3 Football players arrested

[Burger]

I've always found that rag and others like it distasteful. Anyone who trades in exploiting pain and embarrassment is on my list of lowlifes, far more than 90% of those featured since by far most are featured for the most petty of offenses. Putting a college kid as the first mughsot listed when they always go in alphabetical order tells you all you need to know.

Since we live in a world of innocent until proven guilty I think jails should refrain from listing the photographs those arrested but not convicted on their websites (it's fine to show mugshots of those housed there after conviction) and that news outlets shouldn't run photos of those arrested but who've yet to set foot in court -- once they go to trial, a jury is already empaneled and so they're not going to be influenced by pre-trial mugshots that make everyone look guilty as sin. JMO.

I don't like the idea of the state posting these and like even less media running them and mugshot industry making bank from them. It's easy enough in this day and age to use either a driver's license photo alternative, find a photo online of just about anyone, or wait to take a photo at trial. JMO.

The only reasons publications like these exist is so Floridians figure out who to date.

 

[VolFan4Life87]

Saw my own cousin in it once lol.

For those in Rutherford county, the Rutherford county sheriff department app is pretty neat. I've seen many many folks I know's mug shots on that app lol

 

[lincolncovol]

But we don't live in an innocent until proven guilt society. It use to be that way but not anymore.

 

[UTProf]

But we don't live in an innocent until proven guilt society. It use to be that way but not anymore.

I agree. That said, public never has and will always remain under no obligation to play by the legal principle of innocent until proven guilty unless they're serving on a jury BUT the courts do have to comply with that legal principle which is why I think it's wrong for mugshots to go up on county/city jail websites which are where most of the mugshot industry gets their info. They might not be the courts proper but they're certainly a BIG factor in the justice systems and have a huge role in courts.

For all the flak France takes for some of their wonky views they are onto something in this area and that's protecting the identity of those accused until after they're convicted and lots of other countries do something similar and/or do things similar to that. I've seen many nations who show suspects by turning suspects backs to the cameras or allowing them to preserve their anonymity before trial by obscuring their identity with clothing that hides their faces (even things like allowing them to wear a large hoodie and look downward while media is in the room which a lot of South American countries will do) when they do press conferences featuring a big bust. They all do that to protect those presumed innocent and ensure a fair trial that isn't biased by the media which only reports selective/salacious details, often gets things wrong, and influences potential jurors toward locking in the image of a specific person as guilty long before jury selection. While I don't think we should adopt France's full anonymity rules completely, I *do* think we need to find ways to make that principle work for us just as other country's make it work for them which is why I think we should refrain from mugshots being posted by police or used in media. Our criminal justice system and notion of fairness will be well served if American lawmakers considered modifying it to meet our own country's need to ensure a fair trial with our right to information.

Personally, I think refraining from posting and using mugshots is a fair way of balancing the public's right to know with protecting our system from biasing potential jurors as well as protecting the presumption of legal innocence until guilt is proven. We could still talk about the details of a crime, use a DL photo or any other photo as well as trial photos, but a mugshot is different. In special circumstances like someone accused escaping custody or circumstances where they're somehow a threat to the public then by all means post their mugs so we can find them.

It wasn't so bad when media wasn't pervasive in our lives but those days are over and we've become more apt to assume guilt just. Heck, if we did something so simple we might start return to the days of presuming innocence. Seeing our police and media take the concept seriously enough to take these measures would have an impact just like the mugshot thing has one.

 

[UTProf]

I agree for the most part. But, I still look for some reason.

It's like seeing a train or car wreck and not being able to turn away or worse rubbernecking and causing a traffic mess which can cause problems getting ambulances/first responders to the scene, traffic jams and even fender benders/wrecks. We humans are curious by nature and so if something is there right in front of us, it's hard not to look.

And burger - lol.

 

[NashVOL93]

Saw my own cousin in it once lol.

For those in Rutherford county, the Rutherford county sheriff department app is pretty neat. I've seen many many folks I know's mug shots on that app lol

I know people who make checking that app a regular part of their Sunday afternoon routine, just because they know they'll see someone familiar on it from the night before.

 

[FiremedicVOL127]

I've always found that rag and others like it distasteful. Anyone who trades in exploiting pain and embarrassment is on my list of lowlifes, far more than 90% of those featured since by far most are featured for the most petty of offenses. Putting a college kid as the first mughsot listed when they always go in alphabetical order tells you all you need to know.

Since we live in a world of innocent until proven guilty I think jails should refrain from listing the photographs those arrested but not convicted on their websites (it's fine to show mugshots of those housed there after conviction) and that news outlets shouldn't run photos of those arrested but who've yet to set foot in court -- once they go to trial, a jury is already empaneled and so they're not going to be influenced by pre-trial mugshots that make everyone look guilty as sin. JMO.

I don't like the idea of the state posting these and like even less media running them and mugshot industry making bank from them. It's easy enough in this day and age to use either a driver's license photo alternative, find a photo online of just about anyone, or wait to take a photo at trial. JMO.

