Skip to main content

Online Criminal Records & Legal Consciousness Theory

Sarah Esther Lageson
School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University-Newark

The internet has dramatically changed the way the public consumes information about the criminal justice system. At the same time, the justice system and information technology are both operating at unforeseen levels of activity. It’s as simple as a Google search to unveil someone’s mug shot or court records from the privacy of your smartphone. This explosion of digital crime data invokes new questions: who is responsible for the accuracy of these data? What rights do website subjects have? In other words, what should law do?

This hazy legal framework creates fertile ground for both website publishers and website subjects to develop their own set of legal consciousness around criminal justice data. Law and Society research has long demonstrated how in the absence of laws, or in the context of confusing or unclear laws, social actors construct legal meanings to help guide their behavior. In a period of rapid technological change, this is especially prevalent. My LSR article, Crime Data, the Internet, and Free Speech: An Evolving Legal Consciousness,” describes these processes as they relate to the release of criminal history information on the Internet.  I explore how crime website publishers, as well as people who have appeared on websites, interpret, construct, and invoke law in a nascent and unregulated area.

My analysis reveals how both parties construct legality in the absence of actual written law. However, this plays out differently for these distinct groups. The first set of interviewees, the “publishers” (composed of those who produce crime reporting websites) believe in the social good of producing this information for public consumption. On the other hand, the “subjects” (those who have appeared on websites) are wary of their digital criminal record, and describe the negative effects of this extralegal sanction that is widely available to anyone with access to the Internet.

Beyond beliefs about law, the two groups also invoke law in different ways. For instance, to justify their online posting of criminal records, website publishers tend use legal language and invoke their First Amendment rights. In contrast, those who appear on the websites are more likely to use personal pleas, working to appeal to the emotions of publishers as they ask for their arrest records and booking photos to be taken off websites.

The relative powerlessness of the people who appear on the websites is clear. They cannot use civil law, existing legislation, nor personal pleas to control the release of their criminal histories – even for non-conviction records or arrests that didn’t lead to charges.

These practices reinforce structural inequalities already present in the criminal justice system in a profoundly public manner. In the end, any and all brushes with the justice system remain Google-able indefinitely, resulting in inescapable digital trails. 

 
Example of a website publisher using legalese to justify posting an arrest photo. 

Popular posts from this blog

Ten Insights Regarding Sexual Harassment

By Loan Le, President of the Institute for Good Government and Inclusion The #MeToo explosion has demonstrated how common sexual harassment is and how quiet the settlements are, or how much people have not complained. It’s long been named as illegal sex discrimination in the United States,as a result of feminist movements. Sociolegal scholars explain what happens to complaints on the ground, an exercise of political power if ever there was one. Amy Blackstone, Christopher Uggen and Heather McLaughlin argued in Law and Society Review, assailants often choose women who are least likely to complain. As Anna Maria Marshall and Abigail Saguy have argued, people and workplace organizations explain problems in ways that limit their meaning as unequal working conditions, or sexual assault. The news in the United States has taken over other ways of explaining women’s disadvantages at work, including in the academy. We have yet to see systematic discussion of problems in the academy. Her…

End impunity! Reducing conflict-related sexual violence to a problem of law

By Anette Bringedal Houge & Kjersti Lohne, Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law, University of Oslo
(Image from Global Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict, 2014, hosted by UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office)

In our recent article, End impunity! Reducing conflict-related sexual violence to a problem of law, we question the taken-for-granted center-stage position of international criminal justice in international policy responses to conflict-related sexual violence. We address how central policy and advocacy actors explain such violence and its consequences for targeted individuals in order to promote and strengthen the fight against impunity. With the help of apt analytical tools provided by framing theory, we show how the UN Security Council and Human Rights Watch construct a simplistic understanding of conflict-related sexual violence in order to get their message and call for action across to wider audiences and constituencies – including a clear and short caus…

Early view comes to LSR

You can now access articles as soon as they are ready for publication rather than wait until the whole issue is out. We also invite you to sign up for content alerts on the Wiley site, so you learn as soon as an article is available.