Lawyers Using Databases To Grab Clients

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.'"

Comments

Re:Privacy Issue

[Shakrai]

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.

You think the blotter exists as a safety mechanism? WTF are you smoking? Nothing in any law requires the police to release your name to the blotter. In fact, when a friend of mine was arrested and "encouraged" to cooperate against his alleged co-conspirators they kept his name off the blotter (for the obvious reasons). Nothing was required to do this other then the cops saying "We aren't going to put him on the blotter".

If you seriously think a police blotter is going to keep you from "disappearing" if the Government decides to make you "go away" you have more faith in it then I do. I think it exists as a shame mechanism to harass people who haven't been convicted of any crime (yet).

Nice to known members of the Bush administration are reading /. to mod such posts up. Send me a postcard from Guantanamo.

WTF does that have to do with anything other then to score a cheap karma-whoring shot aimed at Dubya?

Lawyers = scummy?

[Lord_Dweomer]

This just in, lawyers are not the most ethical people in the world and WILL in fact do whatever it takes to get clients.

Film at 11.

Re:Privacy Issue

[Shakrai]

You're an idiot. The police don't write the blotter, the newspaper gets the publicly available information from the police department. The information is required to be publicly available. You clearly need a little remedial civics. Best of luck to you.

Really? So if they arrest a drug dealer hoping to get him to roll on his supplier they must publish the fact that he was arrested?

Cop: "Wear this wire for us and get him to confess to being your supplier. If you do this the DA will go easy on you."
Suspect: "But won't he know that I've been compromised when he sees my name in the police blotter?"
Cop: "Naw, he won't bother reading the paper, we're 100% sure of it."
Suspect: "Are you sure? I don't want my life to be in danger."
Cop: "Don't worry about it! What's the worst that could happen?"

I know it's a lot to ask of an AC but use your fucking brain. The cops provide a list of arrested people for public consumption. There is no law (in my state anyway -- IANAL) saying they must provide this information. If there was such a law and it was designed to protect us from people disappearing then why does the Federal Government scoop people up as "Material Witnesses" all the time without so much as a peep?

Can't Have it Both Ways

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

You are being sarcastic. I'm sorry, but this is PUBLIC information. If *you* violate the law, your arrest records are a matter of public record. It's funny how you types hate it when PUBLIC records are held back by authorities, but GEEZ, when you don't like it, PUBLIC records should be restricted?

Can't have it both ways, Mr Bleeding Heart.

Re:Can't Have it Both Ways

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

Nice of you to stereotype when you know almost NOTHING about me ... person who was arrested was never even charged with a crime

Yap, yap, yap. Arrest records are public records. Again, when it works for the "Government Must Be Open" crowd, public records are OK, but Geezzze, when you actually start to think about PRIVACY you don't like it? WORKS BOTH WAYS!