I have and in the state of Michigan it’s agaisnt the law for an employer to use an arrest record when considering employment, their must be a conviction and they are only allowed to search for convictions.
I’ve used databases such as Been Verified to do background checks on people and they don’t show arrest, only convictions. To get arrest records you need to do a courthouse search, which is more expensive and could cause privacy and liability concerns.
American police also kill citizens at a higher rate than other countries and are poorly trained when compared to police in the developed world. Police in the US come from the shallow end of the labor pool and it shows in their performance.
Hypothetical: someone recognizes one of these cops on the street from the video and assaults them based on and because of that picture. Is Afroman then in trouble? This is a genuine legal question, not trying to be a “gotcha” or anything like that.
You can get in trouble for inciting others to commit crimes, but I don’t think just showing the faces in a video would meet that bar of incitement. If it did, news reporters and documentary makers would potentially be in a lot of trouble.
No more trouble than Jodi Foster and Robert DeNiro got in over the attempted assassination of Reagan.
But Hinkley had (I believe) some type of mental health concern. Many people have quite understandable and justified anger towards law enforcement.
Again, I feel the need to reiterate that I have no issue with those cops being punished based on what I know of the situation. I’m just curious about the legal aftermath.
Drug testing still happens, I can assure you. Some states have banned employers from testing for cannabis, most states (including most/all red ones – surprise surprise) have not.
I offer two data points about employer drug testing (for cannabis) in Missouri. First, one guy did an interview with a newspaper or TV station, even before Missouri legalized recreational, and said that he had to ditch testing for cannabis else he’d never be able to hire anyone. Second, my employer, in an email they sent when they offered me the job, included some boilerplate about how they do drug testing, including for cannabis, and even though it’s legal in Missouri, if you’re using it you need to stop. I start Monday and still haven’t been drug-tested.*
*It’s been impossible to determine what their drug-testing policy, if it exists at all, even is. On Glassdoor one responder said they only do it if they have reason to believe you’re using at work, another said they do pre-employment and/or random only on direct-care employees. I’m not sure if my job qualifies as direct-care; I’ll be directly providing services to the clients, but not administering medicine, bathing, or that sort of thing. And I definitely have an investment in this, as I quit smoking pot the day I read that email, and have been off for about ten (very long and difficult) days. As soon as I’m comfortable in my belief that I’m unlikely to be drug-tested (I’m not stupid enough to go to work high), I’m sparking a bowl.
And so I proceeded to tell them the story of the Alice’s Restaurant massacree with full orchestration and four-part harmony…
What’d you get?
I didn’t get nothing. I had to pay $50 and pick up the garbage.
Welcome to the Group W bench.
They most certainly do, especially for anything other than an entry level job.
Hypothetical: someone recognizes a pedestrian on the street from a mugshot taken after an arrest where all charges were dropped, and assaults them based on and because of that picture. Is the police then in trouble?
I wasn’t sure whether this should be in IMHO or Cafe Society. It could end up in GD, which would be fine too.
But, has everyone heard about Afroman (of “But I got High” fame) and his run-in with the local police?
Apparently they got a warrant to search his house for narcotics and kidnapping. They executed a no-knock warrant and busted in the door. Aaaaand, found nothing.
So Afroman wrote a bunch of songs about it, and used his home security footage in the videos. They’re pretty effective, if you ask me. And now the police involved are upset and suing (Steve Lehto, among others, thinks they have no case).
But beyond the obvious Streisand Effect, it does seem that there’s no accountability when the police are wrong about these things, and it seems like no-knocks have become way too common, even when confronting someone with no prior violent past.
For me, it’s patently offensive for the police to claim they’ve become targets of ridicule and bullying due to the videos, when the videos only exist because of their actions (I’ve not heard what precipitated the warrant, to be fair). Actions which, at the very least, yielded no actionable evidence. Hey- when I go out on a limb at work, and I’m wrong, there are repercussions.
Also, I really don’t like that they disabled his security cameras. The police are serving a warrant, and I can see no reason all involved aren’t protected and better served by the cameras. And anyway, I’d think they would need an additional warrant to do that, or at least they should.
And I highly recommend checking out some of the songs and their videos.
Good.
So, it’s “good” that the officers NOT responsible for the mistake have their safety and the safety of their families jeopardized?! Well, the next time somebody screws up and you get left holding the bag, may the same harsh judgment be applied to you as well.
They’re responsible for their own actions, which include either miscounting or (more likely) stealing money. And unnecessarily wrecking a bunch of private property. They could have searched without causing do much damage.
Furthermore, this is an account of events on private property. The news can definitely legally broadcast it without blurring faces - just as they could of cops working on the street. If the news can broadcast it, si can Afroman.
I’ve never screwed up so badly that I broke into an innocent man’s home, turned off all the cameras, ransacked the place, and then left him with the bill.
Is that the sort of mistake you think normal people casually make all the time? Oopsie doopsie, no big deal?
If someone breaks into my house, and I post pictures of the perpetrators on facebook warning others about it, am I putting the criminals’ safety at risk? If so, should anyone care? Why should the perpetrators in this case get a pass?
For me, this is not a, “Ha, your sin is bigger than mine!” It’s a matter of empathy and understanding and forgiveness. It’s also a matter of finding a systemic solution to what is obviously a systemic problem.
First and foremost, if I’m a judge, I’m going to be VERY stingy when it comes to granting a police request for a search warrant. The request is going need evidence far more compelling than, “Gee, I really think something is going on there.” “Probable Cause” is a very subjective reason and not acceptable in and of itself. Secondly, the person or persons formally requesting the warrant are going to be held directly responsible for its outcome.
There are other things that can be done, but you get the drift. The idea is to find solutions.