U.S. Public Records (USPRS)

PeopleSearches.com - Largest People Search Site in the World

2010-05-19T18:28:00.001-06:00

PeopleSearches.com Demo http://yfrog.us/5n241z
PeopleSearches.com is much more than a search site; People Decision Engine. This is a website with a difference as it helps users to make quality people search. Users get the unique opportunity to search for people and any kind of information related to them. It is easy to make searches in this website. Users need to type the required personal details, in a required form, such as first name; last name or the State.

PeopleSearches.com maintains a high standard database that is a comprehensive store of personal data records, with updated information. With this technologically advanced website, searching has become easy and hassle free. It is much easy to reconnect and even search for personal details of anyone you are looking for, especially for investigative purposes.

PeopleSearches.com is a user-friendly website, where the users are required fill out a form with required information and start the online search. Once this is done-the search is easy. There are more services offered by the website, which includes investigation related services. The website also wishes to provide public record users. This will consist of complete profile of the person, along with public records that are very helping in any kind of background check information.

Through this website, PeopleSearches.com helps people to reunite and also in useful investigative services. Other useful services offered by the website include sex offenders list, criminal records search and also a business search option, using the state-of-the-art database of the website. PeopleSearches.com with its high quality services is truly a revolution in online search technology.About PeopleSearches.com

PeopleSearches.com - is great way to find family, old friends, relatives, and just about anyone! A People Search report includes phone number, address history, age, birthdates, household members, home value, income and more.

For more information about the website and related information visit http://www.PeopleSearches.com
PeopleSearches.com Demo http://yfrog.us/5n241z
http://twitter.com/peoplesearches
http://pplsearch.wordpress.com/

in reference to: People Search and People Finder, Background Checks, Criminal Records (view on Google Sidewiki)

Intelius Blog is Journalism First, Marketing Second

2009-05-14T19:04:00.001-06:00

http://www.peoplesearches.com/news/
Easton at BusinessBlogWire writes a review of the Intelius corporate blog today. Like Easton, I have some quibbles with style (the posts are awfully long). But it's a great example of the kind of "journamarketing" you could be doing.

Intelius helps people get access to public information through personal background checks and other services. They deal with a lot of complicated issues, and the people who work there become experts in that space. So they're using their blog to explain some of those complicated issues. It's really nothing more than journalism. There's no overt sales pitch for Intelius. For example, the blog has entries about what kinds of mistakes you might find in public records -- and whether it's a good idea to publicize the names of people who've received concealed-weapons permits.

You might think this is a silly thing for them to spend time on. But when people want to dig into public records, I'll bet they almost always go online first. So building a repository of information, dedicated to helping people track down public information, will pay off in the long run with more referral traffic and a better online reputation among people who might use Intelius' services.

Information about Intelius, Founded by Naveen Jain

Founded by Naveen Jain, Intelius well known in the information commerce industry helps clients make intelligent decisions about assets, people, and businesses. Intelius applies advanced heuristics to public and publicly-available information, delivering it on-demand and online to consumers and businesses to facilitate a more informed decision-making process in business and life.

Intelius ranks among the top 100 most trafficked Websites, with an average of one million unique visitors daily. The many products and offerings of the company include a set of comprehensive and customizable pre-employment screening services, a consumer-facing people search service, list management, and an award-winning identity theft detection, prevention and insurance service.

Intelius’ background checks have helped consumers make better decisions about the people, businesses and assets in their world, from potential dates to new neighbors.

People search by Intelius, has reconnected thousands of people with friends or relatives with whom they’ve lost touch. In the HR world, Intelius’ employment screening services enable companies to analyze candidates’ professional backgrounds, from drug testing and fingerprinting to criminal records, professional licenses and education verification, plus a best of breed SSN verification service.

These services have helped create leads and confirm data for millions of customers, in addition to giving them peace of mind and the ability to make better decisions by making use of valuable public information. The Intelius executive team consists of IT and Internet professionals, technologists, business providers, and security specialists, and is led by Chairman Bill Owens and CEO Naveen Jain.

Intelius makes security available at multiple levels, including the personal, technological, and operational levels. Intelius also protects customers’ personal names, credit card numbers, and social security numbers. Intelius’ Verisign certificate signals safe and secure web transactions.

Reference: Intelius.com
http://www.peoplesearches.com/news/

AP CEO Tom Curley Discusses Open Government Effort

2009-03-15T17:46:00.002-07:00

Tom Curley, president and CEO of The Associated Press, is one of the news media's foremost advocates for open government and freedom of information.

In 2007 and 2008 he earned national awards for his work on First Amendment and open records issues, and this year he received a national citation for journalistic excellence from the William Allen White Foundation.

In question-and-answer form, he discusses the 2009 Sunshine Week initiative spearheaded by media organizations.

Q. Sunshine Week 2009 marks the fifth year of the national effort to initiate a public dialogue in the United States about the people's right to know. What's different, compared to previous years?

A. I'm sure the Sunshine Week brand and the goals and values behind it are becoming familiar to more people than ever. But for me the biggest payback for five years of intense annual open government teamwork is to get us used to working together on these issues. A united front is the only way we hold down our end of the checks and balances that make the system work. Our progress has been significant because so many grasped the threat to democratic processes.

Q. Upon taking office, President Barack Obama rolled back some of the policies instituted by George W. Bush and promised greater openness and accountability. Do you expect the Obama administration to initiate significant changes in the rules of engagement between the military and the media?

A. There are promising signs that make it seem possible, but we can't assume it will happen. Where the military is engaged in combat, everything it does is expected to serve the mission. We've seen the Pentagon devoting enormous resources to developing doctrines and tactics for turning news reporting in all media into an offensive weapon where possible, or, at least neutralizing any effects of news reporting that are viewed as interfering with the mission. We have to remain ready to evade or challenge such efforts. That's part of our mission. We've reached out to the military and are hopeful we might find important areas of common ground. After all, we both serve the American people.

Q. An Obama administration team has been tasked with the responsibility of writing an "open government" directive that will outline how agencies and departments in the federal government will be more transparent. What concrete idea would you recommend to put teeth into such a directive?

A. Appointing the "chief technology officer" who's supposed to coordinate the writing of that directive would be a good start. But the only thing that will really make all these good intentions effective is a work environment in government in which compliance with open records law carries incentives and rewards for government employees. Right now, even with the good messages coming from the new administration, disclosing information carries only burdens and risks to the agency executive who makes the call on a sensitive request. It still takes courage just to obey the law. That's got to change.

Q. Any movement on calls to Congress to make its records as available to the public as records from the executive branch of government?

A. Not that I'm aware of.

Q: What is the outlook for a federal shield law?

