And we know how that story always plays out.
Sorry, had to.
That’s what they all say XD j/k
Can you do structured field queries?
Like, all cases where defendant is X. And maybe where the cause is Y
- that the evidence that defendant fired the murder weapon during the sandwich
- bologna sandwich found at the crime scene
- presence in sandwich the morning of the murder
- ways in which they could murder her mother. these included the sandwich ... sandwich incident could not be used
- crime of capital murder. as a habitual offender, sentenced to life ... to the "bologna sandwich" constituted reversible error
- coroner testified that victim had eaten a fish sandwich within 2 hours ... prior to his death
- it was not first degree murder, and the court should have ... sandwich. he paid for the sandwich, but did not pay for the coffee
- convicted of malice murder and possession of a ... sandwich
- she was shot and that she had some change in one hand and a sandwich in the other ... sandwich in your hand kind of slow your progress down in getting a gun out of your ... sandwichAlso would be a very strange to apply this so-called “right” when court records are essential to keeping organs of government accountable.
The names and so on are always censored anyhow, in some cases it's a bit obvious who did things though. If it's a lawsuit about a company and let's say it sells books online, maybe you can tell by 1-2 things what company it is. But for people, it's not so straight forward.
This is actually starting to become a problem because computers are getting too good at their job.
Let's say a news site reports on a criminal trial of a John Smith, censored as John S. If John Smith was in any way famous before the trial and had an article written about him, that article is somewhat likely to appear in the "you may also like" sidebar when you're reading the censored one. Some news sites try to suppress this, but I'm not sure they're legally required to do so.
I presume since it’s free and is likely domiciled/hosted in America, the owner could probably just scrape euro records and tell the EU “lol get bent” if they made a stink, but probably doesn’t want to run the risk.
They're not searchable, they're often not even digitized, and the media is generally not allowed to report the full names of those accused.
Where I live, it's literally impossible to run a background check on somebody. If a background check is required, the person of interest has to specifically request an official document from the government proving they haven't been convicted for any crimes, or listing the crimes they have been convicted for. This is pretty common when starting a new job, I have had to do this.
Now there's also a sex offenders registry, which authorized institutions can query directly, although they have to get consent first.
I have a hard time imagine that law enforcement doesn't have access to it. At that point access is given by degree of difficulty and not "impossible". I could buy "illegal" tho.
Here in the us I know how insubstantial this claim is. If you know enough law enforcement $10 can get you pictures of a full lookup. And this is with a fairly bare relationship.
So maybe it's not impossible, but it's not something you would do as part of normal HR screening.
In the Netherlands it's not even that -- you can ask for a certificate of "good behavior" with a purpose and they just say yes or no. If the purpose is employment, the form asks which sector you will be employed in, because sex offenders can still work somewhere and so do people convicted of financial fraud. You just don't want them to work in specific places, i.e. near kids or banks respectively.
Data minimization is a thing.
Tangentially, IMO any 1984 comparisons fall flat when the state is not involved in the censorship in question.
“ Here are the reasons cited in the GDPR that trump the right to erasure:
The data is being used to exercise the right of freedom of expression and information.[…]”
A recent law review article on the prospects of this so-called "right" under US law is https://mttlr.org/2020/02/why-the-right-to-be-forgotten-wont..., citing https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/420/469/ ("It is unconstitutional under the First Amendment to criminalize releasing the name of a rape victim or to permit a private right of action against the press for doing so."), and https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/12.... See also https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/13....
? What are you referring to? I've never heard of such a concept.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights
Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement; that is, rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory. Rights are an important concept in law and ethics, especially theories of justice and deontology.
The history of social conflicts has often involved attempts to define and redefine rights. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "rights structure the form of governments, the content of laws, and the shape of morality as it is currently perceived".
I searched the DB but it seems i couldnt get the actual docket unless i paid for a PACER sub. Is that right ? This is only an index, but to actually see the court docs, you have to pay someone ?
Otherwise, courtlistener has PACER docs that us users exfiltrate from PACER and upload for free.
I'm a Jr.
- the domain
- the owner of the website
- the content displayed on the website
And more to the point, to what end? If the info is public knowledge it's public knowledge, it's out there already.
If it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t matter.
I couldn't find any hits on the Alec Balwin manslaughter case for shooting and killing cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and injuring director Joel Souza.
Maybe it's not in the database because the case was dismissed by the presiding judge?
catlover76•9mo ago
TZubiri•9mo ago
comex•9mo ago
kopecs•9mo ago
ETA: which is of course mentioned on the thread root. But RECAP users would be paying, in that case.
ls612•9mo ago
qingcharles•9mo ago