Criminal History

The Right to Privacy

Having a criminal record and having it checked also have an effect on one's right to privacy. Many people worry about the computerization of records, about who has access to them, and, of course, about hackers. As of 1995, “fewer than half the states have fully automated criminal records systems, and four states have no automation at all” (Shoop 1995: 95). The U.S. Department of Justice offered grants for upgrades and automation of state criminal history records systems, but it is doubtful that states have gotten much better since 1995, so some of the privacy concerns should be reduced. Pennsylvania, on the other hand, is merging its juvenile and adult records systems to “enhance the ability of the law enforcement community to obtain timely information on offenders,” saying, “technology is yet another tool in our crimefighting arsenal …” (PR Newswire 2000: 1). This is not to say that there should be no privacy concern; clearly, whenever there is computerization (or even when there is not) inappropriate access and illegal access are always a problem. Criminal history records should be safeguarded with procedures for tracking who has accessed them with potential “flags” for incidents that appear to be problematic. For example, gangsters' girlfriends and wives have been hired as court and records clerks. After some time on the job, they begin to erase and otherwise manipulate the records of their boyfriends/spouses and members of their gangs. When confronted they usually confess, and the agency is “surprised” that this occurred. Why should the agency [Page 403]be surprised that there was a failure either in the background check or in the internal procedures? And the problem is not confined to the United States. In Kyoto, Japan, a police officer was given a three-year suspended prison term for obtaining the identity of a mobile phone user for a female friend. This was clearly beyond the scope of his job.

...