Get Adobe Flash player

Bill seeks to limit public mug shots


By Pam O’Dell
Capitol Reporter
    State Representative Bruce Strickland (R-McDonough) authored HB845 in an attempt to restrict access to arrest booking photos. Should the bill become law, it would allow an exception within Georgia’s “Open Records Act,”

empowering arresting agencies (such as a sheriff or police department) to withhold photos of those arrested - but not convicted of - a crime.   
    Strickland authored the bill to address loop holes in a bill passed during the 2013 session aimed to prevent Internet-based companies from posting booking photos and charging arrestees to remove them. HB150 (now Georgia law) requires companies posting booking photos to remove them within 30 days of a citizen’s request in instances in which charges were dropped or an individual was not convicted.
    Strickland (an attorney) represented a client who, after complying with new legal procedures to have photos removed, finally resolved to pay the publication company’s fees rather than pursue further legal action.
    In another case, Strickland called an out-of-state Internet company on behalf of a Georgia citizen in order to comply with the law and was told by a company spokesperson that the law did not apply to companies located outside Georgia.
    Lamenting the difficulty in enforcing the bill, Strickland notes, “Many of these companies are off shore and there is little that we can do to regulate them. The people’s photos who are being posted are often not truly criminals. It’s costing people jobs, their reputations and who knows what else. This photo can haunt them indefinitely.”
    During a phone interview, Pickens County Sheriff Donnie Craig expressed similar concerns. Craig, who is currently required by law to make booking photos available to anyone formally requesting them, expressed the need for balance in the law that allows for public safety but preserves individuals’ right to ‘due process.’
    Matthew BeGlopper, editor at Just Busted, noted that, inherent in public policies aimed to protect a free and independent press is the concept of “fair and equal access.” BeGlopper believes that, should the HB845 become law, minor publications could be denied access by virtue of the style of their publication, or perceived readership.
    “This is an instance where government limits your freedom, it’s scary,” BeGlopper said, noting that Just Busted does not discriminate when publishing or removing photos. “We are fair across the board.”
    Noting that all publications post pictures in some fashion or another, he said, “This is how the public knew about Justin Bieber, this is the same way that court TV works.”
    David Hudson, legal counsel for the Georgia Press Association, believes that the bill is misguided. “This bill leads to government censorship. That is not a choice that government should be in. This allows law enforcement to operate in secrecy,” he said.
    Strickland says he is aware of the challenges inherent in giving law enforcement discretion but notes that sheriffs and other elected officials are elected based on the public’s trust. He believes those prone to over reach their discretionary power within the law will not be re-elected.
    Hudson noted that the public also has a decision to make if they believe commercial mug shot publications are immoral or unnecessarily damage the reputations of law abiding citizens adding: “If people don’t like it and feel that it is not in the public interest, they don’t have to buy it.”
    The bill will receive a hearing early week amidst a fast moving legislative session. Bills not passed by the 30th day of the 40 day session ‘die’ (or fail to be considered) until the next year.
    Given the controversy regarding mug shot publications, the bill will likely survive to be heard in the house chamber. It could survive under the current bill number or be attached to a surviving bill (known in capitol nomenclature as a ‘vehicle’).
    O’Dell provides news on state government through The O’Dell Report in newspapers in North Georgia and her blog, She can be contacted at pamodellreport@


pinto colvig
-5 #1 pinto colvig 2014-02-19 17:05
this Republican state rep is clearly backed by wealthy defendants who have the means to beat the charges. otherwise his bill completely contradicts the classic GOP m.o. of shaming and embarrassing everyone who might end up a liability to their election strategies... While it is pretty disgraceful to make a living publishing mug shots of detainees, this bill is clearly a case where the rich win and the poor (the press) and other practitioners of Free Speech lose, again...
Charlie Brown & Lucy
+1 #2 Charlie Brown & Lucy 2014-02-20 17:14
Quoting pinto colvig:
this Republican state rep is clearly backed by wealthy etc.etc ...

Wrong again punto polvig - No one should have a mug shot published until AFTER they are convicted no matter how much money they do or don't have unless they are a democrat
pinto colvig
-2 #3 pinto colvig 2014-02-20 23:13
Quoting Charlie Brown & Lucy:
[quote name="pinto colvig"]

Wrong again punto polvig - No one should have a mug shot published until AFTER they are convicted no matter how much money they do or don't have unless they are a democrat

you should have read the article before commenting...
+2 #4 Firestorm 2014-02-21 06:17
I like something a friend of mine once said, that if his face ever appeared in that paper for a crime he didn't do, he'd go and do something to earn the infamy.

(BeGlopper must have already considered that, thus keeping his place of business secret and using an obviously-fake name.)

"This is how the public knew about Justin Bieber, this is the same way that court TV works."

Having forgotten who Justin Bieber was, I'm going to hold Glop personally accountable for time wasted googling him.

As for Court TV, I don't watch Court TV because I work for a living, but I did used to watch COPS back in the day: faces blanked, "innocent until proven guilty", etc. Has the definition of LIBEL changed, or are they still required to do that? If so, then how long will it be 'till we see Glop's mugshot in one of these papers?
-6 #5 kitty 2014-02-21 14:04
Arrests are public record and I disagree with both Pinto and Charlie. Mugshots are not invasion of privacy, just like trials are not invasion of privacy. Anything of public record is just that:public record.
+6 #6 Skip 2014-02-21 19:50
They are public record. That said, anyone who would pay for a newspaper, etc. whose sole content was centered on people who have been arrested is a sad, pathetic moron. The fact that a (so-called) "industry" even exists to cater to people whose own lives are so dismal they have to gloat about others misfortunes (whether or not self-inflicted) really says more about the buyers than the publishers ... and what it has to say isn't good.

Get a life.

Add comment

Security code