Lawyers Using Databases To Grab Clients 319
bc90021 writes "It seems that lawyers are using jail-house email lists to send potential clients letters offering their services. One couple, on finding their son who'd been missing for two days, '...was astonished that deputies failed to call them when their son was arrested -- though contact and medical information was in the young man's wallet -- yet managed to inform people who wanted his business.'"
Ah... (Score:4, Insightful)
Could be illegal to do this. (Score:5, Informative)
Someone should check the states where these sharks are swimming to see if those states have such restrictions.... then the will need their own lawyers.
Re:Could be illegal to do this. (Score:4, Interesting)
it sounds like the state in question (california was it?) is selling this information
Re:Ah... (Score:5, Funny)
It's called a captive market.
What do you expect from scummy lawyers? (Score:4, Insightful)
Still, you shouldn't expect any more from these pond life.
Jolyon
The need for scummy lawyers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The need for scummy lawyers? (Score:2)
This is so true. There is nothing wrong with what these lawyers are doing, it is no more or less than anyone with a skill to sell would do if they wanted to eat well and have nice shoes.
Re:The need for scummy lawyers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, and you're why they're still around (Score:4, Insightful)
If I were charged with a crime, and I didn't do it, I'd want a lawyer who could help me prove to the court and the world that I didn't do it, and get me off that way. If there were really no evidence that I hadn't done it, and lots that I had (which, outside of TV trials, seems unlikely), only then would I look to get off on a technicality. My preferred technicality would be finding the SOB who really did it.
If, on the other hand, I were guilty of whatever it was, I would want only to reduce my sentence. I'd probably plead guilty. The only time I'd do otherwise would be if I truly believe the law is unfair (for instance, if I were brought up on copyright infringement charges for having a few episodes of a show that doesn't yet exist on this continent on my computer).
We need more people willing to face the consequences of their actions. If people did, not only would we have fewer scumbag lawyers, I think we'd have fewer people that would need their services in the first place.
Dan Aris
Re:Yeah, and you're why they're still around (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree but that is just so completely un-American. Americans in general are not good at taking personal responsibility. Nuisance lawsuits, people wasting court time (i.e. my tax dollars!) to avoid paying speeding tickets, etc. Why does every product I buy have a huge warning label on it telling me something so painfully obvious it hurts? Often because some idiot loser hurt themselves or allowed their child to be hurt and thanks to the
Re:Yeah, and you're why they're still around (Score:4, Funny)
Soooo.... your theory is that we need more honest criminals?
Or, that we just need less criminals, and more honest people?
So, isn't it safe to break that entire thing down to: "if people were honest we wouldn't need lawyers and this wouldn't be an issue?"
You typed an awful lot there without really saying a whole lot. You sure you're not a lawyer? :-p
Re:Yeah, and you're why they're still around (Score:5, Interesting)
I've lost both of my parents to prison. My mother is guilty and my father is not. My father was actually a lawyer who believed in justice.
We do not have justice. We have law. There is a big difference. Don't trust that they'll play fair. Don't trust your lawyer to do a good job. Don't trust the jury to see the holes in the story.
Bash any hole you can in the prosecutions case.
And remember, it's going to cost a ton of money.
Re:The need for scummy lawyers? (Score:3, Funny)
No, what you want in that situation is a hooker. I know it's hard to tell the difference between hookers and lawyers, but hookers are usually cheaper.
Re:What do you expect from scummy lawyers? (Score:3, Interesting)
Follow that Ambulance! (Score:5, Interesting)
Great quote from the film: "North, this is America. Everybody needs a lawyer."
Re:Follow that Ambulance! (Score:5, Funny)
For the lawyers hawking services, you have the best chance of clinching the deal if you can get to the client before they sober up.
I for one think this could be great... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I for one think this could be great... (Score:5, Insightful)
Using spam to punish criminals. Priceless!
I don't know about other countries but here in the USA getting arrested doesn't make you a criminal. Being convicted of a crime, however, does. Priceless? Indeed. You can't buy that kind of freedom. You have to fight for it.
Re:I for one think this could be great... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know about other countries but here in the USA getting arrested doesn't make you a criminal.
In principle, sure. In practice, recent events have demonstrated that, even in the USA, people can be arrested and held without charge or trial -- even if they are citizens. Until the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights are consistently respected, without being transgressed under the guise of 'security', then I don't think its fair to say that the US is more 'free' than, say, your average European country.
