I have advice regarding some successes I’ve had without spending a dime.

1. File a complaint with the webhost. Often such publications violate the Terms of Service. I’ve got entire websites taken down. Use “whois” websites to identify webhosts and webservers. Threaten litigation if you have to. For example, mugshots.com is hosted on Amazon Cloud (AWS).

2. Threaten to expose the website operators. Most of these sites rely on anonymity for the creators. I’ve had luck threatening to sue and threatening to use the lawsuit to reveal the publishers identies.

3. File DMCA notices, even if the mugshot isn’t your copyright – DMCA can cover a lot of things and most often companies (publishers, webhosts, etc) will simply remove the content rather than risk litigation or verify copyright ownership.

4. Request Google to de-index the site or image. This is especially useful if the site or image includes personal information that violates Google’s privacy policies.

5. Use the “Report Image” functionality in Google when you do an image search. This can help remove negative images from top search results if you are persistent.

6. Flood the internet with positive information (or misinformation) about yourself. Some examples to do this include making numerous free WordPress blogsites, tumblr, flickr, social media, linkedin, and so on. If you can afford about $20/year, make a website in which the domain is your legal name and fill it with good things. This all helps suppress the negative results and research has shown that the vast majority of people don’t look past the first page or two of search engine results.

7. File for a Protection from Harassment Order (restraining order). Often this can be done very cheaply or for free, especially if you have low income to qualify for a fee waiver. I got a court in Maine to grant a protective order against a Massachusetts group harassing me online. Statutes defining harassment are often very broad and publishers will sometimes prefer to simply remove content rather than deal with litigation and court hearings.

8. If you’re a California resident and fall into one of several classifications such as being a victim of domestic violence, stalking, sexual assault, etc. (and California law would likely determine websites like mugshots.com constitute stalking), then you can apply for the Safe At Home program. This program, among other things, forces all publishers and search engines to remove all personal and identifying information about you from the internet. And you have the State of California to back you up and enforce fines if the publishers fail to remove the information. Remember, Google and many other major webhosts are based in California. You can find out more about Safe At Home here:

http://www.sos.ca.gov/registries/safe-home/

Finally, the State of California has a Privacy Enforcement & Protection Unit, which handles complaints regarding the vast area or privacy laws in this state. You can read more or submit a complaint here:

https://oag.ca.gov/privacy/privacy-laws

https://oag.ca.gov/privacy

This is pretty gross! I remember years ago doing a self background check after my misdemeanor was expunged! My original charges where showing as my conviction? I called the company and asked for their info (name of person I was speaking to/address)? They wouldn’t provide it? They where demanding I go to the court (1 hour away) and fax them the expungement? Totally gross. I wanted to kill the (sorry) guy

I just saw my info on a new one, arrestfacts.com. It’s the first time this has come up on a search with my name.

Kicking Mugshots ass

Apparently, the war against mugshots.com is won in federal court.

https://www.ic3.gov/Media/PDF/Y2013/PSA130619.pdf

WEBSITES POSTING MUG SHOTS AND EXTORTION
The IC3 has received hundreds of complaints from individuals claiming they located their mug shots on 20 different websites, all of which allegedly use similar business practices. Some victims reported they were juveniles at the time of the arrests and their records were sealed. Therefore, their information should not be available to the public. Others stated the information posted on the sites was either incorrect or blatantly false. Complainants who requested to have their mug shot removed, had to provide a copy of their driver’s license, court record and other personal identifying information. However, providing such information puts those at risk for identify theft. Complainants were also subject to paying a fee to have their mug shot removed. Although they paid the fee, some of the mug shots were not removed. If they were removed, the mug shots appeared on similar websites. If the victim threatened to report the websites for unlawful practice, the websites’ owners threatened to escalate the damaging information against the victim.

**

6 years ago
Since the federal court ruling back in September we can now sue over “Right to publicity” Just google “Peter Gabiola” or bing search that name and TONS of info will appear.

**

https://casetext.com/case/gabiola-v-sarid

That is the case that hit mugshots.com It turns out a law against dissimination of records and using a likeness for profit is enough to get the record removed from the internet.

https://www.paypal-community.com/t5/About-Business-Archive/Mugshots-com/td-p/655101

**

The Celebrities Rights Act passed in California in 1985 and privacy in California and other states:

https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/california-publicity-and-privacy-rights-law-the-right-to-control-the-use-of-your-image-5609

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&division=&title=1.&part=4.&chapter=1.&article=5.

If need be I can organize this better for the sake of clarity.