Is that accurate? Being charged with a crime but then having charges subsequently dropped shouldn't show up in a background check. Plus, given their line of work, I think in their profession it would basically be a badge of honor.
This can happen just being under investigation. Or worse, no arrest, conviction or investigation. Just word of mouth kind of stuff can do it.
Employers also have a convenient privilege to maintain these narratives about a former employee. This is employer to employer confidentiality where they can say almost anything about you to another potential employer and you never have the chance to hear it or correct it.
Everyone should support the ability of even a person with a conviction to continue working and contributing to society. It's kind of a civil death that leads to bad outcomes for those targeted.
Also, I've seen many job applications that ask a question like: "Have you ever been arrested for a crime, regardless of the outcome?" Presumably mere involvement with law enforcement (even if acquitted or charges dropped) is some kind of signal in these guys' risk formulas.
Can confirm. I needed a security clearance for government contracting work when I was in my mid-30s. The background check flagged a dismissed charge from when I was a teenager.
It's hard to say if they would be able to gain security clearances in the future. Not to mention automated application systems will drop them from the system immediately with a prior arrest.
THIS should be illegal. If you are arrested and have all charges dropped, you should not show up on any database whatsoever, nor be required to answer “yes” to “gave you been arrested.”
One of them went on to start their own physical pentest firm. I think they're doing fine. I also think if they'd lost clearances, or ran into later clearance problems, that would have made it into their complaint. I don't know, maybe you're right. It's not like I disagree with them about suing.
prior arrests mean nothing and most ATS won't flag you; you could be innocent and they let you go.
prior convictions are a different story.
in most cases our ATS won't even ask, instead it'll come up in a background check after you clear the first HR hurdles. even then arrests may not show up.
This isn't a felony case. In fact, I'm not sure it ever was? It's not clear from their amended complaint, but they were ultimately charged with simple trespassing, a misdemeanor. Those trespassing charges were themselves dismissed a few months later.
What we're talking about today is the resolution of what looks to me (not a lawyer) mostly like a defamation case. Were they defamed? Absolutely. The problem is, to get anything useful out of a defamation case, you need to demonstrate damages. They were accused of a crime --- per se defamation --- but the point of the suit is to recover damages.
I don't want to be glib, and I'm very prepared to be wrong, but the Dallas County Courthouse Incident is likely one of the top 3 world events to have happened to both these pentesters. They've been cause celebres in the field for years and years. It might be pretty tricky to actually demonstrate damages.
They were arrested, arraigned and bonded for felony charges. Those were later reduced to misdemeanor charges and the case was eventually dropped/dismissed (can't remember which) - so they were facing felony charges for a while.
I didn’t see how long it took for the charges to change from felony to misdemeanor before being dropped. It would be standard for clearances to be suspended for investigation when you get charged with a felony. (You have to report even an arrest or misdemeanor, but it’s less likely they’ll suspend it while investigating you for those).