Re:I for one think this could be great... (Score:4, Insightful)
Except that none of the people in Guantanamo were captured in the US. They were arrested because they were part of organizations that perpetrate killing and destruction, yet have no governmental umbrella that can be negotiated/reasoned with and therefore Geneva POW status does not apply to them. They are slowly being sorted and distributed either back to their country or origin/capture after no longer being deemed a direct threat, or charged with crimes in their home country. The fact is though, they are being treated quite well [bbc.co.uk].
-- even if they are citizens.
Not true either. John Walker Lindh never went to Guantanamo.
Until the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights are consistently respected, without being transgressed under the guise of 'security',
People continually talk of rights being "transgressed under the guise of 'security'", but I actually see very few examples ever of what they mean. Otherwise, it just sounds like rhetoric. I know you believe the issues we are talking about are an example, but what are some others?
then I don't think its fair to say that the US is more 'free' than, say, your average European country
I would tend to agree that most western European countries are very 'free' except the previous poster did not specify Europe. I would not say that all of Europe is free (largely Eastern Europe is not in many ways) however, and that leaves a large portion of the globe with few of the same rights as Americans and Western Europeans.
Re:I for one think this could be great... (Score:5, Informative)
They are slowly being sorted and distributed either back to their country or origin/capture after no longer being deemed a direct threat.
Unfortunately, that was not the case with Maher Arar [timeswatch.org], a Canadian citizen of Syrian descent. After being arrested (but not charged) while changing planes at JFK, US officials deported him to Syria, where he was imprisoned and tortured for over a year. It is not unreasonable to hold the US government complicit in this torture.
Not true either. John Walker Lindh never went to Guantanamo.
I was actually thinking of Jose Padilla, who was held without trial or charge in a military brig for over a year, after being arrested at Chicago O'Hare. What happened to his due process?
Re:I for one think this could be great... (Score:3, Informative)
More info here [theage.com.au]
To the best of my knowledge, there has been absolutely no progress here and he is still being detained.
Don't attempt to claim that an Australian doesn't have a "governmental umbrella" that can be negotiated with, this is just a single example of many that the US is a law unto itself and is routinely a
Re:I for one think this could be great... (Score:2, Funny)
And thus ends... (Score:2)
C'mon folks...at least make the leeches work for their money..
I can see it now... (Score:5, Funny)
Want to make your member^H^H^H^H^H^Hjailtime longer^H^H^H^H^H^Hshorter? Just give Smith at Law a call, we will do the rest! Guaranteed results! You only have to take^H^H^H^Hmake one pill^H^H^H^Hcall!
How much would it suck (Score:4, Funny)
ambulance chasers (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if lawyers contacted OJ after his arrest...
Re:ambulance chasers (Score:2, Insightful)
what have we come to? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm. I would have liked to have known what the outcome of that was. I have a friend who is in a similar situation and he gets questioned all the time by people concerned for his well-being. But arrested on suspicion of using drugs? Just because he was acting erratic? Does that strike anyone else as strange?
I'd sue the pants off the casino and the arresting agency over that if I was him or his guardian. WTF is this? Arrest first and ask questions later? What have we come to?
Re:what have we come to? (Score:2)
Re:what have we come to? (Score:2)
So I guess if I take your post and this one [slashdot.org] I can forget any chance of a real debate or discussion on quite the serious issue. Too bad too because it looks like all the other people who have replied to the article missed this piece.
Perhaps the more interesting /. readers will come on in a few hours
Re:what have we come to? (Score:2)
nah it isn't that. it's more of the fact that the police can do anything that they feel is neccessary to protect them and you. so if they feel your erratic behavior was endangering any other people them or you, they will arrest you.
Re:what have we come to? (Score:3, Interesting)
First thing the parents have got to do is...find a lawyer...hmmm...
Re:what have we come to? (Score:4, Interesting)
Hey a serious reply to my comment. I was about to lose faith :)
It's been my experience that if a lawyer has to advertise their services you probably don't want to do business with them. The best lawyer I ever dealt with didn't advertise at all -- I found out about him by talking to a friend who had the misfortune of going up against him in an unrelated case (his lawyer got his ass handed to him). I suppose that's probably true of a lot of professions though.
I'm not usually sue happy but I think I'd go after the whole lot of them for this. It would have been one thing to call the cops out of concern and he wound up at the mental health clinic -- but to actually arrest him because you thought he was using drugs? Makes me wonder if he was subjected to any tests to see if he was using drugs. Yeah, I'd say he has quite the case.
