Department of Justice explains why it won't release Lori Loughlin and Felicity Huffman's booking photos


#1

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/03/14/department-of-justice-explains.html


#2

I bet that there is a Hollywood version of Heaven that is even nicer. Like they get to have pets and be gay and shit.


#3


#4

Yes, but apparently not since 2016? I guess I’m OK with the policy as long as it is applied uniformly. That’s a big “if” of course.

They better make good with the photo if Felicity Huffman stages a prison break and becomes a wanted fugitive though. It wouldn’t be fair if hers is the only wanted poster that uses headshots cleared for release by her publicist.


#5

I can’t wait for William H Macy to re-enact his character’s plotline but in real life.

Fargo 2: Meta Boogaloo.


#6

I actually agree?

There’s nothing substantive to be gained to the public by seeing these defendants looking hagard and scared other than satisfying morbid curiosity. The pro argument is basically the typical argument that the public ought to have the right to see any public document. Which, fine, but you’re just going to see the photos, goof on them, then go on with your life. Give the defendants a little privacy. Similarly, there’s a lot of documents for which there is no compelling reason to release, such as a defendant’s finger prints, SSN, etc.

I do agree that, if this is truly the policy, it needs to be equally applied to defendants regardless of race, class, etc.


#7

“…putting them out post-arrest only serves the public’s fascination.“

There’s some truth to that. On the other hand, mugshots can sometimes be very impressive photos.

image


#8

Yeah, one hopes they at least give the arrestee a copy if they want one. Of course, they probably charge you for it, like a theme park log flume ride…


#9


#10

Just so we can be clear…

unqualified children

I don’t recall anything stating all of these kids were unqualified…the measures these parents took were to guarantee acceptance.

I’m not saying “oh think of the poor kids” here. I am just thinking many if not most of them were “qualified” but would probably have been denied, no more or less than the rest of the children of us pleebs.

Also…side note…I am hoping this draws to light another huge problem in the world of college acceptance. The actual standards. There is no reason why so many kids get told “NO” just because they didn’t have some magical little item like “4 year starter on the water polo team” on their transcripts. I don’t think it should simply be a standardized test score alone…but seeing some schools with 2-8% acceptance rates makes me think they have some magical rubrick test they are trying to fit these kids into.


#11

Good.

I know the media is outraged, primarily because they can’t make money off the photos. But I personally have no desire to see anybody’s mugshots, celebrity or mortal. Not even James Brown’s.


#12

Booking photo releases are bad, but let’s not only selectively end them.


#13

If the students’ own parents didn’t think their kids were likely to get accepted without resorting to cheating and bribery then I feel no obligation to assume otherwise.


#14

As far as I can tell the policy is supposed to apply evenly to all mugshots controlled by the US Department of Justice, but state and local agencies can and do release mugshots all the time.

So I guess the reason we have one of Paul Manafort is because it was released by the Virginia jail where he was detained last year rather than being released by the DOJ itself? The jurisdictional overlap is kind of confusing sometimes. Maybe that means the public could get those celebrity mugshots after all but only through certain channels.


#15

Yeah, I am not sure why in general we release mug shots. If people are wanted for something with a warrant, I can see the use in that. Otherwise, what, shaming?

I do have a small bank of image I’ve saved, but they were because the people had unique looks that looked fun to draw someday. Like long necks or other things one may consider different. I got the idea after looking at some of Divinci’s sketches that were full of different looking people.


#16

The thin white duke?

/google

The thin white duke


#17

I get that, but I think that is misplacing what these assholes were thinking. It wasn’t that they didn’t think their kid was qualified…it was they wanted to make sure they weren’t told no.

There is a difference, however minor or subtle it may be.

Regardless, any of these kid should be expelled or otherwise denied (as USC has said it is doing in the denied part at least). They will be just fine otherwise going to another institution on their actual merits. The parent son the other hand I am hopeful face serious consequences; though I am apt to believe it will simply be a slap on the wrist.


#18

what an amazing photo! :blush:


#19

I can see if someone isn’t well known and doesn’t have a publicly available photo the the news reaches out to the jail for a picture of the person. Within this context i kind of get it… but then oftentimes it devolves into lowkey racist messaging. Minorities are often shown with mugshots but for Caucasians the news outlets go out of their way to find the nicest pictures of them from their families or that might be available online.


#20

“Right to privacy”? What the @#$Q!? They were arrested on criminal charges and the American public pays for the entire process. We have the right to see things that were bought with our money.