Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Privacy

Your (Australian) Criminal Record Online 113

Posted by timothy from the time-to-start-a-penal-colony? dept.
An unknown assailant submitted the following: "A new web site calling itself CrimeNet is causing a bit of a controversy in Australia. For as little as $6, you can look up anyone's criminal record and perhaps even become your very own vigilante. The Age had an interesting story on the topic. Now where did I put those pitchforks and flaming torches?" And what if you happen to share the name of a heinous criminal? This sort of site seems inevitable, but ripe for abuse.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Your (Australian) Criminal Record Online More

Your (Australian) Criminal Record Online

Comments Filter:
  • For example, the vigilantism on WWW.SOREFEET.COM [sorefeet.com] against MATTEL is good because MATTEL is the Great Satan. If I do not use WWW.SOREFEET.COM [sorefeet.com] to carry on my fight against MATTEL, the world will not know about my REPETITIVE STRESS INJURY or the GREAT FAILING OF THE AMERICAN JUSTICE SYSTEM that was the WWW.SOREFEET.COM [sorefeet.com] case.

    P.S. My feet hurt.

  • Wasn't Australia a penal colony before it was a country? Back when it was known as Van Diemen's Land.

  • As one might expect, the majority of reaction on /. to this story has been negative, and I can sympathise with opposition to this move; one one hand, we have a criminal management (I am loathe to call it "justice") system which is ostensibly interested in rehabilition, and yet moves like this and sundry similar projects (offenders registers, f'rinstance) have the potential to undermine those attempts by exposing people who have served their time to an unproductive backlash.

    However, name publication was originally intended to be an effective tool of the criminal management system; the notion that part of one's punishment as a criminal is that one has a criminal record and that others are freely allowed to republish and access the relevant details. In a sense, making it easier to find out whether an individual has a criminal record is entirely in line with a philosophy of using community and peer pressure to act as a deterrent to crime - I'll leave aside the question of the value of deterrence in crime management for a moment - and allowing people to be forewarned with regard to those with a criminal record. After all, many people would have few qualms offerring a job to someone with a minor offence committed many years ago, but most people would have more qualms about taking on a career criminal.

  • Hey, don't we already get Spam offering the same services?
    Why would I want to use these people?
    The Internet Spy tells all!
  • I don't know about Australia, but in the UK it's not that simple. You might be able to get your "criminal record" removed from the database, but these things spread. You would never know who else had it in their database. Credit ratings are a particular problem. Once you are refused credit once, it is on your record that you were refused credit. It's true so you can't get rid of it. And the next person to inspect your credit rating will see that you were once refused credit and decide that you are not a safe enough bet for them.

    Also, suing them out of existence won't help if your friendly neighbours already took the law into their own hands and administered friendly local justice to you because they thought you were a paedophile.

    It always annoys me that the American culture seems to be "It's OK to do whatever the hell you like, so long as you pay out to people who have the time and money to sue you for it". It's not enough.

  • It would be helpful if, besides browsing at a certain threshold to avoid the trolls, we could have the choice to add individual users to an ignore list. I for one have read enough about sour feet to last me a lifetime...
  • And what if you happen to share the name of a heinous criminal?
    Then you'll finally get the respect at work that you deserve.

  • And why not? Technological inevitability doesn't mean social inevitability. It has been technically feasible to control
    people by embedding electrodes in their brain for a fairly long time. Somehow the practice didn't become widespread.

    No, it is not possible with current technology to control someone by plugging electrodes into their brain.

    Please stop spreading misinformation.

    -Dave Turner.
  • Australia is actually implementing some privacy controls. The federal government is (was?) trying to introduce a law which would mean that anyone collecting personal information to put into huge databases would have to have your permission first. Problem was, this doesn't apply to current databases

    Here's an opinion [anu.edu.au] on our useless Government's farcical privacy bill [law.gov.au].

    If you have something to say to the Government, tell the Parliament what you think [aph.gov.au] by May 12.

    alexgp

  • (Note: I might have got this story a bit wrong in places.. I wasn't paying a huge amount of attention, and "Today Tonight" isn't known for accurate reporting, anyway)

    No... I believe it's still under the mistaken impression it's a real current affairs type show.
  • not only that, but publicdata.com will allow you (for a monthly fee) to lookup info on drivers license, death records, license plates, criminal history, voters registration information. It's all only information that is legally available for anyone if you go up to the courthouse and ask for it, but here people can do it easily online. True there's lots of bad things that can be done with it, but that could be said about lots of things in this world....
    "Leave the gun, take the canoli."
  • Um. No. and No. Australia wasnt a Penal colony. Parts of it were. The colony of New South Wales was about 200 years ago, as was the colony in Van Diemens land, which, by the way, isn't Australia, its the little island floating off down the bottom called Tasmania. Various other colonies were. Some colonies, like South Australia, weren't. Then in 1901, long after the convicts grandchildren had settled down with all the settlers who came here by free will, all the colonies joined up to call themselves Australia.

    Sorry, I get so sick of anyone from overseas getting on the "You're all a bunch of convicts!" vibe in reference to Aussies.

  • If this site is so disliked, couldn't it be registered with the Australian Government (or whomoever) as an offensive site? Wouldn't it then have to be shut down by the Australian Censorship Laws?