Best way to find a lawyer (OT) (Score:5, Informative)
This gets you lawyers that are reasonably reputable, and often the referral service will have a deal worked out so that the initial consultation isn't going to empty your bank account.
Re:Best way to find a lawyer (OT) (Score:2)
In Oregon, it's $30 for an initial half-hour consultation (which usually last longer, but they still only charge you $30). But they're usually going to send you to the lawyers that aren't currently busy, either because they are new to the profession, or not very good at what they do.
Bottom Line (Score:4, Interesting)
Last week my brother arrested "Satan" (that's who he said he was)- I guess they might have let him keep harassing people while they tried to diagnose what his problem was but instead they took him in. It was meth so I guess you would be o.k. with it.
Re:Bottom Line (Score:3, Insightful)
Did "Satan" have a medical ID card in his wallet?
Re:Bottom Line (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention- this guy is supposed to be on medication daily- and was off it. I am glad they picked him up for his own safety and that of others. This way he doesn't have to use the temp insanity defense if he 'accidentaly' kills somebody while he's off his meds. You see, in that state, he is not responsible for his own actions. So who is? When the folks were called he was in a mental care place- not jail. Sounds like he was treated well.
Beat cops don't have the time or training to do a lot more than look at the current situation and quickly decide if they are going to remove someone. In a casino I bet it is an easy/quick decision. Then when he is no longer a threat to himself or anyone else, you have time to decide what to do. I didn't see anything in the article about him being charged.
But as I said, there just isn't enough information here to make any kind of decision on the rightness/wrongness of what was done. Me- I'm sympathetic to cops and so I tend to assume they did o.k. unless something shows otherwise. It seems (maybe not- I'm just saying) that you are otherwise inclined.
Re:Bottom Line (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes it would. I'll acknowledge that cops are also human beings. That means they have this thing called "common sense" that they can apply to their situations. Common sense says that if a guy has a medical ID card saying he needs this or that mediation and has a mental illness he is not on drugs.
How do you know he was off it? What line in the article said he was off his meds? It only said he was "acting erratically". For all you know he acts like that on or off his meds. The friend that I referred to in my original post [slashdot.org] isn't on medication at all. His condition causes him to appear intoxicated and/or sick to the casual observer. Does that mean that the cops can assume he is being drunk and disorderly and toss him in jail at a whim?
And as I said here [slashdot.org] if the cop in question had used the aforementioned human trait called "common sense" after he had cuffed the guy and gone through his wallet looking for ID (standard procedure in my state) he would have found the medical card. Again using "common sense" he could have called the paramedics and/or mental health people right there and spared the kid the humiliation of being tossed in jail and having his name in the police blotter. Or he could have taken him down the station where this could have happened. But this isn't what happened -- from everything I've seen the kid was actually arrested and processed. How else would the lawyers have gotten his information? Are you seriously suggesting that this level of public humiliation is justified simply because he was acting "erratically"?
You don't need to be charged to be humiliated. His name likely appeared in the newspaper with the tag line "arrested for suspicion of using illegal drugs". Does that mean nothing?
I'm not sympathetic to the cop that looks at somebody acting in a way he can't understand and instantly assumes he is on drugs and slaps the cuffs on him. This kid and his family were utterly humiliated in front of their community. With a little bit of training (and I'll say it again: common sense) this could have been avoided. The cop in question gets zero sympathy from me and if I was his parents (or him assuming he is legally able to make these decisions) I'd be filing complaints with internal affairs and securing myself the services of a reputable attorney. But that's just me.
Re:Bottom Line (Score:3, Interesting)
Right.
The beat cop's job is to remove the danger. If the guy seems dangerous (to himself or to others) you get him out of there and take him to the station.
The very next step is to find out what happened. This
Re:Bottom Line (Score:3, Interesting)
This is based on two major factors, one legal and the other medical.
First, the right to refu
Re:what have we come to? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:what have we come to? (Score:3, Insightful)
And then the casino owner would write a big check to the individual whose rights were so blatantly violated. And the guards in question would be charged and convicted of false arrest and imprisonment. You don't check your civil rights at the door when you go into a casino.
Ah, but why am I feeding the trolls anyway? Time to go back to work...
mod parent up! (Score:2)
as others have pointed out a medical ID tag might have changed this occurence. if he was wearing an ID tag the officer (if smart) would have noticed and called a p
Re:what have we come to? (Score:4, Insightful)
No it's not, but it seems like in this case it would have made more sense to call the paramedics rather then toss his ass in jail after he was processed and fingerprinted. What happens after the cops slap the cuffs on somebody who is "behaving erratically"? Chances are they went though his wallet (probably before he was even in the squad car) and found the medical information card.
