• zikzak025@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        On the other hand, a legal obligation to collect and publish mugshots on intake prevents people from getting disappeared.

        Though that’s still a concern in the US these days, when ICE is able to just kidnap people off the streets and ship them wherever with no due process.

      • Thorry@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        14 hours ago

        It is actually illegal to publish the name, face or any identifying information about suspects in some countries. Just because you are suspected of a crime, doesn’t mean you’ve lost your right to privacy. And it only helps to further public outrage and mob justice. The media can tell their stories just fine without naming or showing the people who are suspected of doing so.

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        mediaeval public shaming bloc…

        The word you’re looking for is “pillory.”

        I probably have been playing too much Kingdom Come: Deliverance II.

      • pirc_lover@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I can see the rationale in their publishing after someone has been proven guilty for certain crimes.

        Like, I think being able to recognise confirmed rapist Brock Allen Turner is pretty good.

    • mech@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      14 hours ago

      The fact that mugshots stay public long after the convicted have done their time, or even if they haven’t been convicted, is abhorrent.
      Demand better!