    No, someone could complain about it, but unless the content was deemed to be of the sort that would be in some way 'restricted' in other media, then they wouldn't take it down.

    I'm trying to remember the url for the site which allows you to register a complaint, and gives more information, but it escapes me atm..



    #include sig.h
  • Newspapers don't really care very much about minor crimes,

    Unless they have a deal with the local police to publish the names of johns soliciting prostitutes. Which is very common. And can fuck with your life big-time. Now people who commit this non-crime never get past it...
  • Think about it,no guns for the people, stuck on an island where only the authorities are armed

    This from someone in the country that has a schoolyard shooting every two weeks. I think I can live with Australia's gun laws.
  • About celebrities.

    If you are a celebrity, this is the last thing you would have on your mind if you were caught for speeding.

    Firstly, the regular press will eat you alive. You won't get a chance to tell your side of the story.

    Secondly, magazines like New Idea, Womans Day, will drag it out into a witch hunt, and suddenly find ways of linking it conspicies, not existant mental illnesses. Some idiot will come out of the woodwork to tell how terrible you have been (you probably never seen this person before) and break down in tears describing the terrible mood swings and violence you have exibited.

    No, there is a good reason why celebrities get driven around by other people :-)

    BTW, about Elian, why havn't they sent him back to cuba yet? His father is there, (he speaks to him on the phone regularly apparrently) so there should be little problem sending him back? What right do those idiot protesters have in deciding the future of a complete stranger? *sorry if this is offtopic, I don't really understand this, I am from Australia*

  • the major problem I can see with this (especially with information beong leaned from media sources - "it must be true, its on the internet/newspaper/tv"?!) is that aliases aren't always recognised as such (in Australia you only have to provide your correct name in traffic accidents, AFAIK). This happens even with police records, but at least if someone checks your records at the station - and gets an alias used by someone else - you have a chance of rebuttal, not so with a mob, or when your resume has been mailed in to a company.

    Imagine: Mr(s) NoGoodnick gets picked up and convicted for something, but they give your name as an alias, that alias is now referenced every time you have a record check, the as far as anyone knows the crime is on your Permanent Record(tm)!

    eh, you never know, with the censorship laws down here they might mention the word paedophile or something to many times and get banned ;-) would SurfWatch or NetNanny censor it if you were looking for paedophiles in the area?

    just my $0.02

  • you can do the same thing in north carolina, as well as, i'm sure, other US states, where criminal records and offenses are public record. sites like 123NC.com [123nc.com] market themselves as the way to pre-screen your potential employees, coworkers, babysitters, or boyfriends.

    it only costs about $6 to run a single search. $12 will give you results state- or county-wide.

    i find it a little ironic that a big part of the site is dedicated to privacy concerns - on the part of users, that is.

    are there any other states this has been rolled out in, or is it just my bass-ackward corner of the world?

  • the US goverment has a classification level called (I think) sensitive. That is things that are public record, but should not be combined.

    An example: It is public record that company a got a contract to build a new top seceret fighter. It is also public record that company a ordered a large amount of Titanium after getting the contract. Take those togather and you can deduct that the new top seceret fighter can break the sound barrior, which is classified knowlege. (titanium is appearently one of the few metals that can stand up to those speeds)

    And so we see that information that is public record is not nessicarly something that should be combined.

  • No, it is not possible with current technology to control someone by plugging electrodes into their brain.

    Does the name Jose Delgado mean anything to you?

    It's not possible to control a person to the degree of, say, making him believe something or making him rob a bank. However basic stuff like pain centers, pleasure centers, fear centers, etc. is well known. If you can make somebody feel pleasure, pain, fear whenever you want, you effectively control that person.

    Kaa
  • IANAL and IANAA, but...
    If this site is so disliked, couldn't it be registered with the Australian Government (or whomoever) as an offensive site? Wouldn't it then have to be shut down by the Australian Censorship Laws?
  • A woman of Middle Eastern appearance or name or something vague like that hid in terror in her Oklahoma City home while a mob howled outside, but when people talk about the tragedy of Oklahoma City (which it certainly was), no one mentions the miscarriage she had due to the stress of the way she was treated that day.

    I guess it's just lucky she didn't have a neighbor named Al Niño, they would have probably burned down the whole block.

  • To all those people holding flamethrowers, remember that this is not providing police crime records. If anyone commits a crime serious enough to get themselves into a newspaper, then maybe the stigma should stick to them.

    I'm glad to find out that the Australian newspapers present all stories in an unbiased manner, despite the fact that they have possible relations with the police, businesses, and other entities that hold great interest in what they publish. I'm even more glad to know that newspapers never commit errors in their reporting, never (accidentally) leave out important facts, and never
  • doh ... that preview button's waaay too close to the submit! ;p anyhow... I'm even more glad to know that newspapers never commit errors in their reporting, never (accidentally) leave out important facts, and never warp the story to their own points of view.

    Please, if this is all true, email me. I'd love to move to Australia right now!