And yet he was still arrested and tossed in jail. You can bet his name appeared on the police blotter (probably with the tagline "under suspicion of using drugs" or something else equally damning). The FBI now has copies of his fingerprints (your state will typically give them back to you after charges are dismissed/you are acquitted -- but they forward them to the FBI and the FBI never gets rid of them). His rights were completely violated for no justifiable purpose.
He has every right to be pissed off. And the arrest is the issue, not the failing to contact the family. As another post pointed out if he is >=18 years of age they are under no obligation to contact the family. You have to ask for your phone call. They aren't obligated to do it for you. Since he was in a casino I would assume he is at least 18 -- probably 21.
I have a problem with an "arrest first, ask questions later" mentality. I hope they find a good lawyer and clean house.
Shouldn't be surprising... (Score:5, Insightful)
Privacy Issue (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Privacy Issue (Score:2, Informative)
No, that's the wonderful thing about being arrested. Even though you haven't been convicted of any crime you can bet your ass that every local newspaper will carry it in the blotter.
When the charges are subsequently dropped or dismissed chances are they won't
Re:Privacy Issue (Score:3, Interesting)
It makes you wonder why medical records, bank records, military records and so many others are private but arrest records are open to the public.
Re:Privacy Issue (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Privacy Issue (Score:3, Interesting)
"That you wre arrested is a fact, but absolutely nothing to do with whether you were actually guilty of any crime."
- the police
"I don't want you going anywhere near that criminal"
- the neighbors
Re:Privacy Issue (Score:2)
No, it doesn't make me wonder at all. I'm glad arrest records are open to the public. The alternative is people (usually people not too popular with the government) start to just 'disappear'.
Re:Privacy Issue (Score:5, Insightful)
No.
Er, rather, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
While I don't think authorities should be using that information for commercial purposes, arrests records should absolutely be 100% public.
With private records, you run the risk of embarrassment when the neighbors read your name in the local police blotter.
Without private records, you end up...Well, we don't know where you end up. You're gone. And while we suspect the police had some involvement, nobody can find you to waive your right to keep your arrest secret.
Nice to known members of the Bush administration are reading /. to mod such posts up. Send me a postcard from Guantanamo.
Re:Privacy Issue (Score:2)
We had a situation here where a woman got arrested for some little thing, and of course her name and address ended up on the blotter. Turns out someone was stalking her, and having her name and address in the paper was not good, guilty or otherwise.
Re:Privacy Issue (Score:4, Insightful)
There are compelling reasons for publishing that information - it's a good way to get witnesses to volunteer information. Imagine that you read that J. Random Thug was arrested for burglary. He is a neighbor of yours, and you've seen him unloading TVs, stereos, and other expensive goods from the back of his van. Now, although you might've assumed that JRT had just been on another shopping spree (he's had a lot of them since the neighborhood crack dealer started hanging out at his house), you realize that you have some information that the police might find interesting.
Sure, that's contrived. However, I'm we've all seen things that looked perfectly innocent that turned out not to be, and it was only after we found out the truth that it seemed so obvious.
Alternatively, if someone on my street were arrested for possessing child pornography, I darn well want to know about it. S?he may eventually be found innocent, but in the mean time, I don't want my kids playing near their house.
When the charges are subsequently dropped or dismissed chances are they won't pick up on it unless you call them and tell them. Even then they will carry it in the smallest possible font nowhere near the normal police blotter.
Our newspaper carries a comprehensive listing of all court cases, including those dismissed, acquittals, and convictions (and associated penalties). If J. Random Thug from my example above turns out to be innocent, they'll print that alongside the list of arrests and convictions. I guess things are different where you are.
Crime and Punishment (Score:4, Funny)
Miranda for the new century (Score:5, Funny)
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.
You have the right to be speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning.
If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.
You have the right to receive exciting new offers from spamvertise.com.
If you choose to opt out of our mailing list, your user preferences will be reset some time in the future.
Capitalism overriding Social Responsibility (Score:2)
IMHO: It should be the first step, to contact parents and relatives of the arrested/convicted, isn't this sort of important?
