[49bc]

Q: When does a fee become extortion vs covering the cost to execute?

[drefanzor]

I have mugshots on that site for charges that were DROPPED. I HAVE PROOF OF INNOCENCE. I even have my paperwork stating that the charges WILL NOT BE REFILED. I emailed the administrators at mugshots.com and they refused to remove them without first paying a fee. This is exploitative. They now won't even allow me to pay the fee since I "threatened" them (with a lawsuit).

Don't feel bad for these guys.

[TheCowboy]

It's good when people share their personal experiences like this here.

People too often take a "tough on crime" attitude but don't realize the millions of people affected by overzealous police or burdened by justice system digital trails who haven't even been convicted of anything. That's not just.

Turning a blind eye just means more pent up anger and less trust in the justice system. It just seems un-American that people can't move on with their lives and accomplish their full potential.

[49bc]

I don't feel bad for them at all. Clearly it's a racket. My comment was that I don't think the government charging a fee is a similar situation.

[eevilspock]

I think its wrong for the government to the charge for the "cost to execute". It's not equal protection under the law if there's a price on it.

[Clubber]

Some states charge for court costs and public defenders, including California where this motion was filed.

https://www.npr.org/2014/05/19/312455680/state-by-state-cour...

It's corruption and theft everywhere. If I were cynical (which you bet I am), I would say this is more about California not getting their cut.

[2_listerine_pls]

If they are willing to remove them, why bother making them public in the first place?