  • Actually, a federal version of Megan's Law (named for Megan Kanka, a child in the state of NJ who was raped and killed by her neighbor, a convicted sex offender, released on parole). The federal version of the statue established minimum requirements for the state variations of the law. Worth noting is that the section of the law requiring community notification was struck down as unconstitutional in PA (state, not federal constitution). It will be interesting to see how the correction to the law (currently before the state senate) plays out. But I digress deeply off topic... :)

    -Jason

  • Here in North Carolina a company called 123NC.com [123nc.com] has been selling North Carolina criminal records online for a couple months now. They've got a full-bore radio ad campaign in progress, promoting it for pre-employment screening but also to check out someone you're dating.

    The company has a contract with the state and a direct link to the central court records database. It's the genuine article. They may do civil court records eventually, too.

  • That's all well and good, but this could also be considered dangerously close to cruel and unusual punishment - because even if you've served time and repaid your debt to society after being convicted of a crime, people are still likely to discriminate against you based entirely on the contents of the db and things you did years ago (imagine not being able to ever get a good job because you went out joyriding once at age 15).

    Simply aggregating the data and making it so trivial to look through will have a chilling effect on how people behave in society. And it effectively extends your punishment for even minor crimes throughout your entire life, which is generally not appropriate.

    There have already been documented cases of this sort of thing happening - it's even more of a nightmare than having bad credit reports, b/c at least there are laws that prevent bad items from staying on the report for more than 7 years (good items stay forever)

    Additionally, what if there's an error. A huge percentage of credit reports contain errors that have significantly harmful effects on the people they concern, and these errors are nigh-impossible to correct because the errroneous data continues to propagate, rather like a virus. What if chkingg's file gets confused with chking's file? What error correction mechanisms are in place? How does it comply with court orders to seal records?

    There are REAL DANGERS involved with massive databases. It's important to actually frickin' think about them ahead of time and carefully regulate them - how they're used, how they're compiled, corrected, time limits on the data, etc.
  • The Crimenet site can be found here, at www.crimenet.com.au [crimenet.com.au], for those who want to see it.
  • You know, the ones who have done many bad things and never been caught. I'd be much more afraid of them than the ones who are always screwing up and going to jail. For all you know, this is the fellow next door who's working on your bank account or your daughter or whatever. Actually, there's something to be said for the time when everyone lived in a small village and knew everyone else there. No privacy, but not much injustice either.
  • What does Australian law say about Databases? In Europe, the information HAS to be accurate, but I think European Data laws are more strict than anywhere else. It would also probably be illegal to refuse someone for a job based on a completely unrelated criminal offence. In the US I get the impression that anything goes. Australia is most likely different from both.
  • ...or the descendant of one?

    Perhaps they should list people who aren't criminals!

    It's interesting that they gather their data from newspaper reports, etc. All you need is a web server and some minimum-wage workers to scan the newspapers to enter this business. It's a do-it-yourself Megan's Slaw.

    BTW, even though this is not a government sanctioned list, and it's happening in a foreign country, it means we should be careful about supporting things like Megan's Law, even if we don't like pedophiles [pedowatch.org] or child molestors [geocities.com]

    --- Speaking only for myself,

  • Why the fuck should your employer care? What you do on your own time should be your business and your buiness alone. Employees are replacable. If it is ok for employers to do this, then thats say its ok for them to impose a certain moral code on you. NO ONE has that right.
  • Say I go to work for company X, and they dig up a 3 year old list of speeding tickets on me (hey, it's a misdemeanor in many US States). So now I'm getting rejected a because of some arbitrary crap that doesn't even matter to my work performace?

    Doesn't matter?! If you make a habit of speeding, you're running an increased risk of ending up in jail, hospital or maybe the morgue because of your selfish stupidity. This would be bad news for your employer.

    Don't call this discrimination, because we're talking about a choice you make.

  • it's in private time. your employer has shit to say about what you do with it. I am very much against the disclosure of criminal records. after you have paid your fines, done the jail time, had the therapy, and worked the social job you were sentenced to, you are supposed to have served your penalty. It makes no sense to add to this penalty by making it harder to re-integrate into society, I even think it is very much counter-productive.

    //rdj
  • YEs that is correct. Like many places around the world run by the English

    You will find that Van Diemen's Land is actually Tasmania the state on the bottom of Australia. It was discovered by Van Diemen who thought it was part of Australia.......

    Anyway's all these records are made public in Australia anyway, and as to them getting things wrong the newspaper here do that on a regular basis anyway.

  • For $12 per search, $6 per record, you can look at the criminal records of people in the state of North Carolina at 123nc.com [123nc.com]. Check out if your new roommate is a murderer! Is your babysitter a child molester! Wonderful country.
  • I should point out that (at least according to local media here) that they are not publishing peoples criminal records (ie from the police computers) but a compliation of court records/news paper reports etc all matters of public record - so, on the plus side it is not open access to peoples criminal records - on the minus side it is even less likely to be accurate, and there is nothing to stop anyone doing the same thing in other countries.

    - Zilch

  • NC's had this for a while (Score:3)

    by HiRes ( 28255 ) on Tuesday May 02, 2000 @01:57AM (#1098405)

    I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone mention this yet, but North Carolina has had something like this for at least a few months. Says 123nc.com's front page: "Why worry about someone's past when you can know the truth right now."