Capitlism without limits (Score:4, Insightful)
why not? (Score:2)
Re:why not? (Score:2)
1 question to ask yourself:
Are respectable lawyers sending out spam junkmail? I would guess no.
Oh, there is one more....is there really a respectable lawyer???
South Florida has been doing this for years (Score:5, Interesting)
He was in a casino (Score:5, Interesting)
The thing about needing medication sucks, but its well within the realm of possibility that his health issue both doesn't present as an actual health issue and renders him unable or unwilling to notify the officers. If thats the case, nothing to see. IF the officers knew something was wrong and still failed to act, well then fsck them.
I carry contact and medical information too, but thats only for use if I am unconscious or otherwise unable to speak for myself. Don't call my mommy just because I get picked up. If the officers dug through the medical records of everyone they picked up, wouldn't we by crying invasion of privacy then too?
Re:He was in a casino (Score:3, Informative)
Re:He was in a casino (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:He was in a casino (Score:2)
Only if you haven't moved out of the house by then. (Just to be clear on this) Most likely the mail was sent to him, and was not addressed to "Parents of the offender" like some note from school. But if you do get arrested (and you still live at home), you might consider getting a temporary change of address from t
Re:He was in a casino (Score:2)
I agree. They should only call about 1 out of 20 arrests, a few times a month, at the most.
-Adam
Re:He was in a casino (Score:5, Informative)
Personally, this frightens me. As someone who is diabetic, I sure as hell would WANT my loved ones to be contacted if I was sitting in jail without insulin or my other meds. If I'm in diabetic ketoacidosis, I may be unable to think clearly and not communicate properly, and I certainly would look and act fall-down "drunk". I certainly would be in need of medical attention, and the sooner the better.
Two lessons need to be learned here. First, the Sheriff probably needs to send some of their officers to school and teach them that not everybody who acts drunk belongs in a detox cell -- there are serious, life-threatening medical conditions that can cause a person to act oddly. This having taken place at an Indian casino in "hick" Riverside County dosen't shock me at all.
Secondly, and this is a lesson everybody who has a medical condition that can result in this sort of thing needs to know: THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR A MEDICALERT BRACELET OR NECKLACE. Carrying a card in your wallet with your information on it IS NO HELP, because law enforcement and/or paramedics will often not look in a wallet.. hell, in some places, they are specifically instructed NOT TO because if money is missing the agency may be held liable. But, even a back-country sheriff is going to know enough about that little silver bracelet to at least call the number on it. I highly suspect that if this kid had a MedicAlert necklace or bracelet, he would have been transported to the hospital in the back of an ambulance, not to jail in the back of a squad car.
For me, just having the necklace that said "Diabetic" on the back has already resulted in my life being saved once. And the paramedics who found me didn't even have to call a phone number: they knew the second they found me and my MedicAlert necklace exactly what needed to be done. That's not "rooting around in your medical file".. that's telling emergency personell what they need to know to save your life.
Just In Case It Wasn't Clear... (Score:5, Interesting)
I want it on the record so that there's no misunderstanding on the part of future generations, or the current generation who's building the future:
I don't want to end up living in a Neal Stephenson novel. No, not even if I get to be Hiro Protagonist.
Reading this writeup reminded me of the scene in Snow Crash where we discover the police have outsourced incarceration, and take YT to The Clink. All that is left is dollars. The human equation is lost, and anyone holding a sense of morals or ethics is seen as an anachronism. I don't know about anyone else, but... Yuck.
Great books, but I wouldn't want to live there.
Schwab
This Lady Don't know lawyers (Score:5, Interesting)
First Spam (Score:3, Informative)
Re:First Spam (Score:3, Informative)
Re:First Spam (Score:3, Insightful)
Templeton's outdates the lawyer one by 16 years. *sigh*
Oh well. (Score:5, Funny)
I'd bet he politely asked to place a phone call, but the officer responded, "What good is a phone call if you're unable to speak?" The rest, as they say, is history.
Who Needs to Chase Ambulances (Score:2, Funny)
Titanic (Score:3, Funny)
This is not so new (Score:5, Interesting)
what else do you expect from lawyers (Score:3, Informative)
according to this wired article anyway:
www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,19098
I don't mind... (Score:5, Interesting)
If I sell a t-shirt with Michael Jordan's name on it I could get sued. Isn't this the same thing? If so, then why can't I get paid when my name is sold? If it isn't the same thing, how is it different and why don't I have a choice in the matter?
Re:I don't mind... (Score:2)
I think there's a law in the US that prevents perpetrators from benefiting in any way from the crime(s) they commit...
