6 ms·

I thought something was off about that site. I doesn't seem fair or legal to just publish that data like that. I think in the era of go in and get things thing

I thought something was off about that site. I doesn't seem fair or legal to just publish that data like that. I think in the era of go in and get things things should be "public". Now in the search engine age and data available at your fingertips we need to entirely change our public records laws... Immediately. edit: In fact a HN User said this with NO REPLY from the author of that Show HN: I have some records that are sealed, but show up in this database. So there are records that were once ‘public’ but are no more, but this database makes them public again. I think that website should be taken offline immediately.

mistrial9 5y ago
please recall a basic motivation for the formation of the United States of America, versus the Kingdom of Britain under George III. In the legal system of Britain, all Crown records are SECRET unless cleared. Under the Federal Laws of the USA, all Federal records are PUBLIC unless classified. get the idea?
5ESS 5y ago
Blame the state governments for publishing those records in the first place. Everyone knows that once information is published on the internet there is really no “undo” button. If judyrecords goes down another, perhaps less scrupulous, operator will release another similar site.
wolverine876 5y ago
Without transparency, including public records, how do we hold the powerful accountable? Court records are public to prevent secret government courts from abusing people (among other reasons). How do we operate a democracy, which depends on citizens controlling their country? And most importantly, who does get access to the records? That exculsive access will give them a lot of power.
- SllX 5y ago
  Something that stuck out to me about that website is that we really do publish a lot. If you ever had a speeding ticket, that’s a matter of public record now. If you ever had a parking violation, that’s a matter of public record. I mean to be honest, if you just have a car, I can probably find you on that website if I know your name. Also goes for divorces. By and large I agree with your take, but playing around with the search got me thinking that maybe we just make too much a matter of public record and that some things might just be too noisy, even if it isn’t the biggest privacy violation per se. Still mulling it over though, so I can’t say I’m committed to that position yet, feel free to talk me back.
  - oh_sigh 5y ago
    I have owned a car in NY, FL, and CA, have been married, and have received parking violations in all 3 of those states, and my very unique name is not present at all on that website.
    - SllX 5y ago
      Fair. I did search out myself and several others I know. Didn’t find myself, but did find out that there’s a guy with a very similar name to me (different middle name) that likes to live dangerously in the same State but in several different counties racking up speeding violations like there’s no tomorrow. I was able to find almost every single other person I searched though, chose not to dig into it any further than I could confirm it was someone I actually knew, typically by birth date.
    - function_seven 5y ago
      I think their coverage is still spotty. I'm in California, and searched some names I know. The results came from some counties, but nothing from others. Notably I never saw anything from Los Angeles County, but tons of results from San Bernardino County. My own name brought up a couple tickets. In 2014 I got a cell phone ticket. There's something kind of funny seeing an all-caps official document explaining that THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA were all arrayed against me! :)
      - mistrial9 5y ago
        there are at least six adults in the USA with my same first and last name, who are professionals and middle-aged .. one of the others died of a drug overdose, and looks a bit like me! new world now
    - ghaff 5y ago
      AFAIK, a parking ticket would be written against a car/license plate. Obviously that can be attached to a registration if the ticket is unpaid but it's not clear to me that a record of the violation would necessarily have the name attached in the record.
- nisegami 5y ago
  >Court records are public to prevent secret government courts from abusing people Except of course, when "national security" is involved.
- sacrosancty 5y ago
  It's possible to be both not public enough to ruin people's lives and public enough for journalists or concerned individuals to find. In New Zealand, voter registration details are, by law, available to look at but not to copy. Anyone can walk in to a public library anonymously and rifle through the book but the book is chained to the desk and you're not allowed to photocopy it or take photos. Also, it's only present in the local libraries near where the voters live.
- giantg2 5y ago
  One thing to note, judicial and Bar complaints are generally not considered court records. In theory, anything that went to trial would have transcripts available (unless it's sealed, like for minors). Many of these complaints could still have the transcripts available for the cases associated with them. But it's hard to tell what the alleged problem or misconduct is. I emphasize alleged because I assume the nonpublic ones were ones in which the lawyer was not found "guilty". In my state, the Bar will only investigate prosecutors if the court has already issued a statement determining prosecutorial misconduct occurred. So prosecutors get off without scrutiny most of the time.
ejb999 5y ago
>> we need to entirely change our public records laws... Immediately. I am certain that many people in government would agree with you - they would LOVE to be able to hide what they are doing and not be held accountable for decisions they make (or don't make). We need more public disclosures, not less, imo. >>So there are records that were once ‘public’ but are no more, but this database makes them public again. This website didn't make them public, they just gave others a way to access them - once something is public, and in control of others, it is impossible to make them 'un-public' without violating the 1st amendment.
- djbusby 5y ago
  What's the point of sealed records then? How would that be managed? We should let citizens have some privacy right?
  - ejb999 5y ago
    If they were sealed, they shouldn't be made public until they become unsealed (if ever) - but if they were public at some point, they are for all intents and purposes public forever. Very hard to make something private, after it has been out in the public.
    - thrashh 5y ago
      Plenty of things become super hard to find after no one cares about it anymore. High profile cases aren’t like that but most things are not high profile. Just because you can’t make something 100% perfect doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try. Locks aren’t unbreakable. Seatbelts won’t always save you. Your cloud service won’t always stay up. Yet we use and build all these things and no one has an issue with it. And for all intents and purposes, if court records are meant to be hidden to protect someone’s future chance of success, by all means we should do what we can.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    I don't think the discussion is about sealed records. I think the main point here is that the state needs to adequately seal the record. As a side note, I don't think Bar complaints should be private. People running the system should be transparent. The only reason transparency should be limited is with the name of the witness. Otherwise, how can we be sure the system is functioning correctly?
richardbarosky 5y ago
It's the first reply.

mistrial9 5y ago

please recall a basic motivation for the formation of the United States of America, versus the Kingdom of Britain under George III. In the legal system of Britain, all Crown records are SECRET unless cleared. Under the Federal Laws of the USA, all Federal records are PUBLIC unless classified. get the idea?