A. The people I talk to say there's a better than even chance a bill will go to the White House this summer. I hope that's true. The legislation as it stands now certainly isn't perfect. I know some in our business are unhappy with the definition of a journalist, and others are unhappy that government should be allowed to define a journalist at all. And there are more if's, and's, and whereas's than any of us would prefer in the provisions that say when the shield is effective. But on balance, I think it would be an acceptable deal for protection we need.

Q. Sunshine Week's government transparency project this year is enlisting journalists, educators and students, openness advocates and others to develop a snapshot of public records that states make available on their Web sites. Is progress being made in opening up government records without legal recourse on the state level?

A. It varies from state to state. The examples to emulate are states like Connecticut that have commissions or ombudsmen to help citizens use open records laws and in some cases mediate disputes before anybody has to go to court. Last year's federal FOIA amendment established the first step for such assistance at the federal level. It won't be up and running for a while, but it will fill an important gap in the ability of ordinary citizens to get information that should be public but which government resists disclosing.

Q. Does a weak economy hinder or help open government initiatives?

A. It certainly adds to the overall angst, but it doesn't have to hinder. The laws already on the books are powerful levers, and together we advocates of open government can speak loudly in persuading governments to abide by those laws. That costs will and energy, but it doesn't have to cost a lot of money.

Q. Any change expected in the media's traditional role as a watchdog of government activity on behalf of the public?

A. None whatsoever. Media businesses may be changing, but their role stays the same.

Reference: Google.AP

(BackgroundCheckDirectories.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (VerifyPeople.com) and (USPRS.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (SecurityInformation.com) and (BestBackgroundCheck.com) and (JobSearchAssistant.com) and (TopBackgroundCheck.com)

Public Backs Criminal Record Checks

2009-01-06T19:29:00.004-07:00

The public overwhelmingly supports criminal record checks on volunteers working with children, Government research shows.

More than 90% of those surveyed said they backed checks on volunteers and a similar percentage said they would be prepared to undergo such checks themselves.

A report last year found red tape and unnecessary criminal record checks were deterring volunteers from coming forward.

The Commission on the Future of Volunteering called on ministers to remove bureaucratic barriers to charity work.

But in a Home Office-commissioned poll, more than 70% asked said they thought checks by the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB), which holds criminal records data, deterred criminals from applying to work with children or vulnerable adults.

A similar proportion thought criminal checks would catch pedophiles and other unsuitable adults trying to get access to children.

But nearly one in five people expressed concerns about how accurate and up-to-date CRB data was.

Figures released last year showed more than 12,000 people found inaccuracies in their CRB files.

The Home Office estimates criminal records checks have prevented more than 80,000 people working with children and vulnerable adults.

Identity Minister Meg Hillier said: "This research clearly destroys the myth that people are put off volunteering by CRB checks. Most people are only too willing to be checked and understand it protects children and vulnerable adults."

Reference: google.com/hostednews/ukpress

(USPRS.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectories.com) and (SocialNetworkingSafety.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (SecurityInformation.com) and (PeopleSearch.hover.com) and (PeopleSearchs.hover.com) and (PeopleSearches.hover.com) and (PeopleSearchers.hover.com)

How to Use a Public Records Database

2008-12-27T07:26:00.001-07:00

When you want to use a public records database, then you will need some basic information. If you are looking for information on a relative, for example, having their birth date, name and even their Social Security number on hand may be a good idea. Any information that you have can be used to find the person that you are looking for, including their date of death, if that is applicable.

What Can I Find the Information?

There are many different things that you can find online using a public records database, including birth and death records, marriage records, current and past addresses and phone numbers. The key to finding the information that you are looking for is knowing a little information about the person and where to look.

Thousands of people have begun using an online public records database to build their family history. You can often find records dating back to the 1800’s in many of the online public records databases, making it an excellent option when you want to find those who you only know by name.

How Do I Begin?

The first thing that you will want to do is find the public records database that you want to use. For many, a free database is the best option, but if you are in a hurry or want to see the results without having to look through several free sites, then you may want to choose to pay for a subscription to a website that offers information on others.

You may also want to check with your state website, especially if you are looking for information on court records or other legal matters. For example, background checks can be completed by entering in the relevant information, such as government issued number or name and birth date, to find out tons of information on the person that you are researching.

Laws and Regulations

Most of the time, if someone has their telephone number listed, then you will easily be able to find current information on them via the Internet. For example, if you are looking for a friend from high school, then you can enter their name into the database and find some matches based on your search criteria. It may be more difficult to find a person if they have been married or have changed their name for another reason.

It is perfectly legal to find information on people who are listed in public directories. If you are serious about finding someone online, then you may simply want to pay for a detective website, where you may be able to find more comprehensive information, provided that you know all of the relevant information that is needed.

Costs

The costs of accessing a public records database will vary from being free to about thirty dollars a month. Many different websites also offer a free trial, so that you will know exactly how to search for the information that you want before your trial is up.

Reference: uspublicrecordssearch.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectories.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (VerifyPeople.com) and (USPRS.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (SecurityInformation.com)

Finding Public Records You Need In No Time

2008-12-27T07:23:00.000-07:00

Finding public records on your own can take hours, or even days, of hard research. By choosing an online service to help you, you can find all of the information that you need within minutes, so that you aren’t stuck at your desk trying to find out whether or not you should hire a new nanny, or who your great, great grandfather’s parents were.

What Do You Need?

The type of website that you choose should be based on what type of specific information that you need. For example, if you want to perform criminal background checks, then you will want to find a website that offers that service for a relatively low fee. You may also need genealogy services, which make finding public records from a long time ago painless and quick.

You may also want to find an old friend’s telephone number or address, which can be done for free on some websites, providing that you know their name and the city that they live in. If you do not know this information, then you will need to use a more advanced and generalized search to look around the nation to find who you are looking for.

You can also use free telephone directories to quickly find the name that goes with a telephone number, to make sure that you want to call them back before you pick up the phone. Finding public records doesn’t have to take all day; it can be fast and easy with the right website.

What Is Public Information For?

Basically, finding public records online can be used in three main ways. First, you can use the information that you find to build a genealogy report, which can be used for generations and generations to come. Second, you can use the information to protect you and your family, for example, when you are hiring a domestic employee. Third, you can use the information to find someone that you have been looking for, such as an old friend from high school.

Lastly, you can use the information that you find to help you hire and screen potential customers, such as someone who wants to lease an apartment, or potential employees to make sure that they are right for your company. Most of the time, you will need a different website for each of these ways of find public records.

Streamlined Content

Unfortunately, most websites that are devoted to helping you in finding public records won’t have all of the services that you need. There are often websites that are devoted to one specific search type, such as genealogy or court documents, but not both. There are the occasional few that can provide you will several different types of information, as long as you pay the fee or membership costs they require.

The good news is that all of these websites are fairly inexpensive, ranging from about two dollars per use to twenty dollars for a month.