    And they're advertising. I've seen/heard plenty of spots for these guys on radio and TV -- feel-good, soft-spoken ads that make you feel like you're choosing a health care provider or baby powder.

    I see no problem with such an undertaking, per se. After all, these are public court records, and if someone wants to pay others to get the info for them, fine. But I do have a problem with

    1. advertising that encourages the general public to look into the criminal history of the nice folks who just moved in next door,
    2. Joe Average Citizen who will allow himself to be suckered in to paranoia by these ads.

    It's certainly a gray area, ethically. All I can do is not patronize them, and hopefully they'll go away or take a low profile.
    --

  • The fact that some people might believe that a certain length of sentance isnt a long enough time isn't the point. Most of us live in free, democratic societies, based on the principal that when you commit a crime you face the justice system, you are tried by a judge and a jury of your peers, and you are given a sentance under the law. Thats democracy. But we seem to be forgetting that now days, and deciding somehow that "the law is failing", and that people need to take things into their own hands. When a person is sent to jail for 18 years (and if you stop to think about it for a while, having 18 years stolen from your life in an environment where most probably you will face sexual abuse yourself is a pretty extreme punishment, personally I'd rather die than be sent to jail for that long) thats the decision of a lawful, democratic society, and it should be respected if we respect the democracy we have. Publishing criminals details on the WWW might be legal, and justifiable in many cases, but if it allows people to take the law into their own hands then it is very questionable.
  • Until you get fired for missing work because you were in jail. Or maybe because your name is associated with the company and they want to keep their image somewhat clean.

    It's all private till it's public.

    Bad Mojo [rps.net]
  • I bet you believe everything that you see
    in the news.This among other things become a "trend" or "fad" as the liberals in the news
    overwork an event to satisfy their agendas.This
    is not a bad place to live,just a hard place to
    protect freedom from sniveling cowards who would
    trade one of their rights and yours for their supposed safety.
    Truthfully,had their been an armed and trained teacher in any of the cases,one shot
    would have ended the trend.Rent-a-cops and school
    "security"are a joke and cant be everywhere at
    once just like real cops.Therefore armed citizens(and teachers)are the answer LIKE IT OR NOT.
    As for Australia The crimerate has skyrocketed since gun prohibition since criminals
    have no problem getting guns.Even the real Crocodile Dundee was recently killed in a shootout
    with Australian authorities.So you can save your
    lame liberal crap for the pinheads who would believe you.BTW England and Canadas crime went up too.
    Like I said "Love it or Leave it"or Dont come here,we dont need anymore sissy whiners,we have
    more than enough domestically.
  • If it wasn't before,it is now.Think about it,no guns for the people,
    stuck on an island where only the authorities are armed,ever diminishing rights.Their
    only crime was a lack of vigilance.
    Ignore your rights and they go away.Perhaps this is not entirely bad,now
    liberals can have a place to go when we say"America,love it or leave it,commie!"
    Poor Austrailia,I used to want to visit there,but now its just too sad to think about.
    The same goes for Canada and England,who wants to
    vacation amongst the slaves of their corresponding
    governments.
    Get the U.S. out of the U.N. and the U.N. out of the U.S.!
    Thank you,this has been my 7:00 a.m. before
    caffeine rant.entirely different shows at 10:00,2:00 and 5:00,every one a gem.

  • [Sir Bedivere] And how do you know Skippy's a criminal?
    [Mob] She look's like one.
    [Criminal] They're the ones who've dressed my like this.
    [Sir Bedivere] Did you dress her like this?
    [Mob] NO! No... Yes. But she does have a wart. BURN HER ANYWAYS!

    Sorry, I'm getting way OT. I just had to laugh at the mention of vigialantes...

    kwsNI

  • There is a *huge* difference between "public record" as in "You have the right to check a persons criminal record" and "You get access to a database of every convicted offender"

    I absolutely agree that court records should be public as in the first sense, but the second is scary.

  • It's not as easy as you think. Jose Delgado invented a type of electrode that could, if the brain were better understood, be inserted in the brain to provide people with the sensation of pain at will. But this is nothing like mind control - it's a naked threat. It doesn't take brain surgery to control someone through fear - all it takes is a gun.


    -Dave Turner.
  • It's everybody's business if you are a criminal. That's part of your penalty. The world gets to know you did something bad and were convicted of it. Sure, the government may be done with you after you've served your time, but the community still has the right to pass judgment. That's another incentive to be a good fellow.

    Anyway, the site lists neither the names of people who received traffic tickets nor the names of people who were merely arrested. It lists only the names of convicted criminals.

  • The problem is one of striking a balance between the needs of the community and the needs of the individual.

    On the one hand, it is understandable that the community may want to know if a convicted paedophile or rapist has moved into the area. On the other hand, the person in question may have undergone treatment/been under the influence of [drugs alcohol a cult] at the time. Do not forget, also, that once they have been released from prison they have paid their debt to society (in law, at least).

    Yes, I would want to know if a convicted paedophile moved in next door to me, or into the same area - I have a five month old daughter, and of course, as she grows older, I will be concerned for her safety. OTOH, if I had some minor conviction fomr my youth (possession of canabis, or something), I would be unhappy at the thought of prospective employers having an easy way to find this out and possibly refusing me an offer of a job that they would otherwise have made.