5ESS 5y ago

Blame the state governments for publishing those records in the first place. Everyone knows that once information is published on the internet there is really no “undo” button. If judyrecords goes down another, perhaps less scrupulous, operator will release another similar site.

wolverine876 5y ago

Without transparency, including public records, how do we hold the powerful accountable? Court records are public to prevent secret government courts from abusing people (among other reasons). How do we operate a democracy, which depends on citizens controlling their country? And most importantly, who does get access to the records? That exculsive access will give them a lot of power.

SllX 5y ago
Something that stuck out to me about that website is that we really do publish a lot. If you ever had a speeding ticket, that’s a matter of public record now. If you ever had a parking violation, that’s a matter of public record. I mean to be honest, if you just have a car, I can probably find you on that website if I know your name. Also goes for divorces. By and large I agree with your take, but playing around with the search got me thinking that maybe we just make too much a matter of public record and that some things might just be too noisy, even if it isn’t the biggest privacy violation per se. Still mulling it over though, so I can’t say I’m committed to that position yet, feel free to talk me back.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  I have owned a car in NY, FL, and CA, have been married, and have received parking violations in all 3 of those states, and my very unique name is not present at all on that website.
  - SllX 5y ago
    Fair. I did search out myself and several others I know. Didn’t find myself, but did find out that there’s a guy with a very similar name to me (different middle name) that likes to live dangerously in the same State but in several different counties racking up speeding violations like there’s no tomorrow. I was able to find almost every single other person I searched though, chose not to dig into it any further than I could confirm it was someone I actually knew, typically by birth date.
  - function_seven 5y ago
    I think their coverage is still spotty. I'm in California, and searched some names I know. The results came from some counties, but nothing from others. Notably I never saw anything from Los Angeles County, but tons of results from San Bernardino County. My own name brought up a couple tickets. In 2014 I got a cell phone ticket. There's something kind of funny seeing an all-caps official document explaining that THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA were all arrayed against me! :)
    - mistrial9 5y ago
      there are at least six adults in the USA with my same first and last name, who are professionals and middle-aged .. one of the others died of a drug overdose, and looks a bit like me! new world now
  - ghaff 5y ago
    AFAIK, a parking ticket would be written against a car/license plate. Obviously that can be attached to a registration if the ticket is unpaid but it's not clear to me that a record of the violation would necessarily have the name attached in the record.
nisegami 5y ago
>Court records are public to prevent secret government courts from abusing people Except of course, when "national security" is involved.
sacrosancty 5y ago
It's possible to be both not public enough to ruin people's lives and public enough for journalists or concerned individuals to find. In New Zealand, voter registration details are, by law, available to look at but not to copy. Anyone can walk in to a public library anonymously and rifle through the book but the book is chained to the desk and you're not allowed to photocopy it or take photos. Also, it's only present in the local libraries near where the voters live.
giantg2 5y ago
One thing to note, judicial and Bar complaints are generally not considered court records. In theory, anything that went to trial would have transcripts available (unless it's sealed, like for minors). Many of these complaints could still have the transcripts available for the cases associated with them. But it's hard to tell what the alleged problem or misconduct is. I emphasize alleged because I assume the nonpublic ones were ones in which the lawyer was not found "guilty". In my state, the Bar will only investigate prosecutors if the court has already issued a statement determining prosecutorial misconduct occurred. So prosecutors get off without scrutiny most of the time.

ejb999 5y ago

>> we need to entirely change our public records laws... Immediately. I am certain that many people in government would agree with you - they would LOVE to be able to hide what they are doing and not be held accountable for decisions they make (or don't make). We need more public disclosures, not less, imo. >>So there are records that were once ‘public’ but are no more, but this database makes them public again. This website didn't make them public, they just gave others a way to access them - once something is public, and in control of others, it is impossible to make them 'un-public' without violating the 1st amendment.

djbusby 5y ago
What's the point of sealed records then? How would that be managed? We should let citizens have some privacy right?
- ejb999 5y ago
  If they were sealed, they shouldn't be made public until they become unsealed (if ever) - but if they were public at some point, they are for all intents and purposes public forever. Very hard to make something private, after it has been out in the public.
  - thrashh 5y ago
    Plenty of things become super hard to find after no one cares about it anymore. High profile cases aren’t like that but most things are not high profile. Just because you can’t make something 100% perfect doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try. Locks aren’t unbreakable. Seatbelts won’t always save you. Your cloud service won’t always stay up. Yet we use and build all these things and no one has an issue with it. And for all intents and purposes, if court records are meant to be hidden to protect someone’s future chance of success, by all means we should do what we can.
- giantg2 5y ago
  I don't think the discussion is about sealed records. I think the main point here is that the state needs to adequately seal the record. As a side note, I don't think Bar complaints should be private. People running the system should be transparent. The only reason transparency should be limited is with the name of the witness. Otherwise, how can we be sure the system is functioning correctly?

richardbarosky 5y ago

It's the first reply.