https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&division=4.&title=1.&part=&chapter=9.7.&article=
"So relevant code section is 3307.5, but uses the language “as a condition of his employment” submitting to a photo. Advice on whether or not his public record booking photo is going to come from County Counsel, who not to put too fine a point is on a pretty rough losing streak. The bottom line is that POBR does not prevent the release of a booking photo from a criminal action. The picture is required because a Judge ordered him remanded and booked into the HCCF not as a condition of his FORMER employment as a CO. I hope this is not them protecting their own."
Allan Dollison, former Humboldt County Deputy District Attorney and former local defense attorney left the comment on my post about why HCSO said they have not released Cory Fisher's booking photo.
Previous post:
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2017/09/hcso-responds-and-explains-why-they.html?m=1
(with links to other coverage)
Former EPD officer Adam Laird, who had a case dismissed against him, had his photo released. The alleged charges in the Fisher case are very serious. Way more serious than the charges alleged against Adam Laird. Unlike Adam Laird, Fisher is in protective custody. The Fisher case has many similarities with the Chad Smith case. One similrity being Fisher had access to other children and when he was in a position of authority.
ReplyDeletei think the public at large is entitled to see all booking photo's of those arrested as a matter of public safety.
ReplyDeletealong with that i think there is an obligation for any entity who did publish a booking photo to then publish a follow up with an updated notice if/when that particular arrested individual has had the charges dropped, or in some other way the person is found not guilty of the crimes they were arrested for.
this updated info would be for the public safety of the wrongly accused.
which is not to say a guilty person who has had criminal charges dismissed and stands accused, or who has been legally found not guilty isn't in fact guilty of the crime he was charged with.
i guess that's why verdicts can come down to a finding of with the phrase "not guilty" instead of using the term "innocent".
law: it's all about semantics and fallible human nature.
*two thumbs up for john for keeping us informed. thanks.