Posted on 04/08/2008 5:38:05 AM PDT by radar101
Mug shots taken of suspected shoplifters and then posted online has spurred debate over the rights of people who may or may not have committed a crime.
Avondale has joined the list of cities posting mugshots over the Internet.
The photos show adults arrested and accused of shoplifting, even if they haven't been convicted of a crime.
Avondale police officials said it's a way of helping merchants by cracking down on shoplifting, which peaked at 94 reports in October.
The American Civil Liberties Union along with defense attorneys question whether the practice infringes on citizens' rights. "I think we have to look at this from a public-policy perspective and ask if the program is effective," said Alessandra Soler Meetze, executive director of the ACLU of Arizona.
"This is part of a growing trend to penalize people who are arrested, no matter if they're cleared later," she said.
In Arizona, the Maricopa County Attorney's Office displays convicted DUI offenders' photos.
The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office posts photos online of suspects booked into its jails for about three days.
Avondale becomes the first metro Phoenix city to zero in on shoplifting through the same tactic.
"(Stores) keep on losing merchandise. And with that, they keep on losing profit," said Sgt. Memo Espinoza, an Avondale police spokesman. "Our purpose is not to embarrass the individuals."
Store managers like the picture posting and think it's a deterrent.
Janet Becchina, who manages a Walgreens in Avondale, said she fights store theft daily, sometimes confronting shoplifters without bothering to contact police.
She already hangs photos of shoplifters at the store, but posting their pictures online could be extra helpful, Becchina said.
Viewing the photos could help her employees recognize suspects' faces if they enter her store, she said.
Legal experts said Avondale's program could taint a jury pool, making it difficult to get a fair trial.
Screw the aclu.
Richard Jewel disagrees on this point.
Why the rush to “convict” in the media in absence of a trial?
Where is the online photo database of crooked cops accused of things, prior to any hearing?
If they’ve been convicted, the ACLU has nothing to complain of.
If they are not being posted by the government, the ACLU has nothing to complain of.
If there is no conviction, and the government is doing the posting, then complain to the legislature, not the courts.
Hollywood should make a movie about Richard Jewell............
I can see mug shots and addresses where sex offenders live in my neighborhood. I want to be able to see the same for all violent criminals and vandals. Make it so that undesirables are run out of town and have a hard time finding a place to live and work.
It is funnier than Redneck Scrapbook.(unless you see your neighbor in the lineup)
Wait till you get falsely accused of something and then see what it takes to get your name cleared.
Accusations shouldn’t equal guilt.
(Convictions, though, are another matter. )
I walked into a drugstore, saw the lines at the cashier were too long and walked out.
As I went through the exit the alarm bells rang. I kept walking and the next thing I knew three security guards were running after me, accusing me of stealing from the store.
I refused to let them touch me or look into my pocketbook; I told them they would have to call the police, that I was in the store for seconds and I didn’t steal anything.
They relented and left me. It was very embarrassing.
Later, at home I emptied my pocketbook out and took all the tags and price-tags off makeup and everything else to make sure it wouldn’t happen again.
But that would be a consequence for behavioral choices,
and the left is all about removing all consequences for behavioral choices.
I hate to admit that the ACLU might have a point here.
If someone’s convicted of a crime, it’s gone to trial and the evidence has been considered and judged, that’s one thing. I have no mercy.
If someone has only been ACCUSED, that’s another. We’re still working on *innocent until proved guilty* and posting mugs of people accused of crimes but not yet convicted, implies that they are guilty. And once that’s in someone’s mind, that suspicion is always there.
So now that I find myself apparently agreeing with the ACLU, I need to take a harder look at either what I believe, or what they’re up to. Whenever they do something that seems to make sense, I always suspect there’s some ulterior motive because it’s inconceivable to me that what they are doing really is in the best interests of this country or it’s citizenry.
I live in Gwinnett County in Georgia and there is a website that posts the mugshots of all ‘alleged’ criminals booked into the county jail daily.
I have to get my daily dose of perp pics.
http://www.scangwinnett.com/mugshots/
So it's okay for con-men, the kind of people who might bilk you out of your life savings, to remain anonymous?
I am sure the Duke 88 will not be happy with the ACLU.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.