Maybe in some 3rd world country, but here we live by the American standard. Just because someone commits a crime doesn't mean they are some worthless piece of garbage. Wouldn't you feel bad for an 8 year old little boy with no toys to play with, no friends, no Christmas, dirty filthy house to live in. Chances are thats where criminals come from, troubled past. Its more of a sad situation

Funnyguy. By American standards, we forgive and give people a second chance. But what we have happeneing here is that the same people are committing crimes over and over again. At what point are these people made to be held responsible for their bad choices? At present, the public bears all of the costs of these people and their behavior. If I didn't know better, I would suspect you are a defense attorney. That would explain your side of it.

I am inclined to agree. Posting these images before conviction is the prelude to trial by the media.

Furthermore, should one of accused ultimately prove to be innocent, although the police record may be expunged, Google won't forget this posting, and I believe the Baltimore Police Department and the Patch could be setting themselves up for a very expensive lawsuit.

I also question the purpose of this article. These people have been arrested and charged, it is now up to the courts to determine their guilt or innocence.

The article takes no position on the guilt or innocence of anyone pictured. All photos were featured in stories written about arrests made over the last week or so. The use of the photos is no different legally than using a incident summaries and other official records to report on crimes and arrests.

Yea, but the perceived stigma of guilt remains....and potentially damages as a result of walking the line of the law in this case Bryan..

Buck: Are you arguing to never report an arrest or publish a mugshot photo because "the internet is forever?"

Tom Kiefaber in this case....trespassing..?? trial by trash government and media....the proverbial gang bang..

Bryan:

This a recent problem, and has never been considered. The reporting of arrests in the press is a long tradition, and I have no problem with that. Newspapers, by definition, have very short value.

However, the internet is a different matter. There is no method to redact or retract the report of an arrest where the person is later found not guilty. There may not be any further reporting on the case if the accused is not guilty, as it is not newsworthy. Consequently, there may exist a report on he arrest of an innocent man, and a search only reveals the arrest, leading people to assume guilt.

Perhaps if news being put out through a blog forum such as Patch were to require that poster's identify themselves with a real name that could then hold the poster to a degree of accountability it would be a little more digestible, but with the wrath of no name poster's being allowed to make almost any accusation with 0 accountability for what being posted....in many cases insult is added to injury as well. Not a good , or ethically correct stand for Patch to take.

John: Understood and it's an issue all media (TV, newspapers, radio and online news sites) wrestle with. There is no such thing as short-term value as you suggested with newspapers. Almost post everything that makes it to the paper is posted online.

Bryan:

I think you are underlining what I said.

There was a time, 20 years ago, when print media had a short life, and we all wondered what the www was at the bottom of TV advertisments.

The Maryland Judicial website states if a case has been dropped or vacated, or if the accused is found not guilty. There is no mileage in reporting this this for the ink or on-line media, unless the defendant is someone of interest, so the defendant appears to stand accused even after acquittal.

Consequently, searching someone's name on the Internet will show the negative aspects, but not the positive aspects. It is the advent of the internet and search ability that has caused this problem.

It is, I believe, a problem waiting for a solution.

John Cole: So again I point out that it appears that the natural extension of your argument is to never report on any arrest that names a charged suspect because it will appear as a "negative" in an internet search.

Bryan, Why did you not comment on the problem with fake name posters as well?

Buck: There is no ethical issue for Patch when a user declines to use his or her real name. Patch encourages users to use their own names rather than a pseudonym but it is not required.

Commenters are required to adhere to other terms of use including not posting false or misleading information.

Patch local editors try to monitor the comments on stories and also allows readers to identify specific comments of concern by both flagging the comment in question and emailing the reporter or site editors directly to report a problem.

Local editors and management (myself included) routinely remove comments and explained the reason for their deletion.

These names and faces will be long gone from our memory in a few months anyway, just as the newspapers "have very short value."

Unless of course you are close to one of the cases.

I believe there is a value to the Maryland Case Seach site. If you are an employer considering hiring someone, or in business considering doing business with someone, that site is invaluable, and helps you to do due diligence before acting.
Remember, court cases are public record, as indeed is a conviction. However, it is essential to really reade the case disposition, many cases are lost or vacated, but they are still listed.

I have no problem with the public having this information available- conveniently too. Of course, I am a law abiding citizen and excercise self control. I find the internet is an excellent tool to check to see what violent sex offenders are living nearby - the ones that have "done their time" - and can pose a threat to my wife and children. Surprisingly, there are a lot of them concentrated around the unsuspecting public. If you don't want your mug out for all to see, then don't commit crimes. As far as the fine gentleman whose mugshot was on patch, if you do some looking, you'll see this aint his first rodeo.

Really Danielle,
If you don't want your face or your actions on TV, websites, newspapers or any other type of media outlets stay out of trouble. I think it’s great that we can see public information on people at a click of a mouse.

Danielle. I think you care more than the dude who's mugshot it is. Don't commit crimes and this is not an issue. The least they could have done is have him comb his hair for the picture.

John T. What about the human beings that have been arrested by mistake, or have been found innocent of the charges. That would mean that they've done nothing wrong but have been smeared and the report and photo live on forever for them to have to deal with...is that ok with you?

Danielle, I believe that your thoughts are right on the money with this one. Too many Quick Draw McGraw reporting techniques being used today....shoot first~ then aim..

Buck: I'll go back to my original point. All of the mugshots in this story were part of stories about these individuals being arrested and charged.

Remove the photos.

The alleged perpetrators of the crimes and their charges and their hundred block address remain—information that all of the media have used for a long, long time.

How would your standard apply to something like this: http://essex.patch.com/articles/catonsville-man-charged-in-saturday-stabbing

I see it as only reporting the public record as long as no editorial commentary by The
Patch is involved. They offer the disclosure "and remember, an arrest does not indicate a conviction"

Danielle, the majority of the profiled persons have some past dealings with the court system due to their behavior. I agree with Eastsider. If you don't participate in an action that gets you arrested, you will have no problem. I also think it is great to have public information so I can protect myself and my family.

I know this is the Baltimore rogues gallery, but at the Havre de Grace patch hardly a month goes by without a story trumpeting the great works and deeds of the convicted town child molester. You all should see how our town molester skips around selling his snow cones to kids. The Patch in HdeG's case promote him in a most positive light but have no problem prominently displaying the mug shots of unconvicted suspects.

@Kareem N Mikoffee

For goodness sakes! The offences you refer to are about 30 years old!

Factually, the Patch has reported several negative items about this person, but there have NEVER been any further allegations or convictions.

It's time to move on; find another kebab to spear!

I agree. But they should get 1 speedy apeal then, if convicted a 2nd time they should be sent to the death chamber, but the appeals process has gotten so screwed up that these people have become a meal ticket for the lawyers that represent them. While these people sit in prison, their lawyer(s) keep racking up a bill. The ironic thing is the victims family pays an emotional cost and the public pays the bill for these animals the entire time.