Reference: uspublicrecordssearch.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectories.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (VerifyPeople.com) and (USPRS.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (SecurityInformation.com)

The Best Way to Find Divorce Records

2008-12-27T07:20:00.001-07:00

Finding divorce records can be challenging, especially when you don’t know where to look. Luckily, there are several online websites that you can use to find the information that you need, without the hassle of digging through hundreds of files or using several different websites. The process of finding divorce records can be simple and easy when you have the right tools, and a website can be the best tool that you have.

Begin Searching

One of the ways to get started when you want to find divorce records is to simply use your favorite search engine, and type in the person’s name that you are looking for, along with a phrase or word, such as “divorce”. Even though you may not find much like this, it is free, and it may help you find what you are looking for.

You can also use a free site to find some preliminary information, although you will rarely be able to find divorce records in their complete form by using a free, non-government site. If you want to find the easiest, fastest and most accurate results, then you will also need to know some basic information, such as when the divorce may have taken place.

Free Searches

Some free searches will give you exactly what you need when you want to find divorce records, but you need to be prepared to be patient. It may take a little searching to find a free site that actually delivers the documents, without asking you to pay for their services.

Most states list their court records online, but not all do. For example, California has a comprehensive list of the court records that are on file available online, while Arkansas court documents are more difficult to access. A virtual private eye can be the best way to find divorce records online, especially if you are pressed for time and want to see the results of your search quickly.

Paid Searches

Most websites will allow you to do a preliminary search for free, but since you will only use the person’s name for this type of search, there will be several invalid results. The best searches are those that use some other type of identifying criteria, such as name and birth date, or name and government identification number. It is important to remember that, even though it happens rarely, some results will not be accurate.

The best way that you can avoid finding incorrect information when you want to find divorce records online is to make sure the site that you are using is legitimate, and that you have entered the correct information into the search fields. It also helps if you have access to a state or federal website, but since these are limited, this may not always be an option. Finding the information that you need doesn’t have to take days or months when you choose an online service, which will allow you to have the divorce records that you need immediately.

Reference: uspublicrecordssearch.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectories.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (VerifyPeople.com) and (USPRS.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (SecurityInformation.com)

Can You Find Marriage Records Online?

2008-12-27T07:14:00.001-07:00

If you want to find marriage records in a fast, easy and efficient way, then the first place that you may want to look is online. You can easily find marriage records online, especially when you know where to look. There are several reasons why you may want to find this type of information, but perhaps the most important is if you feel as if your spouse or future spouse has been married before, and you want to find out the truth.

Where Do I Look?

You can find marriage records online using a background check, or by searching civil or court documents for a divorce record. Most of the time, you will want to find both the marriage and the divorce records, making a comprehensive search your best option. Luckily, there are many different websites that you can use to find the information that you are looking for.

A reputable site is your best option when you want to find marriage records online, so make sure that you search the Internet for any complaints that have been filed on the website that you want to use. The best websites are those that are relatively inexpensive, and have a large database with information from all of the states.

What is the Cost?

The cost to find marriage records online will vary, depending on the website that you choose to use. You can often perform a one time search for just a few dollars, but if you want more comprehensive results then you may instead choose to buy a month or week long subscription to a website that specializes in background checks.

The main benefit of subscribing to a website to find marriage records online is that you won’t have to worry about paying to perform several searches, which can happen if you are getting the wrong results from each of your searches. Since the cost of subscribing is typically only about ten dollars a month, you don’t have a lot to lose by paying a little more at the beginning of your search, rather than paying a lot by the time you are done.

Can I Verify the Information?

Most of the time, when you find marriage records online, you will also want to make sure that the information that you have found is correct. There are several ways that you can verify the information that you find, and this will be particularly easy if you have some information about the party that you are looking for information on.

Most searches that contain results will also show the government issued identification number and birth date of the person, so as long as you have this information you can simply match it up to make sure that it is correct. If you don’t have this information, then you at least need to know some basic information, such as where the person has lived or their middle name. Any piece of information can be used to find marriage records online, allowing you to find what you need easily.

Reference: uspublicrecordssearch.com

The Internet Age Helps Open Floodgates on Public Records

2008-10-29T16:47:00.004-07:00

The Transparency Train, produced by the Ocean State Policy Research Institute, and the Money Trail, a project of the Rhode Island Statewide Coalition Foundation, are part of a growing number of specialty Web sites across the nation that shine the light on government in a way that was not possible before the advent of the Internet.

The Money Trail rates Rhode Island school districts, cities and towns on their willingness to respond to requests for public records.

The Coventry schools, for example, get a “thumbs down” for a $2,400 estimate they gave The Money Trail to retrieve and reproduce about 300 documents.

Meanwhile, on The Transparency Train, information-seekers may tailor their requests through a powerful search tool, so that asking for “Blue Cross” will pull up links to some 200 contracts in which public money goes to Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Rhode Island.

Requests for public information through The Transparency Train have resulted in 72 open-records complaints filed with the state attorney general, 17 of which have been resolved with the release of the information, according to the Web site’s sponsor, William Felkner, president of OSPRI.

Among other things, the Transparency Train has requested monthly check registers from the cities and towns so that citizens can track spending as it occurs.

Web site development and document preparation does not come cheap. Felkner estimated that OSPRI will have spent about $130,000 on the five-part Transparency Train by the end of the year, all of the funds coming from the private sector.

Harriet Lloyd, project director for The Money Trail, declined to disclose the budget for that Web site, which among other things covers the cost of Web development and legal advice, saying only that it is “substantial.”

With its enormous storage capacity for digital images, the Web can put voluminous amounts of information just a click or two away.

But in Rhode Island, government has not necessarily kept up with the capacity of the Internet — or responded to requests for voluminous public records.

The town clerk’s office in at least one community, Tiverton, does not have a scanner to convert paper records to a digital format, although one is on order.

Lloyd said she doesn’t understand why government agencies don’t make electronic copies of all their records as a part of routine office procedure.

She says there is a “culture of concealment” in Rhode Island that contributes to Rhode Islanders’ cynicism about their government.

RISC plans to have legislation introduced in the General Assembly next year to require government agencies to maintain electronic records, she said.

Lloyd said she is most disturbed by some of the estimated costs cited by agencies for scanning or copying public records.

In Coventry, Schools Supt. Kenneth R. DiPietro initially estimated it would cost $4,500 in clerical time to provide the Money Trail with what he calls an unprecedented volume of information, including hundreds of contracts worth $10,000 or more that run to tens of thousands of pages in their entirety.

He said he lowered the estimate to $2,400 after the School Department’s lawyer told him he could not charge more than $15 an hour, after the first hour.

DiPietro took strong exception to any implication that his department is trying to conceal records. Collective-bargaining agreements, for example, are already posted online.