    There is also, of course, the danger of people convicted of certain "unsavoury" crimes (rape, paedophilia, race hate crimes, etc) being victimised or even lynched. Whatever you may think of such people, you have no right to exact your own punishment on them. That is what the court system is there for - it may not be perfect, but it's better than leaving law and order up to roving gangs of vigilantes...

    Cheers,

    Tim
  • in what country was Megan's law passed? I don't know megan's law, so I cant really comment on it.

    it is one thing for the police to have an overview of recent sexual offenders. This is not comparable to a publicly available database of people and crimes, where someone can look up that I got caught stealing a bag of crisps 12 years ago. (no, I didn't steal a bag of crisps 12 years ago, my sheet is clean)

    //rdj

  • Why this is a good thing (Score:5)

    by Miskatonic ( 8445 ) on Monday May 01, 2000 @11:32PM (#1098416) Homepage

    Gosh, everyone is so focused on what a dangerous thing this could be. But let's think about the positive applications of this. For instance, let's say you are a crime lord, and you're looking to expand. Now, dice.com isn't exactly going to be able to handle your particular staffing needs. Well now you can just plug into CrimeNet and get yourself a listing of hundreds of potential employees!

  • "CrimeNet: News for criminals. Stuff that matters." wow...cheap way to get dirt on people you hate. I know...I think I'll register "TrollNet.com" and sell spam and useless post records of Trollers everywhere...and at a mere $5.50 a piece, I'll have that Beowulf cluster in no time...

  • Re:We should learn to live with this (Score:3)

    by Kaa ( 21510 ) on Tuesday May 02, 2000 @03:54AM (#1098418) Homepage
    I don't think it will be possible to have privacy in the information age, the best we can hope for is that nobody (not even our government) will have privacy,

    That's the position originally put forward by
    David Brin, right?

    OTOH, long time ago I read a science fiction story on similar lines. In it a kind of a time machine was developed that allowed people to watch anything in the past (but not interact with it). The use of the machine was heavily restricted. A couple of guys thought this was unfair and, to put it in contemporary terms, posted the blueprints of the machine to the 'net. Well, it turned out that the machine could go no deeper than about a hundred years into the past, but it was most useful for watching what has happened a second ago -- it was a total surveilliance device -- and now everybody and his dog could easily have one. The final words of the story were: "Welcome to the new world. I hope you like living in an aquarium".

    Most people would recoil in horror from this idea, but consider what kind of a society would result from this.

    I have considered it, and I didn't like it one little bit. I don't think that losing one's privacy is compensated by other people losing it, too.

    we may not have a choice in the matter.

    And why not? Technological inevitability doesn't mean social inevitability. It has been technically feasible to control people by embedding electrodes in their brain for a fairly long time. Somehow the practice didn't become widespread.

    In any case, I'm not going to stick a camera out of my bedroom window, even if I could sell the footage to somebody.

    "And now, the latest spring styles of the Darth Vader-type helmets..."

    Kaa
  • So, I guess they're putting the latest census data up on line? Australia being, after all, Great Britan's Penal Colony!

    (Smiley captioned for the humor impaired)

    -=Bob
  • Fine, you missed alot of work...thats understandable. That 2nd point tho is bs. IF I AM NOT ON THEIR TIME I DO NOT REPRESENT THEM. Speeding when you are delivering dominos pizza to a house is one thing, speeding on your own time is quite another. I work to live, i do not live to work.

  • Clerical Errors, Oh My! (Score:3)

    by smack_attack ( 171144 ) on Monday May 01, 2000 @11:34PM (#1098421) Homepage
    I know this story is going to get a lot of posts, so I want to get straight to the point: This is a HORRIBLE idea... and I'm saying this from the "well duh department" because we can only scratch the surface on what the implications of something this big are. Say I go to work for company X, and they dig up a 3 year old list of speeding tickets on me (hey, it's a misdemeanor in many US States). So now I'm getting rejected a because of some arbitrary crap that doesn't even matter to my work performace? Ok, another scenario for you to think about: I'm a typical programmer going out for a quick 3AM meal and I get arrested because I fit a profile (it's a stretch, but not really), I get processed and released but then 3 months down the line... BAM, my face is in the database. Now I know that in certain agencies (Experian/Equifax), you can get these things cleared up, but that can take months.

    Any body wanna guess what happens when you have bad credit? Not *that* big of a problem.

    Anybody wanna guess what happens when you get arrested for a crime (and processed)?

    I think they need to put the privacy checks in place before they actually start selling my personal life (true or not).
  • http://123nc.com/
    "123nc connects you to every courthouse in North Carolina. 123nc contracts with the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) to provide you with access to these records."

    ...looking for a reason to hate someone? Check here! I can't WAIT until this is as mandatory as voluntarily providing your secret social security number currently is. Of course, there will be some dumbfuck saying "It's not a problem if you have nothig to hide" as there always is, to which I reply, "don't ask for help when they come for YOUR group, stinky."
  • The USA. I believe it's a statewide thing, 'tho, not federal; the Feds don't have jurisdiction on many of those cases.
  • seriously seriously fucked up.

