Police find a weapon in a car and charge the driver with possessing an unlicensed gun. After his name appears in the Police Blotter, he is fired. He produces his license in court and all charges are dropped.

Police find syringes in a woman's backpack. Although explaining she is diabetic, she is charged with possession of drug paraphernalia. After her name appears in the Police Blotter, she is placed on academic probation. She brings her medical records to court and the charges are dropped.

This newspaper's "Police Blotter" feature, which prints the names and charges levied against individuals, undermines our fundamental constitutional principle "innocent until proven guilty," reinforces racial disparities in our criminal justice system, and serves only to publicly humiliate people arrested. The feature should be discontinued or revised to eliminate these serious injuries to our most basic understandings of justice.

The presumption of innocence is the foundation of our legal system. This principle, and the due process requirement that government must prove the charges against an accused "beyond a reasonable doubt," is designed to protect us from abusive criminal prosecutions, overreaching by law enforcement officials, and prejudiceand discrimination in the criminal justice system. It is a counterpoint to the hysteria and tyranny that characterized some of the worst injustices in our history.

The Police Blotter subverts this basic principle and, by printing the names and arrest information before there has been any legal determination of the allegations, effectively creates a public presumption of guilt that is impossible to overcome regardless of the final resolution of the legal proceeding. In addition, because of the substantial number of arrests that end in either the dismissal or reduction of charges, the publication of arrest records creates an inaccurate, incomplete and misleading picture of actual processes of the criminal justice system or the outcomes for the individuals named.
The publication of a person's arrest can have serious implications for their employment. North Carolina is a so-called "right-to-work" state. Absent a contract or illegal discrimination, an employee can be fired at any time for any reason (or no reason) at all. An employer who sees an employee’s name in the Police Blotter may immediately terminate that employee, despite EEOCguidelines prohibiting that same employer from asking about arrests during the hiring process.
EEOC policy advises employers "conviction records constitute reliable evidence that a person engaged in the conduct alleged, since the criminal justice system requires the highest degree of proof ('beyond a reasonable doubt') for aconviction. In contrast, arrests alone are not reliable evidence that a person has actually committed a crime."
The EEOC also focuses on the discriminatory impacts of policies that exclude job applicants based on arrest or conviction records. In light of the statistical evidence that minorities are arrested and convicted at a disproportionate rate greater than their representation in the general population, the EEOC has held that such policies are unlawful in the absence of a justifying business necessity.
Giventhe significant harms inherent in the Police Blotter column, the only potential justification for printing these arrest reports is to publicly embarrass the individuals named. While we believe we have evolved beyond stocks and scarlet letters, the Police Blotter is in fact a regression to an intolerant and ineffective model of controlling behavior through humiliation. Public shaming is nothing more than moralistic mob justice and is more likely to build anti-social resentment than encourage positive behavior.
These inequities can best be addressed by eliminating the Police Blotter column. If the editors believe that publishing information about police activity or misdemeanor crime statistics have some legitimate journalistic value however, the format should be revised to include only records of criminal convictions, and to omit name, race, age or other personally identifiable information in the reports.
The question isn't whether newspapers have the right to print this information – clearly they do. The question is whether it is right to print it. It is equally clear that is not. This newspaper should stop publishing the Police Blotter.

Response to Mark Dorosin's guest column asking us to stop publishing the Police Blotter has started to trickle in. We have received four responses, and they are split: two supporting the request to end or change the blotter (we call it 'crime notes') and two for continuing it as is.

"Mr. Dorosin is correct," writes one reader. "Publishing an individual's and other personal information in the Police Blotter is nothing less than public shaming. It does not serve justice, it does not protect the public, and it is a defacto declaration for all to read that a person is guilty, never mind the niceties of things like evidence, due process, and outright mistakes, honest though they may be, in wrongfully arresting someone."

"Please keep the Police Blotter," write another reader. "If someone's employment is terminated due to arrest without a conviction that may be unjust, but is another issue. Most arrests likely result from at least a degree of inappropriate behavior. I agree that arrest records sometimes can be interpreted inaccurately, but this is also true for conviction records. Could Mr. Dorosin provide some statistics regarding the percentage of arrests that do not lead to convictions but are dismissed for reasons of convenience, or which led to tragic consequences for the person named? As a resident of Chapel Hill I appreciate knowing what is happening citywide and especially in my neighborhood."

What do you think about this issue? Add your comment to the blog or, if you'd like to see your comment in the newspaper, please send a letter of up to 250 words to editor@nando.com with your name and town or township. Thanks for reading The Chapel Hill News.

Why do you need newspapers when you can go directly to the source, like what we have in Boise?

http://www.adasheriff.org/ArrestsReport/

I think it's a pretty disturbing trend, as well, and it's highly imprudent to jump to conclusions. In the end, however, it's the company's loss. They'll have to go through the time and money to find a replacement, who may not be as good as who they wrongly fired.

I think it's a pretty disturbing trend, as well, and it's highly imprudent to jump to conclusions. In the end, however, it's the company's loss. They'll have to go through the time and money to find a replacement, who may not be as good as who they wrongly fired.

I don't think it should be a part of the public record when an officer mistakes a diabetic for a drug user. A charge is just a charge. Wait for a conviction, and have a conviction blotter or whatever.

We had a police blotter ("Police Beat") in the daily student newspaper at my university. It was one of the most fun things to write, and one of the most read parts of the paper on a daily basis. There was a certain cachet on campus to showing up there--you hadn't really had the full college experience until you'd been in the PB at least once. I spent an entire semester on the paper looking though all the letters to the editor and never once saw one that was raising a complaint about police beat.

If we start cherry picking which arrests are public record and which aren't that leaves it ripe for abuse.

It isn't cherry picking. If you're innocent until proven guilty, the system should prove your guilt before tainting your image.

I was arrested along with 2 friends when I was 17 for criminal trespass (breaking & entering). We were in my friend's mother's house and accidently broke a window. The neighbor called the cops, and because my friend (the son of the home owner) didn't have identification with him and therefore couldn't prove he was her kid (I guess all the pictures were insufficient evidence), they arrested us. Needless to say, when his mom got home she bailed us out and all charges were dropped. I think it's fucked up that my name showed up in the newspaper a few days later, announcing to the whole city and suburbs that I'd been arrested for breaking & entering. Just doesn't seem right. If you're going to print a police blotter, they should at least have a section just under it letting people know when charges are dropped.

I just think there might be bigger implications down the road for not making arrest records public. And if they're public newspapers can print them. That doesn't mean they should though. If anything, I'm in favor of a cultural shift away from it than a legal shift.

Do you honestly think a cultural shift is possible?