Meanwhile, the idea for the Transparency Train, launched in July, grew out of a blog maintained by OSPRI founder Felkner in his role as a member of the Chariho Regional School Committee for the last two years.

But Felkner’s zeal in giving the public access to all the information that came his way as a School Committee member ruffled feathers, particularly when he disclosed the substance of ongoing contract negotiations that had taken place behind closed doors.

Reference: projo.com

Taking Control of the Digital World: Technology Has Let Us Reshape Our Lives, But With This Revolution Come Regrets

2008-09-02T16:33:00.002-06:00

This is the final Real Time column, and I'd like to use it to consider what I see as a dominant theme of our digital age, one that's emerged again and again in this year's columns.

That theme is this: Wherever possible, we are taking control of our digital lives. When we see a new gadget or service that offers us greater control, we adopt it with disorienting speed, consigning old ways of doing things to oblivion and refusing to go back to the way things were. By taking control, we're becoming better organized, more efficient and better informed about what interests us. We have many more choices and the kind of power over our time that was the stuff of dreams not so long ago.

But in taking control, we also enter a new world, one in which long-established business models have been rendered useless, and the old social interactions and rhythms of life have been replaced by new ones that aren't fully formed. That's an uneasy feeling, as if everything we took for granted turned out to be built on sand. Moreover, as with so many technological advances, the ability to take control is driving pressure to come along or get left behind.

You can see this change at work in the way we consume information and entertainment, how we shop, and increasingly how we communicate.

For more and more people that's now a portrait of a vanished world.

Once the digital-music revolution gave us the ability to buy single songs (or, too often, to steal them), we took control of how we consume music, rejecting albums and upending the music industry. Once the DVR gave us the ability to find TV shows easily and record them without fussing with videocassettes, we started watching when we pleased; stopped caring which networks a show belonged to and skipped through the ads that pay for free TV.

(And if we missed something, we looked for a streaming clip online the next day.)
Once the Web let us find and read news whenever we wanted to, we turned our back on print papers and the evening news, replacing them with a patchwork of stories derived from a dizzying number of sources, some of which didn't exist just a few years ago.

Many of us now listen to music, watch TV, and find news in radically new ways, and we aren't going back -- it increasingly strikes us as absurd to buy a CD to get one song, stay home at 9 on Thursday nights because that's when a show is first broadcast, or get our news from a single source. Do we care that our choices have thrown whole industries into chaos? Not in the least -- after years of doing things media companies' way, it's our turn. They'll do it our way, or get replaced.

It's not just entertainment. The mall, grocery store and bookstore now compete with Web versions of themselves, ones that let us shop in the middle of the night and have things sent posthaste to our door. We expect all these retailers to compete on price and customer service, to deliver quickly, to take returns, and to do whatever it takes to satisfy us.

How has our growing ability to take control of our digital lives changed us? Has that change been for better, or for worse? Join a discussion8 with me and other Online Journal readers. And it's not just commerce. Once our friends and family knew our phone number and called us on our home phones -- but people who were neither could look us up and do the same. Now we increasingly carry cell phones instead of using landlines, and we don't want our new numbers listed.

We don't see the need, because even though we have phones all the time, we're also reachable via text messages and email and social-networking sites -- and in many situations we're coming to prefer those communications methods to the insistent, one-size-fits-some summons of a ringing phone. Sometimes we don't need to communicate directly at all -- we drop by our friends' Web pages, Facebook profiles or MySpace outposts to get the latest, and update ours so they can do the same.

Soon enough we will take the next communications step, establishing a single link for those who want to get in touch with us. That will cement our control over our personal communications, and we'll decide to be findable again. Those we're close with will be able to reach us most anytime, with their communications funneled to wherever we are in whatever form we choose. Those we don't know will be able to send us a message, but we'll decide what to do with it, and what kind of access to grant.

We've taken control every time we've had a chance to, but not without regrets. We worry that our local paper will disappear, that our mom-and-pop businesses won't be able to compete with Web entities, and that withdrawing into online communities will undermine our real-world neighborhoods. In taking control, we wonder if we're also making a smaller world for ourselves, one in which serendipitous encounters are less likely and our opinions reverberate in online echo chambers of our own choosing.

And as has always been true with technological advances, the ability to take control drives the need to do so. Just as voice mail went from a curiosity to a must-have, cell phones and PDAs have made it so we're increasingly expected to be reachable -- on our own terms, perhaps, but reachable. Soon potential employers will find it odd, and perhaps even suspicious, if we don't have a Web page of our own -- and we'll feel compelled to have one, for fear that otherwise the information about us scattered across the Net will give the wrong impression.

At least within the boundaries of mainstream tastes, those who sample only the TV governed by real-time schedules and the music available in physical stores will find themselves in an also-ran world of limited choices before too long. Add it all together, and those of us who haven't already opted to take control of our digital-era lives will increasingly feel compelled to do so.

To be sure, most of us will be perfectly happy in this new world and glad to have control of it, just as we've been pleased to find alternatives to solicitors' dinnertime phone calls and holiday-shopping crowds and unlabeled videotapes of uncertain age. We'll have regrets, but for the most part we'll be too busy to get caught up in them. And soon enough even those will be softened and erased. We'll be hurtling along to new wonders, and will struggle to remember that things were ever different.

Reference: online.wsj.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (USPRS.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (SecurityInformation.com)

American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia - News Release

2008-08-28T19:44:00.004-06:00

Court Upholds Privacy Advocate’s Right to Post Public Records on Website Judge rules that new law prohibiting dissemination of Social Security Numbers is unconstitutional as applied to website of privacy advocate B.J. Ostergren.

Richmond, VA - Federal Court Judge Robert E. Payne today ruled that Virginia’s new law prohibiting the publication of Social Security Numbers, including those taken from government websites available to the public, is unconstitutional as applied to the website of privacy rights advocate B.J. Ostergren.

In his opinion the judge holds, that the new law, which was passed during the 2008 legislative session, cannot not be used to force Ostergren to remove Social Security Numbers currently on her website. However, the judge has asked for additional briefings from lawyers before deciding how the law might be applied to new information placed on the site.

The ACLU of Virginia represents Ostergren, who runs a website that advocates against making personal information available on the internet. Her website, TheVirginiaWatchdog.com, contains public records obtained from government websites that include the Social Security Numbers of public officials. By posting these documents, Ostergren hopes to prod government policy makers to take action to prevent Social Security Numbers from being posted online.

“No one wants to protect Social Security Numbers more than the ACLU and B.J. Ostergren, but the government can’t carelessly put Social Security Numbers online and then tell the public what they can and cannot do with those numbers,” said ACLU of Virginia Executive Director Kent Willis. “That’s censorship, and the court was quick to recognize that.”

“In the end, it appears this law was passed not for the purpose of protecting Social Security Numbers but to silence a critic of the state’s failure to protect such numbers from identity thieves,” added Willis.