    --

  • Well, the fix would be a rehibilation program, but since we don't care about people anymore we'd rather just lock them up and let them rot. Besides that would cost too much money, so its not worth it. I wonder how soon it will be to do this to anyone that violates the law. I thought part of being human was having compasion, and the ability to forgive others. Another poster said whats a few innocent people dying as long as we get most of the guilty ones. To him i say, i hope he remembers that if he is ever getting strapped to the electic chair. He does not value human life. ALL human life is valueable. Even those of criminals. Even criminals have rights. Thats what this country was founded on, that EVERYONE, NO MATTER WHAT has certain rights from the day they are born. You might be stupid or an asshole, but that doesn't mean i can take away your rights.
  • once a criminal, always a criminal.

    Well, i'llremember thta if i ever get convicted of anything. B/c if i do, and that is how most of society thinks, well then i'm gonna have a blast after that, b/c, what the hell, i'm branded a crimal forever. Might as well have some fun if i'm gonna be outcast like that. Oh, i guess if your kid ever smokes pot yu'd throw him right the hell out, after all, he's a criminal now, and will never be anything else. And smoking pot will ONLY lead to other drugs. And of course you'll never forgive him,you have no son now. You're an idiot.
  • Good remember that when i shoot you in the head for tailgatting me. Your life has no value anyway. Better yet, i'll put you in jail for a while, then shoot you in the head. From all accounts i've heard prision is not the most desirable enviroment to be in.
  • find hookers, dealers, whatever you need. open source alternative lifestyles, i say!!
  • Nevermind that somewhere might be a person without a record, yet trying to build a bomb big enough to wipe out the east coast. But hey, he's not no record, so he is safe.

  • Public Records (Score:3)

    by akey ( 29718 ) on Monday May 01, 2000 @11:37PM (#1098430)
    In the USA, I believe that many states make criminal and court records to be public records. In the state of Texas [state.tx.us], you can look up criminal records (for a small fee) or sex offender information (for free). There is a disclaimer on the site warning about trying to use information based solely upon a person's name. Personally, I believe that court records should be a matter of public record.

    ---
  • I only have one thing to say to you. GET OVER IT. Bad things happen to people. Deal with it and move on. Your violence and hatred will not do anything except create more violence and hatred. The only reason sexual abuse lasts forever is b/c people like you like to wallow in self pity, and companies like to make money off of it. A bad thing happened to you, fine, but move on. There is so much better things in the world for you to enjoy. I really hope that you see one good thing out of your experience; i hope it made you really appreciate the good things in this world. I hope you got that out of it, i really hope you aren't wasting the rest of your life over this. Dweal on the good, not the bad.
  • I would like to send out a thank you to all who corrected my post about Australia's past. I apologize for the inaccuracies.
  • If they did not better themself then something is done wrong in jail. If that is the case you should fix that, not the result.
  • This is nice as long as your employer only sees things your way. Go get a job at IBM and you'll quickly learn that it doesn't matter what you think. It only matters WHAT THEY THINK.

    So until you get that into your scrawny little ass mind, I suggest you remain a pizza delivery boy.


    Bad Mojo [rps.net]
  • And as for "bettering themselves", once a criminal, always a criminal. Scientific studies have shown that convicted criminals are more likely to commit a crime than people without any convictions, so the "bettering yourself" argument seems to fall flat on its face.

    This a a silly abuse of statistics. Say there is a chance that 5% of someone is will commit a criminal act, and a chance of 6% if that person already has a conviction on his/her name. That means that 94% of convicted criminals do better them selves. Ofcourse these numbers are not correct, but what are the odds of a criminal bettering him/herself without being given a chance by society.

    If you've been convicted in a court of law, you are guilty. This is not something you can just shrug off five years down the line, it is a part of who that person is. It's always better to be safe than sorry.

    Easiest way to be safe is to just shoot all criminals (cheap too). Btw it is even safer to have a chip implanted in everyone at birth that monitors what they do and reports it. No I think that in this instance I am rather sorry than safe. (Do you live in a bunker defended by a minefield etc?. That is safer:)

    But then I also believe that if someone served their time, they have payed their debt to society and should be given another chance.

    Grt,
    Arnaud.
  • Well, yeah, if it's his right not to hire anyone if he decides he doesn't like them. This means that he can refuse to hire people based on how they drive, age, sex, race, eye colour, name or anything he wants. On the other hand, he has no objection to hiring somebody who only ever speeds in states that don't put it on a criminal record.
  • One of the questions I am often asked about Freenet [sourceforge.net] is what I would do if someone placed my medical record on to the system, or something else which I consider personal. This question forced me to adopt a rather strange view-point. That is, I don't think it will be possible to have privacy in the information age, the best we can hope for is that nobody (not even our government) will have privacy, ie. that we will all be equally exposed. I can see a time a few years down the line when people will have cameras looking out of their bedroom windows, monitoring and recording everyone who goes past, and selling this information to companies who will collate this information, and allow people to cheaply query their database much like Yahoo ("where was my girlfriend last night?" "where was the prime minister last night?" etc).

    Most people would recoil in horror from this idea, but consider what kind of a society would result from this... we may not have a choice in the matter.

