A while back, Kristen Lombardi of the Boston Phoenix documented abuses of the CORI system to keep track of criminal records. There is pattern of misuse that wastes the time of police and employers by smearing the reputations of innocent people.
One example:
MISTAKEN IDENTITY: years ago, when a childhood friend of Edward Bland’s was arrested, he gave police Bland’s name. Since then, whenever a potential employer has conducted a background check on Bland, the criminal record of Bland’s ‘friend’ pops up. ‘Why should I have to suffer because of the system’s mistakes?’ Bland asks.
Read the whole thing, so you have a better context to understand what was de-emphasized or ignored in today’s Globe story.
Please share widely!
Anybody who thinks CORI should be unimproved should have answer the question, “How does it prevent crime to punish innocent people like Edward Bland?”
Preventing prom dates from attending the prom becuase they got busted for smoking pot.
<
p>
Unfortunately I do think this is a loser of an issue in the “sound bite” world of a political campaign.
<
p>
Will there be a reporter/media outlet that will put this story in the proper contect? I doubt it.
…which will never appear on that blog site, becasue those kids DID go to the prom. See here – http://www.eyewitnes…
<
p>
BTW – checks were run only on kids who did not attend the school – some of whom were older than high school age – and only ONE kid was smoking pot. The rest had convictions which the parents of the girls in question did not know about. Please tell me how that hurt those girls – violating their civil rights to put themselves in harm’s way?
<
p>
Also – it’s September now, and DY is still waiting to hear from the state if they acted properly or not.
I’m glad they got to go. Peter, are you defending the practice of a school principal (or parent) searching the criminal records of an individual who is attending a prom or going out with their daughter? We’re not talking about sex offender crimes–that is readily public.
<
p>
And BTW, one of the other “crimes” was underage drinking. So again, Peter, are you saying that it is OK for a government agency, in this case a school, to look up the criminal background of dates attending a prom and then attempt to bar them from the prom for very low level offenses? Is that your position?
The fact that students’ records were searched without their consent, or that they were searched at all? I think the first is wrong, but am far from convinced about the second.
…but we are avoiding the larger issue. What types of people (employeers) have the right to request permission to look at someone’s criminal record–and how far back should they go? Should UPS be allowed to require a 40 year to give UPS permission to make their criminal records available and then deny them employment becuase the got arrested at age 20 for a minor offense like fighting, or drinking under age or selling a dime bag of pot?
<
p>
Sure protections must be in place in certain circumstances, but is one of the penalties of screwing up is that you’ll never have a chance at a good job for the rest of your life?
It’s my habit to make special allowance for some cases, such as working with children in pretty much any capacity.
That said, I do agree that CORIs should not be a way to have a “youthful indiscretion” hang around one’s adult life like a millstone.
<
p>
Actually, Frank, yes.
<
p>
The school was wrong not to obtain proper written advance permission, and I bet next May the out-of-system form will be amended to reflect this. The school knows about the problems of its own students, but has no idea what a guest might bring. Hence, the written permission for in the first place.
<
p>
And before you go off – there is no constitutional right to attend a non-academic funtion at a school which is not your own.
If certain members of the public have the right to do such banal CORI checks, then let’s open it up.
<
p>
Let’s put everyone’s data online for everyone to see.
<
p>
What’s the difference between a school checking prom dates for a criminal record and a woman checking a potential date for one? Or the parents of a woman checking her fiance’s record?
<
p>
At least that way, people can check their own data to see if its screwed up.
HOWEVER – a FREE CORI check, similar to the free annual credit report you can get would be in order!
From the Globe article:
<
p>
“…Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz, a Republican. ‘My opinion is they raise public safety issues. I believe an employer should be able to make an informed decision whether to hire or not hire someone. People have the right to be safe.’
<
p>
To Cruz, the best CORI law would be no CORI law. He believes the Legislature should eliminate the law altogether and give the public complete access to criminal records over the Internet.”
——-
Don’t people have a right to be safe from vigilantism also? Has no Republican ever met an employer he/she couldnt trust? When they imagine who will be looking these things up on the Internet, can they only see soccer moms and school superintendents?
<
p>
It wasn’t too long ago that some nutcake picked out a couple of guys from a sex-offender listing, tracked them down and killed them, headed for Boston with his guns, and shot himself on the bus (with horrified passengers watching) as the authorities moved in. One of the victims was a borderline case — he might have had sex with his steady girlfriend when she was one-month underage, and it went on the books as statutory rape.