In his opinion, U.S. District Court Judge Robert E. Payne wrote: “It is difficult to imagine a more archetypal instance of the press informing the public of government operations through government records than Ostergren’s posting of public records to demonstrate the lack of care being taken by the government to protect the private information of individuals.”

Under Virginia law, circuit court clerks in Virginia are required to make all land records available on the internet. Land records are made up of deeds and mortgage information, but may also include legal judgments, such as divorce decrees, that contain Social Security Numbers and other personal information. The purpose of Ostergren’s website is to pressure state officials to protect Social Security Numbers by showing how easy it is for her—and anyone else—to obtain them.

ACLU of Virginia Legal Director Rebecca K. Glenberg argued the case for Ostergren. A copy of the judge’s opinion can be found online at http://www.acluva.org/docket/pleadings/ostergren_opinion.pdf.
Contact: Kent Willis, 804/644-8022

Reference: .acluva.org

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (IDTheftdefense.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (USPRS.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (SecurityInformation.com)

The 2008-2009 Talking Phone Book® Is Here, Featuring Pirate Radio 1250 & 930 on the Cover 08-27-2008

2008-08-27T19:41:00.003-06:00

The 2008-2009 Greenville Area Talking Phone Book has hit the streets allowing area residents to get all the information they need in one handy book.

The directory is currently being delivered free of charge to local homes and businesses.

The cover of this year’s phone book features Troy D. and Ellerbe from Pirate Radio 1250 & 930.

The Talking Phone Book is proud to partner with Pirate Radio as they bring the Greenville area another exciting season of ECU Pirate football this fall.

The Talking Phone Book covers Greenville and Pitt County as well as parts of Greene County in one easy-to-use directory.

The Talking Phone Book contains complete white and yellow page telephone listings, ZIP codes in the white AND yellow pages, valuable community information such as a new residents’ guide, area maps, money-saving coupons and much more! The Talking Phone Book also offers users large, easy-to-read print.

The Talking Phone Book is pleased to announce that an electronic version of the directory is now available at talkingphonebook.com. You can view and/or download the book directly to your home or work computer for white and yellow page listings and all the great features found in the printed book at the click of a mouse.

Information is also searchable at talkingphonebook.com. Perfect as a home page, talkingphonebook.com has everything you find in the book and more: - local business and People Searches, e-mail, reverse phone number search, web searches, local weather and more!

Additional copies of The Talking Phone Book are available at the Greenville-Pitt County Chamber of Commerce office in Greenville.

About White Directory Publishers, A Division of Hearst Holdings, Inc.: White Directory is one of the largest U.S. based independent publishers of print and online yellow pages directories in the country. Shaping an industry since 1968, White Directory has been publishing the nationally-known, award-winning Talking Phone Book for 40 years and continues to connect buyers and sellers through its multi-media suite of print and digital products. The Company publishes nearly 80 directories in 11 states as well as providing Internet yellow pages, SEM, video and direct marketing solutions for its advertisers. Acquired by the Hearst Corporation in 2004, White Directory also publishes 12 books under the Area-Wide brand in Texas.
For more information, visit http://www.talkingphonebook.com/

Reference: carolinanewswire.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (SecurityInformation.com)

Guide to People Search: Search for people -- and Find them -- with Powerful People Search Services

2008-08-22T18:03:00.002-06:00

People search services help you find people online. With the click of a button, people search sites can connect you with long lost friends and family members, not to mention undiscovered peers, partners and, of course, employees. For business owners, the result is a dynamic tool that allows them to not only search for people, but also to research, meet and build relationships with them. The potential is truly powerful.

Among the possibilities:
1. Use people search services to perform employee reference and background checks.
2. Use people search engines to track down sales prospects and business contacts.
3. Use people search sites to research customers and study clients.
4. Use free people search services to update your Rolodex and address book.
5. Use people search to gather intelligence about competitors and colleagues.

Action Steps
The best contacts and resources to help you get it done

Start your people search via online phone directories

The most basic of people search services, online phone directories are virtual White Pages where you can look for publicly listed names, phone numbers and addresses.

I recommend: Online phone directories perfect for people search purposes include WhitePages.com, Yahoo! People Search, Dex and Switchboard.

Search for folks by name using dedicated people search engines

People search engines specialize in people search services and function as online databases where you can quickly and easily find public information.

I recommend: Popular, and free, people search engines include ZabaSearch and ZoomInfo.

Use reverse search to do a people search with limited information

A reverse search enables one to perform a people search with as little as a phone number and produce the name and address that's associated with it.

I recommend: You can do a reverse people search at Google by simply typing a phone number into the search engine. Try typing in an e-mail address, too.

Take your people search to social networks with social search

An emerging class of people search engines specializes in helping you search for people via their profiles on popular social networks.

I recommend: Free people search sites like Spock, Wink, Ziki, PeekYou.com, Pipl and Rapleaf offer people search engines that look for people in all the usual places, as well as on social networking sites.

Search for people via paper trails using public records searches

If you're after government records such as court documents, property deeds or vital records, including marriage and death certificates, consult people search sites that specialize in public records.

I recommend: You can do a people search of government records at USA.gov or SearchSystems.net. If you're after criminal records, which aren't widely available online, you'll need to commission a company like Intelius to do a background search for you.

Find servicemen and women using military people search sites

If you're looking for someone who has served or is serving in the military, you can do so using special military-themed people search engines.

I recommend: Do a free people search for members of the military via Military.com's Buddy Finder.

Do a people search in the blogosphere via blog search engines

Because blogs are tagged with search terms, you can use them to search for people; you can search blogs for their authors, sponsors and subjects.

I recommend: Popular blog search engines where you can search for people are Technorati, Blogdigger and BlogPulse.

Tips & Tactics
Helpful advice for making the most of this Guide
The more information you have when you start your people search, the more information you'll produce at the end of it.

Keep in mind that the information generated by people search services isn't always current; in fact, it's often dated.

You might not be able to access personal information in your people search like birth certificates, credit scores, medical histories or other private records without showing proof of identification, getting written consent from the subject or paying a fee.

Consider testing people search services with your own name before using them to ensure that the information they produce is accurate.

Reference: business.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (People-Searches.com) and (PPLSearches.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com)

Interview with Jeff Tinsley, Reunion.com

2008-08-21T21:16:00.003-06:00

Interview with Jeff Tinsley, Reunion.com

Jeff Tinsley is CEO and Founder of Reunion.com (www.reunion.com), which provides an online service to find and reconnect with people. We spoke with Jeff last week to catch up on the company, and hear about how it's doing. Jeff filled us in on the huge growth the company has been seeing, the impressive revenue numbers, and how the firm's services compete against social networking sites like Facebook and others.

For the readers who aren't familiar with Reunion.com, what does the company do and what is its business?