    --

  • "for those who want to see it"

    See what? I'm just getting a login request. Not much of anything to see.
  • Criminal records are usually public information. The obvious 21st century method will be to migrate such public information to the Internet. There is an obvious way to avoid having your criminal record revealed -- don't engage in criminal acts.

    I live in a state where I can get a list of sex offenders on the web. Without that I never would have known the nice old man at the corner who is always trying to give my daughter candy is a convicted sex offender.
  • Yes, but regular speeding might seriously be viewed as an indication of a general tendancy to do stupid and dangerous things. Such a tendancy would be a legitimate reason not to hire you for a wide range of jobs. It's nothing like as arbitrary as the other factors you mentioned (although for certain jobs age is also important, and for a very few, sex is too).

  • I think 123nc.com is a good idea, even if their marketing dept. could use some major work. This Australian site is no different. Now, being crime-free, I don't have the viewpoint of a person who has been convicted of a crime that looks misleading on a web page but that can be easily explained in conversation. However, I like having the option of checking out my babysitter or cleaning service person (if I could afford one) if I have any doubts. My 2/100 of a dollar --chk--
  • Firstly, from my brief reading, they are meant to clear it after seven(?) years, correct me if I am wrong, but I can't see that happening.

    Secondly, this sort of data used to be available in Victoria on the web, through the department of justice(http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/), can't find it at the moment though...

    Thirdly, Australia is actually implementing some privacy controls. The federal government is (was?) trying to introduce a law which would mean that anyone collecting personal information to put into huge databases would have to have your permission first. Problem was, this doesn't apply to current databases, which means that they can get together with you credit card company, ..., (satellite imaging company[1]), big brother, and get together all the info they like, so long as they set it up before July 1, 2001 (I think), they can do whatever they like.

    [1] Any that actually believes that satellite photography can be used to track you is greatly mistaken. It is used by people such as surveyors, to make big great whopping maps of countries, especially road networks, ecologists and the like in remote sensing, i.e., finding out what vegetation there is without having to surevy the whole field (quick hide those mull plants out the back, big brother is spying on us from above...)...

  • If it was regular court records ie every convicted criminal and noone else, I would still be disgusted (since that is an exellent way to make sure that they never get a chance to straighten up) but at least it would be an accurate list.

    A list compiled from newspapers would be a list of crimes with "news value". If Anonymous Coward gets a speeding ticket, he's off, but if some celebrity is involved (s)he not only gets a fine and headlines, but ges listed on this site.

    Sort of like that Elian srory. A clear case until someone called the press.

  • Given Australia's history as a penal colony, does this mean you can look up her founding fathers in this list?
  • to the sex offenders register we have in england (and I would imagine, else where). For the moment, forget the fact this is on-line, and think - would I be concerned about publicly accessable criminal records? Yes? Would you be concerned about a pedofile moving in next door? Where do you draw the line?

    Thad

  • Hrm. Some of those criteria are definitely out. Age, race, and sex at the very least tend to be rather heavily protected, as are disabilities that are irrelevant to the job -- they can't force you to take, say, a blind stunt pilot, IIRC.

    It largely depends on the EEOC, 'tho. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission once initiated an action regarding discriminatory hiring of waitresses (specifically, a 100% bias towards, er, well-endowed waitresses for waitstaff jobs) in the "Hooters" chain when some (male) plaintiffs complained about the hiring practice. Not sure how it all turned out, however.
  • It may be too late for anyone to see this, but these guys [publicdata.com] have been doing this for years in Texas, Florida, Iowa, Wyoming, and some other states. They started in Texas, IIRC, and had to move off shore when they pissed some locals off. The compile drivers' license information, automobile registration, felony records, sexually related crimes, medical exams and other publicly available data. It's pretty cheap, and anyone can get and account.
  • I'm pretty sure it's an Asimov story, but I can't recall the title.

    There's a similar story I read once, where a society developed technology that allowed the ultimate sharing of information. Basically it was a belt, and when you two people both wore one, they shared all knowledge. So if you knew how to program in x86 assembler, and wore a belt, and I also wore a belt, then I also would know x86 assembler.
    The short of it is, that this society allows travellers to come into their world. The travellers find out what the belt does, and steal it. Once the travellers take it back to their own world, they copy it (since they now know how to make them), and share it around, but ultimately their society falls into chaos as no one has any secrets any more.

    SECRETS are a GOOD thing. There are things I don't want to know.

    --

  • Chances are such things as this will be mostly a harmless curiousity. Maybe on occasion some good will come of it by a check on a potential employee or renter or such.

    The potential problem isn't someone being actually listed who should be, though after a time some consideration should be given to the passage of time (Did someone do something dumb in 1997? And it's 2013 now and nothing else? Good indication a lesson was learned, there.)

    The real misuse or abuse will be subtle and is already a problem with other things; this will be no different. In the mid-1980s when the Tylenol poisonings where happening there was a suspect, 'James Lewis' questioned. I knew a different James Lewis ans the coincidence was joked about.. but if someone looked but not too close, he could have had problems.

    Will any such collection of information be harmful? No, not of itself. Just people being stupid about how to use it will be. Just like now. The fear is that now more people will be able to misuse and misinterpret the information.
  • Isn't the whole idea of sentencing to prevent the person from doing it again and then reintegrate into society? Or what about people who were acused but found not guilty? Public opinion will still hang them just to be sure.

