A bill proceeding through the West Virginia Legislature prevents the state reform officers from releasing the public magistrate of the arrested persons.
The House Judiciary Committee has approved and sent the full house HB 4621, stating, “Pictures of a person or any other county or state gel facility for the objectives of the reform and rehabilitation department are not public records and will not be disclosed to the public.”
Bill supporters argue that the durability of an internet image means that the person is subject to a lifetime of potential embarrassment, even if the charge has been dropped or they are found innocent.
In addition, in recent years, profit-benefit Magshot websites have spread, which charge individuals to take their images down. It is an unknown business, and a legitimate concern. However, the bill, as currently written, roughly incorporates all publications and includes news media.
These pictures are public documents, such as the records of arrest, and therefore the public has the right to see them, which usually occurs through the news media. They work for the public, receive images from state reform websites and post them with their stories.
Pictures provide the full story of individuals who have been arrested, often on very serious allegations. Crime and arrests are new, and it is not the role of the government to decide what is and what is not the news. Those images also provide further identity of the suspect. John Doo accused the night time theft, as is clarified by only one picture, in protest against John Doe Pedofilia.
Images also help the officers to justify. If a magshot shows a clear indication of being rough, the media would legally ask questions about arrest and whether the authorities used excessive force.
So, what if the allegations have been removed or the person has been acquitted?
WCHS TV veteran news reporter Leslie Rubin told me on the talkline on Wednesday that he had taken several calls from the persons who have been approved and have voluntarily taken pictures of them. This is just an example, but I believe it is a representative of other news organizations in the state. I know that Metronws respects those requests.
Frankly, it can be difficult to modify the bill, so it excludes the beneficial websites only by publishing Mugshots. A public document or image is public for all, not only something. So that this issue can be complicated for MPs.
But here the overriding issue is for public arrest records and images that do not harm any investigation. Any attempt to limit public reach to that information is incomplete of the government.