Jeff Tinsley: It's a pretty simple story. At our core, we're really a people search service, which provides the best people search service on the Internet. We help people track down people they've lost in their lives. The simple fact is everyone loses touch with people as you get older. You naturally lose touch with people that you care about as you move, change jobs, get married, and have other life changing events. We are actually attracting an enormous, older audience of people who use us to track down others they've lost in their lives, and want to pull them back into their lives. We're able to do that for them, by searching all across the web--all the public records and different social networks--and get them back in touch, and keep them connected so you don't lose touch again with them. At the core, we're the best people search service out there. It's a simple idea, we're just unique around the data we pull together, and because we search everywhere. We're also very unique because we help you find people, and also notify when you when we find those people, and when people are looking for you. Plus, we've really got a business here--our audience is fortunately willing and able, to pay for this very great content and services, and we're doing extremely well as a business.

What's with the growth you are seeing--what's driving that?

Jeff Tinsley: We have more than 40 million registered users, and we're adding 1.6M new registered users a month. That's more than Facebook is even adding in the United States a month. But, we're not getting talked about like Facebook. We've really stumbled onto something big with the people search, and also drawing an older--and more valuable--audience. New registrations are enormous, and the visitation to the site is picking up strong as well. We hit the top 100 for the first time in the Comscore numbers in May, jumping to number 90. And, we jumped to number 78 when the June numbers came out. We think our numbers will be even stronger in July.

I understand that you've got some quite healthy revenues and profits?

Jeff Tinsley: We are doing great. This year, we will generate more than $50M in revenue. Our plans show that we'll soon hit more than $100M, and do so very profitably. At $100M we'll be generating somewhere around $30M plus in profits.

It seems you might have lots of competition from Facebook, other social networking web sites. How has that affected your business?

Jeff Tinsley: The major difference is our audience is almost inverse of the Facebook audience. If you look at who our users are, 65 percent of them are over 35. That's the complete opposite of Facebook. Using the Quantcast numbers, only 19 percent of Facebook's audience is over 35. We do people search better than anyone else, and because we search everywhere, that gives us a real advantage. Facebook only allows you to search the Facebook audience. While globally they have a large audience, in the U.S. they only have 30-40M people. We are searching half a billion records. Facebook is only searching a closed audience--while we are searching everywhere on the web for people, which is an important difference, and our difference from any social network out there. Because of that, we can provide a better service. Plus, we have an older audience none of the others are attracting. People search services are sort of an on-ramp to the older audience to get them involved in social networking.

It's unusual in that you have both advertising and subscriptions in your business model, can you talk about your strategy there?

Jeff Tinsley: its ninety percent subscriptions. We love that. You can't just pull that off if you're a Facebook, and reaching a really young audience. Our audience, fortunately, can afford to spend a small amount of dollars, as little as $5 a month, to become part of the service. If you've got the content and services, and with this audience, you have a beautiful business model. It's not reliant on advertising, which happens to be fickle. Advertising in social networks has really been hit by the change in advertising rates, and what they're able to generate from advertising sales. We're not subject to that same kind of shift. It's a beautiful model if you can pull it off. We have nearly a million active, paying subscribers.

Do you get much competition from other people search services on the web?

Jeff Tinsley: They're all very different. Some are directories, others as white pages. They've all got a certain set of data. If you want to look up a phone number or address, you might go to one. If you want a background check, there are sites that do that. The majority of our activity is from consumers looking for friends and family. We're the place that people go for that. We have more than 260 million public records, and search more than half a billion social profiles. A lot of those other guys take very different approaches, usually around a very specific set of data, or a specific model for background information. Ours is more social in nature, you have a profile, and you can search on profiles. We also have other services that go along with our search, whereas something like a white pages you just go and then leave. With our service, you type in all the people you are looking for and we follow up with them when we find them. We also let you know on an ongoing basis, if someone is looking for you.

Took some venture capital in April of last year, what did that go towards?

Jeff Tinsley: That was really our Series A; it was a big round--probably the biggest Series A in a social network. However, we fortunately had started this awhile ago, and grown it little by little, profitably. We had made a lot of progress, and we raised capital not because we needed it, but because we wanted to accelerate our business. That's gone really well. We used that capital to reach more customers, improve our data, and our products and services. The business is now generating lots of cash.

Having done build companies before, what have you learned on making a company successful?

Jeff Tinsley: I'm an investor in a lot of companies. The thing I see with entrepreneurs is they don't think about all of the pieces they need to make a business successful. Some just think about how to make a product great. Some just think about how to reach their customer, and other just about how to make money. You need all three pieces to be successful. From day one, we've always been working on how to get more customers into the service, and we've been different because we actually spend money to attract them, and are always investing in the product to make it better. The business fortunately, has worked very, very well. You've got to have all three of those pieces to be successful in business, and we've been focused on all three of those things from day one.

Reference: socaltech.com

(BestPeopleSearchService.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com)

Sleuthing Sites

2008-08-17T09:34:00.007-06:00

Here are a few sites modern day sleuths may use:

Court records, jail records, corporate records, and more.

1. Free Public Records Finder: Search free public records by state, view corporate records, court records, criminal records and more on this site.
2. Net-Investigation.com: Search by state to look up court records on almost anyone. This site also provides a background check crash course and tutorials for how to find the most relevant information.
3. Public Record Finder: Finds free public records using the largest public records search database on the World Wide Web.
4. Public Record Directory: Finds free public vital and cell phone records using the largest public records reverse search detective database on the World Wide Web.
5. Dates and Love: Run a background check, reverse cell phone number lookup, employee screening or people search on this site for free.

Criminal Background Checks
1. Detective Unlimited: This site connects users to a free version of the Intelius service. Results bring up addresses, lawsuits, sex offender information, property ownership, relatives, neighbors, marriage records and more.
2. Public Records Information: Search by state and county on this site and get links to investigation records, judicial organizations, sex offender registries and more.
3. Prison Inmate Search - Search for a prison inmate, prison records, offender records and sexual predators at Federal Prisons, State Prisons and County Jails

Sex Offender Sites
1. National Sex Offender Registry: The family watchdog on this site directs users to a search by location or search by name.
2. FBI Crimes against Children: Click on a state to conduct a sex offender search from the FBI’s website.
3. MapSexOffenders.com: There are over 300,000 sex offenders listed in this database. You can view maps of the offenders and search by name.
4. National Sex Offender Public Registry: On this site, you can type in a name, zip code, county or city to perform your search. Results include a photo, names and aliases used by the offender, registration information and address.
5. Free Sex Offenders Search: Perform a sex offender lookup by state and get public access to criminal records and jail records.
6. SexOffender.com Database Search: Look up sex offenders and anyone who has a history or record of violent behavior towards children.
7. US-Sex-Offenders.com: This site can search information and addresses for sex offenders in 27 different U.S. states.