    Jeroen

  • I wonder how well they check for accuracy. The local newspapers here often have rather serious errors in thier reporting of this sort of stuff. Not only that they often spell peoples name wrong or accidentaly swap one person's first name with anouther's last name.
    Stuff like this could cause all sorts of problems for a database like this one.
  • One thing that would be interesting is a site with records of what corporations are found guilty of. One might want to know who they are buying from/investing in.
  • I don't have a problem with people seeing my crimanal record under one condition.

    I get to know that they are looking. I think every Australian should be able to access this site and see a list of names (from the credit cards) of everyone that has bought there criminal profile off the site.

  • Did anyone READ the article (Score:4)

    by rugger ( 61955 ) on Tuesday May 02, 2000 @12:22AM (#1098454)
    CrimeNET, as stupid as they are, is simply a compilation of all the crime information from newspapers ect. This information is already in the public domain and is freely avaliable.

    To all those people holding flamethrowers, remember that this is not providing police crime records. If anyone commits a crime serious enough to get themselves into a newspaper, then maybe the stigma should stick to them.

    PS. Newspapers don't really care very much about minor crimes, so I wouldn't worry about speeding tickets (unless the police were chasing you) and other minor offenses
  • find hookers, dealers, whatever you need. open source alternative lifestyles, i say!!

    I agree, though most hookers are pretty fscking ugly. In fact, I've seen some that were about as good looking as ESR (ick!). Just kidding Eric, I'm just really drunk (at 6:30 AM no less) and in the mood to troll. Hey, who needs karma, right?
  • Don't get caught!
  • Strangely, in Australia we have no (effective) privacy laws. There are no checks on how this information is collected, so it may be quite erroneous(sp) data.

    Another thought to consider is that once a person is released from prison (if they get to prison) they are to be treated like ordinary citizens. This means that police resources must be used to protect them from vigilantes and others.

    Last year a convicted pedophile was released after serving an 18 year sentence, and the papers published his address. People surrounded his house, throwing rocks and protesting until police had to come and disperse the crowd. The state government then payed for him to be moved to a secret location for his own protection.

    This will happen more and more now that these names are available. Remember, in Australia it is relatively easy to track someone down by name alone.. and it is not illegal.
  • If you've been convicted in a court of law, you are guilty. This is not something you can just shrug off five years down the line,...

    Actually, you can. It's the entire basis of the punishment system. After yu've done the time for your crime, you should have a clean slate. I know that in real life it's not quite that simple, because a criminal record isn't exacty a plus in job interviews, but that's besides the point.

  • What if everyone in Australia legally changed their names to Rupert Murdoch? That would piss of the ol' bastard, now, wouldn't it?
  • I am very much against the disclosure of criminal records. after you have paid your fines, done the jail time, had the therapy, and worked the social job you were sentenced to, you are supposed to have served your penalty.

    Tell that to the people who passed "Megan's Law", which requires convicted sex offenders to register with the police in the community to which they move after release. Note that "sex offender" includes consensual adults convicted under sodomy laws for example, not just rapists/child molesters/etc.

  • Login? (Score:2)

    by Dacta ( 24628 )

    What were you trying to do? There wasn't one last night when I posted that.

    I tried checking it, but it seems to be Slashdotted at the moment.

  • And what if you happen to share the name of a heinous criminal?

    I do. Or did. A guy with the same name as me was executed a few years ago in Pennsylvania for killing his wife, I believe.

  • There's plenty of stuff really worthy of being moderated down available. This should be marked up as funny. For a hint, check where the link in the sig *really* goes to.
  • On point 1: ok.. agreed. Here your job is definately suffering
    On point 2: That would most probably be illegal in europe. But IANAL, so don't take my word for it.

    //rdj
  • Feel free, however, to mark as redundant the 87 other submissions from sorefeet to this thread.
  • Several people have voiced a worry about errors in the database. If they have errors, it's libel, pure and simple. You can then sue them out of existence (which I hope will happen). It would be best if they pissed off someone rich first (i.e. Rupert Murdoch :), so that person could clean their chronometers. A poorer person may have trouble closing the company down.

  • I saw this on "Today Tonight" (Score:3)

    by Dacta ( 24628 ) on Monday May 01, 2000 @11:49PM (#1098480)

    Yeah, don't shoot me for watching it, I was eating.

    There were two site, this CrimeNet one, and another, even worse one that was called "World Wide Records" or something.

    This second one allowed you to submit people you claimed had not payed debts to you, and then rewards would be payed for finding them. The details could include pictures.

    Fortunatly, it seemed that the Privacy Commisioner (toothless though he might be) though that it would break existing laws, mainly because it had to do with peoples credit history, which strict laws exist about.

    The owner of the business didn't seem worried, though. He's in my city, too - maybe I should go and see what the real story is.

    (Note: I might have got this story a bit wrong in places.. I wasn't paying a huge amount of attention, and "Today Tonight" isn't known for accurate reporting, anyway)

Slashdot Top Deals

Marvelous! The super-user's going to boot me! What a finely tuned response to the situation!

Close