So, how long did you have to set in jail before your trial? Did a lot if people give you a hard time over your photo being pasted around the interweb and flashed all over the news? And just curious but by the way ya talk I'm takin it your case was dismissed or you was found not guilty right? Sorry this all happened to ya maybe you can find a good counselor and talk about it and work through it lil buddy.

 

[volinca]

So you aren't trolling huh? What would you call it? This has been talked about non stop for a week, do you think reminding about a picture that is a week old and was posted on this very site for at least three days is not trying to stir the pot?

You mad, bro?

 

[WoodsmanVol]

I've always found that rag and others like it distasteful. Anyone who trades in exploiting pain and embarrassment is on my list of lowlifes, far more than 90% of those featured since by far most are featured for the most petty of offenses. Putting a college kid as the first mughsot listed when they always go in alphabetical order tells you all you need to know.

Since we live in a world of innocent until proven guilty I think jails should refrain from listing the photographs those arrested but not convicted on their websites (it's fine to show mugshots of those housed there after conviction) and that news outlets shouldn't run photos of those arrested but who've yet to set foot in court -- once they go to trial, a jury is already empaneled and so they're not going to be influenced by pre-trial mugshots that make everyone look guilty as sin. JMO.

I don't like the idea of the state posting these and like even less media running them and mugshot industry making bank from them. It's easy enough in this day and age to use either a driver's license photo alternative, find a photo online of just about anyone, or wait to take a photo at trial. JMO.

We do not live in a world of innocent until proven guilty. It's a nice concept but isn't applied and certainly not to a lot of people, specific groups of people, or even gender specific people. The key word here is "applied" and that's the reality, the ideal intent or desire notwithstanding.

 

[Doyle Hargraves]

But we don't live in an innocent until proven guilt society. It use to be that way but not anymore.

Victims of the Salem witch trials say wtf?

 

[MedicT]

Granted the idea of publishing mug shots seems a bit sleazy, but you have to admit it does offer some negative reinforcement to the equation. Just my .02.

 

[CNCVol88]

Saw my own cousin in it once lol.

For those in Rutherford county, the Rutherford county sheriff department app is pretty neat. I've seen many many folks I know's mug shots on that app lol

My cousin was in there once for underage consumption. My brother and I almost gave him an 8x10 f his mugshot for christmas that year as a joke but thought it a bad idea with older family around.

 

[CNCVol88]

And merge!

 

[ClearwaterVol]

My cousin was in there once for underage consumption. My brother and I almost gave him an 8x10 f his mugshot for christmas that year as a joke but thought it a bad idea with older family around.

In Florida, Mugshots Magazine offers t-shirts, coffee mugs etc. with the mugshot on them.

My real issue with the mugshots being published and sold is that people who are not guilty get their reputations damaged and there isn't a damn thing that you can do.

 

[GLDunlap]

I'm probably going to get the "Jimmy" award for this but it looks like all charges against all players are being dropped in lieu of community service.

http://www.wbir.com/story/sports/co...-current--former-vol-after-party-arrests/5651

 

[WoodsmanVol]

I agree. That said, public never has and will always remain under no obligation to play by the legal principle of innocent until proven guilty unless they're serving on a jury BUT the courts do have to comply with that legal principle which is why I think it's wrong for mugshots to go up on county/city jail websites which are where most of the mugshot industry gets their info. They might not be the courts proper but they're certainly a BIG factor in the justice systems and have a huge role in courts.

For all the flak France takes for some of their wonky views they are onto something in this area and that's protecting the identity of those accused until after they're convicted and lots of other countries do something similar and/or do things similar to that. I've seen many nations who show suspects by turning suspects backs to the cameras or allowing them to preserve their anonymity before trial by obscuring their identity with clothing that hides their faces (even things like allowing them to wear a large hoodie and look downward while media is in the room which a lot of South American countries will do) when they do press conferences featuring a big bust. They all do that to protect those presumed innocent and ensure a fair trial that isn't biased by the media which only reports selective/salacious details, often gets things wrong, and influences potential jurors toward locking in the image of a specific person as guilty long before jury selection. While I don't think we should adopt France's full anonymity rules completely, I *do* think we need to find ways to make that principle work for us just as other country's make it work for them which is why I think we should refrain from mugshots being posted by police or used in media. Our criminal justice system and notion of fairness will be well served if American lawmakers considered modifying it to meet our own country's need to ensure a fair trial with our right to information.

Personally, I think refraining from posting and using mugshots is a fair way of balancing the public's right to know with protecting our system from biasing potential jurors as well as protecting the presumption of legal innocence until guilt is proven. We could still talk about the details of a crime, use a DL photo or any other photo as well as trial photos, but a mugshot is different. In special circumstances like someone accused escaping custody or circumstances where they're somehow a threat to the public then by all means post their mugs so we can find them.

It wasn't so bad when media wasn't pervasive in our lives but those days are over and we've become more apt to assume guilt just. Heck, if we did something so simple we might start return to the days of presuming innocence. Seeing our police and media take the concept seriously enough to take these measures would have an impact just like the mugshot thing has one.

Now here's the interesting thing, in American cases where a fem accuses a mal of certain acts, his name is scattered all over. But when it's in the reverse, her "delicate" image and name is protected from the public.