Re:I don't mind... (Score:4, Insightful)
So, crime pays, but only mostly for lawyers?
Re:I don't mind... (Score:5, Interesting)
This, incidentally, is the single best non-tin hat reason to support privacy reform, something that everybody ought to agree with. Your private information has value, as demonstrated by the fact that it is routinely sold, for more money then you probably realize. Why is it OK for people to effectively steal this value from you without compensating you fairly, and indeed, charging you in the form of the time you have to spend dealing with people who then use this data?
It's only going to get worse [jerf.org].
(In fact, you can boil all privacy arguments down to this point, but it's better for many people to state it nakedly as a monetary issue, even though IMHO the non-monetary concerns are more interesting and important in the long run.)
No problems with this. It's the way it works. (Score:4, Insightful)
Was he really arrested? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Was he really arrested? (Score:3, Insightful)
The article doesn't mention him being in a mental institution, and it's certainly a violation of federal law to release to lawyers' marketing firms the names and addresses of people you transport to a hospital for medical treatment.
Which is better? (Score:3, Funny)
business as usual in texas (Score:4, Funny)
Every damn time I get out of jail I end up w/ my mail box stuffed for at least a week w/ lawyers' ads. Even if I sat out my time and thus the case is closed.
And as far as calling his parents, unless his medical paperwork mentioned contact w/ a legal guardian, an adult's relatives are never contacted. Shit, you're lucky if you get your phone call until you make it to the main detention center ( which is a big help if you can make bail ).
Speeding Ticket = junk mail? (Score:3, Interesting)
Spam and Lawyers (Score:5, Funny)
cLive
quote from the article... (Score:3, Insightful)
ummm....what else are they going to use that data for?
just asking
So the law school and MIS depts have combined! (Score:3, Funny)
my experience (Score:4, Insightful)
I believe this was on a Friday. By Monday, I had a dozen lawyer's advertisements in my mailbox offering to help me.
Re:my experience (Score:4, Informative)
And I wasn't allowed to make a phone call b/c cellphones don't take collect calls, and I didn't know anybody local's number (was arrested out of town). And, yes, there are very few cops who are doing the job right.
-bZj
"Journalism" at it's best (Score:3, Insightful)
It plays the "parents don't know their kid was arrested" card.
It plays the "public info was used in a way you didn't know was happening" card.
It gives us no details about anything we could use to make a judgement about whether what happened was appropriate or not.
Reconstructing:
Cops are called to the scene of a (presumably, since otherwise they would have had to call his parents) legal adult acting "off".
Does he have a medic alert bracelet? Is he cooperative? It isn't said, but I'll give the cops the benefit of the doubt and say probably not, cause most people don't. I don't, even though I'm on meds. They aren't important enough that I feel I need it. That's my judgement call. And usually, the cops on the scene aren't actually allowed to go through his pockets to find anything more than id, which is usually pretty obvious, so they arrest him and he gets booked.
After he's booked for D&D (or whatever), someone goes through his wallet, finds medical info, and decides he really needs to be in a hospital, not jail. So off he's sent. Does he want his parents to be contacted? We don't know. Doesn't say. He's a legal adult, so there's no requirement to contact them. He's about to be shipped off to the nuthouse, but he's not technically incompetent for another 72 hours yet, so if he doesn't want them called, they won't be. That is still his right, isn't it?
Lawyers do as lawyers do. They'd have a designated person sitting there calling as people were booked if the email system wasn't set up. And this at least gets that freak out of the cops face/space.
Parents get pissy because they weren't contacted. News hound smells "scare" story and writes it up, rather badly.
Slashdot finds it because of the "wow, this publicly available information was sent through email! " connection.
How is this related to MRO again?
losing the point. (Score:3, Insightful)
What upset them was the fact that the letters from the paddy-wagon chasers arrived before a phone call from the sheriff's department. This is a 'get your priorities straight' call, not `don't give lawyers the names of the arrested' call.
In the context of the Patriot act, I'd be happy to know that at least someone with a vested interest in giving me at least some sort of support was likely to be informed of my arrest.
Re:Information availability (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Information availability (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:article text (incase it gets slashdotted) (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:article text (incase it gets slashdotted) (Score:3, Informative)
It was slashdotted on 9/11 as I recall. But I do see your point. He was modded down to -1 at one point. I wonder who the heck modded him back up? What a waste of disk space.
I call troll on the grandparent [slashdot.org].