Contact Information
Verify addresses and other contact information
1. White Pages: Online People Search destination, with more than 180 million people searchable in our databases.
2. Free Address Lookup: Browse by state or just type in a name to find out where someone lives in the U.S.
3. The Search Advisor: Search the U.S. database on this site to find missing people, do a quick address verification or find your birth family.
4. Addresses.com: This website offers a White Pages search, Yellow Pages search, cell phone caller ID and e-mail lookup.
5. AnyWho: To find a person or a business through this site, you need to type in their land line phone number.
6. MelissaDATA: You can verify and look up addresses on this website, which prompts you to type in a street address, zip code or city.
7. PhoneNumber.com: Conduct a people search or business search on this site, where you can find and verify addresses and phone numbers.
8. Superpages.com: Look up addresses, phone numbers and e-mail addresses on Superpages.com.
9. 411.com: At 411.com, search the white pages or yellow pages, do a reverse phone number check, reverse address check, look up an area or zip code and more.
10. Driver’s License Search: Find court records and driving records by looking up your applicant’s driver’s license here.

PeopleSearches.com
1. Zaba Search: This free people search and public information search engine features search options by name, phone number or social security number.
2. Free Public Records Directory: Find death records, court records, marriage and divorce records and a lot more on this “absolutely free” site.
3. Yahoo! People Search: Conduct a U.S. phone and address search, reverse phone number check or e-mail search here.
4. Bigfoot: Find individuals or businesses through this site, which can reveal e-mail addresses, phone numbers, addresses and more.
5. Peek You: Peek You is “the smartest way to find people online.” You can find out if someone has any risque pictures or information on their online profiles, on any site.
6. pipl: Brings up social networking profiles, public records, mentions on blogs and the Web

Reference: fictionway.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (OnlineProfilesSearch.com) and (USPRS.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com)

Spock Co-Founder Finds Vertical Search Engines 'Fascinating'

2008-08-11T17:50:00.002-06:00

"Nowhere am I so desperately needed as among a shipload of illogical humans." --Spock in "I, Mudd." The same can be said of the search engine market these days, which is why Jay Bhatti, co-founder of Spock, loves his company's business model.

Spock: the Web site search engine and not "Star Trek's" famous Vulcan -- claims is has more than 14 million site users and 5 million monthly visitors. As a former Microsoft employee, Bhatti told InformationWeek that knowing the target audience is paramount to growing the business, which is why Spock focuses on people and not on everything (read: Google).

"When you look at the statistics, 30% of all searches are for people," Bhatti said. "It's a huge category, to be sure, but one where we know the traffic will be."

Launched a little more than a year ago, Spock isn't reeling in the page views, about 150 thousand to 200 thousand searches per day, Bhatti said. But the partnerships are making up for organic traffic. The company is actively pursuing contracts that allow it to be the "Search Powered By" choice for content players.

"Very similar to how Google started, we feel that search is ultimately about people, which is where our strength lies," Bhatti said.

For example, someone reading about famed General Motors CEO Jack Welch in the The Wall Street Journal could use an external search engine to find more information, but Spock (and certainly the WSJ) would rather readers keep within the paper's Web sphere of influence.

In addition to site search partnerships, Spock allows individuals to pad their own profiles with keywords. The company said it has indexed upwards of 300 million unique people with more than 10 billion data elements. My Spock search result looks a bit like my LinkedIn profile, except that I populated Spock with my own list of common keywords. I still end up on the third or fourth page no matter which search engine I use, (sigh).

A recently added feature to Spock is a blue band of suggested Titles, Organizations, and Locations. The list is handpicked based on a group of Spock's editors, which Bhatti said are used with all of the search engines.

"One thing we found is people may have a hard time figuring out what to type in a search bar. So we're helping them by suggesting a location or organization and get them started," Bhatti said. "It's just a random sampling that changes every once in awhile. It's not done by popularity but it's a way for our algorithm to stay relevant given the challenges of people searches with pictures."

To avoid spoofing someone's identity, Bhatti said Spock relies on known and trusted reference materials before populating the search with a photo.

Another challenge for people searches is the category someone might have. For example, a search for Boxer may end up with boxing champ Mohammed Ali as the top hit or California Senator Barbara Boxer. Bhatti said Spock's 30 employees (mostly scientists) are in the process of asking Web searchers to hone in their queries. "Did you mean boxer the sport or person," may be a preliminary result in the near future, Bhatti said.

On the horizon, Spock is expected to augment its people searches to social networks in the upcoming months. Spock currently has partnerships with MySpace, Friendster, Microsoft's LiveSpaces, and Bebo, but not the ever-elusive Facebook. This may change as the social network begins to open up its profiles to other sites.

Reference: informationweek.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (PicturePeopleSearch.com)

Is Your Private Data on Display? County Records on Web Pose a Threat

2008-08-06T09:14:00.002-06:00

Ken Klamerus of New Boston had known the Internet held a trove of information, but he didn't expect to see his Social Security number pop up.

"I really felt violated," he said after discovering his Social Security number and other personal data on Wayne County's online records.

Last September, Michigan legislators passed a law preventing county clerks from accepting new records with identifying information such as Social Security numbers.

But the law does not affect records filed before last year.

Many residents of Wayne County and elsewhere are unaware, but some public records containing Social Security numbers, salaries, birth dates and other important identifier information have been on the Web since 2000, said Bernard Youngblood, Wayne County clerk.

The Free Press is not identifying the most vulnerable records to avoid providing a road map to potential identity thieves.

The number of Wayne County records containing Social Security numbers is estimated in the hundreds of thousands. "Years ago, it was common practice to include Social Security numbers," said Christine McLenon, chief deputy for the Wayne County clerk. "No one knew about identity theft."

Wayne County officials said they have not developed a comprehensive plan to redact vulnerable information from older records. They say, however, they are weighing the costs of a computer program, like that used in Macomb County, that scrubs Social Security numbers from online documents.

'A real urgency for security'
Identity theft is one of the fastest growing crimes in the United States, according to the Social Security Administration. The Federal Trade Commission estimates that each year as many as 9 million Americans become identity theft victims, to the tune of $50 billion in losses.

Times have changed, and some agencies don't always keep up. Wayne and Oakland counties' online records still contain Social Security data.

Macomb County officials hired Affiliated Computer Services Inc., last year to electronically redact Social Security numbers online. The county paid about $485,000 to check more than 4.8 million documents.

"I believe there is a real urgency for security," said Carmella Sabaugh, Macomb County clerk.

Ruth Johnson, Oakland County's clerk, said she had also considered electronic redaction for Oakland records, but that the numbers used to identify land parcels in Oakland are too similar to Social Security numbers for the system to be effective.

The county has taken other measures, she said.

Johnson said Oakland County records from March 2006 to the present have been redacted of Social Security numbers.