<
p>
Cruz’ comments are insane. This is not a moderate position. The court system decides how long any of us pays for a crime. It’s not the government’s role, nor is it in the public interest, to allow voyeurs and vigilantes to execute lifetime sentences on whomever they like.
<
p>
Maybe Healy’s position is not as radical as Cruz’, but in refusing to acknowledge any problems with the system, she also sides with the voyeurs and vigilantes, and shares his (and many conservatives’) contempt for the rights, lives, and reputations of the rest of us — those of us outside the (figurative or literal) gated compound. Ms. SilverSpoon will never have to submit to a CORI check to get a job, so screw the rest of us.
<
p>
Anybody know where I can get a Kerry Healy: Soft On Criminal Misuse of Criminal Background Checks bumpersticker?
I am a criminal defense attorney so I deal with CORIs all the time. First, this idea that they rarely include incorrect information is just wrong. The info is put in by people who make mistakes and typos and who sometimes just can’t spell. Alias are often generated by the cops: if you have a client with an unusual last name or s/he has an accent and the cop taking the information down inputs it wrong: voila, you have an alias. This happens ALL THE TIME!
<
p>
Some requesters get way more info than they should, i.e., the entire record which includes all arraignments. So it does not matter that the person who was charged with armed robbery (but was in up state NY at the time and COULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE) eventally had that case dismissed, there will be some requesters who will get that record and see that the guy was charged with armed robbery! Hmmm, do you think he’ll get a call back?
<
p>
The records given to the courts, ADAs and defense attorneys, as well as the records used by the cops, WILL ALWAYS BE COMPLETE! The issue is what do you send to Walgreens. How much info does the mortgage company need? Does your landlord need to know about your minor in possession of alcohol charge 3 years ago. I can tell you now that many landlords will think twice (or not rent) to someone they think is a partier.
<
p>
People who talk about whether prom dates should have their CORIs run remind me of the Christy’s new cartoon ad. Please, try to REALLY inform yourselves and get your head out of your ass. You’re really pissing me off.
a culture in which the employer is just another court by extension. I’m very uncomfortable with the idea that employers can sort, without any justifiable reason, their applicant base simply by requesting CORIs on people. A criminal conviction is just not reason enough.
<
p>
Society has to find a way to balance everyone’s needs–and those needs include the needs of those who have been convicted of crimes, have served their sentences, and are ready to move on with their lives. We all benefit when a con gets a job and becomes a productive citizen. Creating a subclass of unemployable citizens serves no one’s needs, least of all the needs of society.
<
p>
I worked in corrections for many years, and I can tell you it’s nearly impossible to get a guy lined up for a job who’s done real time in a state prison. When these men and women can’t get jobs, we all end up paying the price–again. Cough up your $35,000 a year in taxpayers dollars because that’s roughly how much it costs to incarcerate one inmate for a year in Massachusetts these days. All the rehab programs, job skills programs, GED programs, trade programs in the world won’t matter a rat’s ass if the con gets out and can’t get a job.
But employers should still have access to the crominal records of potential employees.
<
p>
Please note – nobody is PREVENTED from hiring a person with a ‘youthful offense’. And, after 10 years time, your record can be expunged for many non-violent offenses if you have no further offenses, making your CORI report clean again.
<
p>
Repeat offenders, on the other hand, do not fare as wel. And employers have the right to k now about them.
All employers should not have access to CORI records. It is not necessary and adds just another burden on people who are trying to get a job (don’t you want “these people” working).
As for your assertion that records can just be expunged is wrong. A record is never truly expunged (unless you are George W. Bush). There is always a record of past transgretions somewhere and they always seem to pop up; I know. Additionally, sealing records does not happen automatically. You, or an attorney woking on your behalf, has to file an action to get the record sealed. Only certain convtions/adjudications can be sealed; and part of the petition MUST assert that the action would be in the public interest (e.g., Joey wants to join the Army and go to Iraq, but he can’t because he has a possession/class D on his record). I know an attorney who has a subspeciality in this area and I am told that these petitions are not always granted.
<
p>
This type of law and order crap is much like masterbation, it may feel good but it accomplishes very little.
Fresh off of arguing there is no “constitutional right” to attend my prom (used to be all you needed was a tux and a bad haircut), now you’re saying employers have a “right” to know about intimate details of my past? Says who? On what authority?
Ed – Employers can be held legally responsible for their employees actions. A pederast in a toy store? A check kiter in an accounting firm? A shoplifter making deliveries in people’s homes?
<
p>
Bad action by any of these would result in at LEAST a liability insurance claim, and possible lawsuit.
<
p>
Which is why employers DO have a right to know the criminal history of those who will be working in and representing their businesses.