A representation of what happens when you google the word "mugshots" in images
SO. ILL. - We came across the below click-bait-y headline while perusing local news sites this morning.
Scroll down to view, as I want to present it as large as I can.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
I'm not going to name which site it appeared on, as not only did it appear on multiple sites, but it's a screencap and we can post it as such according to Fair Use Act (it's a press release, so we could present it in full if we wish, but we've opted not to, as we don't want people to buy into the bull, but instead, to read reality, as we're covering it here.)
There is no law that says "no mugshots of low-level offenders." Of COURSE law enforcement authorities can take a mugshot of a "low-level offender." The crime associated with such a thing would be known as a misdemeanor, or a basic DUI (which is literally a traffic offense that's tried as a misdemeanor). Idiotic situations like Illinois' Bond Reform Act and the new insanity originating out of California have given people (particularly the criminally-inclined) the false impression that society is finally becoming a little more soft-hearted about crims. So it's not surprising that local media outlets slam a false headline on a story about a stupid internet site like Mugshots.com. Because that's what this is about. It's not about our ability to post mugshots.
Sites like Musgshots.com and others effectively take advantage of a taxpayer-supported item - a mugshot - and post it with a watermark (which is illegal, because a watermark is a trademark, and no one OWNS the mugshots except we the people). Then if you want it removed, they charge you for it - extortion. That was made illegal in 2014 in Illinois, but they kept at it. So now they're going to be fined, as is in the article, if this is done to an Illinoisan. Good deal. Law enforcement should just shut that crap down, but in some states (think Commifornia) this isn't illegal, and it's difficult to police the internet, so here we are.
But to slap such a headline on it is just disingenuous.
We've noticed that the sites that featured this nonsense with the click-baity-y headline, whereas they USED TO run the occasional mugshot, have backed off posting mugshots considerably. They must be believing their own crap. This is sadly reminiscent of the "Yew cain't film COPS" thing that was going around 7 and 8 years ago, lead by the worst offender of fake news in the area, the TV station Channel 3. I can't fathom how this kind of nonsense takes hold and impacts the perpetrators (media) of it; this negatively impacts YOU, the consumer of news, and gives YOU a false impression...and makes people call US and DEMAND that we "remove their mugshot!!" We've actually had this happen to us. The idiot featured in this article (Jack Harrison) harassed us in mid-2015 for weeks until we finally had to get the law involved (because he was on probation and a police report would have violated it) regarding removing his mugshot. We told him to take a flying leap at a rolling donut. He thought he was dealing with a Mugshots.com-type outlet; despite having it explained to him repeatedly that we were a NEWS outlet and he had zero claim on his mugshot, he persisted until he was almost arrested. Others have tried such a thing since 2014. We're not removing anything....just so's anyone with any designs might get a wild hair.
Here's why.
Mugshots are literally a requirement for most crimes, felony, misdemeanors and DUIs. Unless you're Rick White or Terrie Eichorn, it's part of the booking process. When a person is charged with a crime, they have to be identified by those tasked with following them through the pendency of the due process. They have to have a file created that shows all their vital statistics, and in order to support that file of vitals, there needs to be a photo on file. That's not the only reason; if a person jumps bail, or goes missing, or any hundred-dozen other reasons an accused person might not show up for court hearings, a mugshot is something that's sent out to other law enforcement agencies and in extreme cases, is made part of a press release so folks can know what the person looks like. You know. Optics. It's a public service. The public pays for it. The public funds the camera, the person operating the camera, the jail orange or striped togs that the person wears in the photo...pretty much all of it. Yes. YOU own the mugshots, because YOU pay the taxes that fund em. The person who's been mugshot doesn't own it; Mugshots.com doesn't own it; the entity that shot the mug doesn't own it; the media doesn't own it. EVERYBODY owns it. Because it's public. And the public can do whatever they want with it...except extort money for its removal from a website.
Which is what the mainstream news outlets need to understand...and not slap a fake headline on it to lead the crims to believe that the last few media outlets in the area (us among them) are "doing something wrong" by posting mugshots to accompany a news article. We're not. We catch enough grief from the criminally-inclined already. We don't need lying MSM to create any more for us...so don't buy into it, don't forward it...and do share this on your social networking pages, so those who are brainwashed by MSM can be set right.
And don't forget (because apparently the word is slow getting out, since we didn't take it to our now-defunct Fecesbook page) - We're no longer producing the print version, so you won't be getting anymore copies in the mail. We will be refunding all print subscribers over the next several months, so watch the mail for your refund....and use it to subscribe to our online version, which is in the process of getting reworked and will be rolling out very soon!
Click here to view more product SPECIALS!!!