Previous numbers are removed on an individual basis when residents file an affidavit seeking redaction.

Clerks also try to catch Social Security numbers before they get in the system.

"We have a decades-old policy of notifying people if their Social Security number is in a document," said Jim VanLeuven, Oakland's deputy clerk.

Blindsided by technology
Wayne County has taken no measures so far, but Youngblood said he has been talking to vendors to gauge the viability and cost of electronic redaction. He could not provide an estimate of the cost or the number of documents that would be affected.

Youngblood said the state law adopted last year also allows Wayne County residents to file an affidavit to have their Social Security numbers redacted from earlier documents.

Klamerus, the resident who saw his Social Security number online, said he had not been able to get past answering machines at the Wayne County Clerk's Office.

But he said a friend who called received another version: It was impossible for the numbers to be online because they had already been redacted.

Wayne County resident Cheryl Huntley said she had no idea her private information was online, let alone that she had to file an affidavit to have it removed. Huntley found out her Social Security number was online when a Free Press reporter called.

"I know nothing about computers," said Huntley of Belleville. "How could I know that this stuff is on there?"

'Sold and sold again'
Last year, Michigan lawmakers considered requiring Social Security numbers to be redacted from all records, said Phil Browne, chief of staff for Rep. Brian Palmer, R-Romeo. But officials concluded that would be logistically difficult because of the volume of records and changes in filing practices. No such bills are being considered. That leaves the onus on individual counties.

Macomb and Oakland have taken some steps, but Wayne County's system still relies on individuals discovering their Social Security number online and filing an affidavit.

Unfortunately, even an affidavit does not guarantee security, Youngblood said.

For years, companies have been culling private information from public records and selling it.

"These documents probably have been sold to a variety of different title companies across the country, to be resold and sold and sold again," he said.

Youngblood said no criminal charges have been filed as a result of stolen Social Security numbers from Wayne County public records, but says weaknesses in the system.

And that's what has Klamerus concerned.

"This is private information," Klamerus said. "It should not be out in the public."

Reference: freep.com

(PrivatePublicRecords.com) and (NonPublicRecords.com) and (PublicDomainInformation.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Court: Some Teacher Records Exempt From Public

2008-08-03T22:07:00.002-06:00

The state Supreme Court ruled today that school districts do not have to disclose the names of teachers who have unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct made against them.

In a 6-3 decision, the court found that releasing the names would violate the privacy exemption of the state's Public Disclosure Act.

School districts still must release records related to unsubstantiated cases so the public can judge how school districts handled allegations of sexual misconduct, the court said. "The identities of the accused teachers will simply be redacted to protect their privacy interests," Justice Mary Fairhurst wrote for the majority.

Names of teachers must be disclosed only in cases where sexual misconduct has been found or some form of discipline has taken place, Fairhurst wrote.

The ruling drew a stinging dissent written by Justice Barbara Madsen, who declared, "It is important to bear in mind that unsubstantiated does not mean untrue."

Madsen said the public will not have access to information necessary to determine whether school districts satisfactorily deal with allegations of sexual misconduct.

"As a consequence, predatory teachers may go undetected and unpunished," Madsen wrote.

The case stems from a 2003 investigative project by The Seattle Times that found 159 coaches in Washington were fired or reprimanded for sexual misconduct, ranging from harassment to rape.

The Times report found that school districts often failed to investigate complaints against coaches, and didn't report them to law enforcement or the state education office.

While researching the series, The Times filed public-disclosure requests with Seattle, Bellevue, Federal Way and seven other school districts for records relating to allegations of teacher sexual misconduct in the past 10 years.

The Times argued that regardless of the outcome of an investigation, the names of teachers alleged to have committed sexual misconduct was of legitimate public interest.

The newspaper's request was challenged by 37 teachers.

A King County Superior Court judge found that the districts must only disclose the names of teachers whose alleged misconduct was substantiated, resulted in discipline or if a district's investigation was inadequate.

A state appeals court overturned most of the decision, ruling that districts could only withhold records relating to teacher sexual misconduct when the allegation was "patently false."

In today's ruling, the majority said, "Making a distinction between 'unsubstantiated' and 'patently false' is vague and impractical."

The appeals court provided little guidance on what should be deemed false as opposed to unsubstantiated, the court said.

"When an allegation is unsubstantiated, the teacher's identity is not a matter of legitimate public concern," Fairhurst wrote.

The adequacy of an investigation should not affect a teacher's right to privacy, because the accused has no control over the investigation, she added.

Madsen, in her dissent, wrote that teachers do not have a right of privacy because allegations of sexual misconduct fall within their public duties. The allegations do not involve intimate details of their private lives, as required by law, she wrote.

Madsen said the court's ruling will allow school districts to manipulate investigations to avoid disclosure of teacher names.

"A school district can effectively control whether an accused teacher's identity must be released by reaching an agreement with the teacher exchanging resignation for silence," Madsen wrote.

Chief Justice Gerry Alexander joined the majority, along with Justices Susan Owens, James Johnson, and Bobbe Bridge. Justice Tom Chambers also signed the majority opinion, but wrote that he agreed "in result only," with no further comment.

Madsen's dissent was joined by a Justices Charles Johnson and Richard Sanders.

Toby Nixon, president of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, blasted the decision in a written statement.

"This is yet another example of exemptions to public records disclosure being created by the courts rather than by the legislature," Nixon said. "School districts often hide evidence of patterns of misbehavior by teachers, coaches, and staff to avoid lawsuits.

It's one thing to expunge allegations shown to be false from a teacher's record, but we know from sad experience that where there's smoke there's usually fire — and now parents will have a harder time becoming aware of continuing patterns of accusations."

As part of the ruling, the majority also found that school districts do not have to release the names of teachers who received letters of direction, or guidance, when the letter doesn't identify an incident of substantiated misconduct and no discipline or restriction is imposed.

Reference: seattletimes.nwsource.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com)

Keep Searching

2008-07-28T02:53:00.002-06:00

Anna Patterson was one of Google's star engineers until she left in December 2006 to seek out something new. Venture capitalist friends gave her a curious suggestion: talk to your husband.

Unbeknown to Patterson, her husband, Tomàs Costello, had been building a start-up between car pool runs for the couple's three (now there are four) children. Even more surprising, Costello was building a search engine to compete with Google .

"I thought he was basically a stay-at-home dad," says Patterson, 43.

"I couldn't tell her, because in some ways, I was working against her," says Costello, 39, who previously worked at IBM and then at Stanford University as a research professor. (Both hold doctoral degrees in computer science.)

Weeks later, the two teamed up with the goal of creating a super-efficient Web crawler that would seek out vast parts of the Web that go untouched by the big players, and analyze what those pages are about. The pair has raised $33 million in venture funding from Madrone Capital Partners, Tugboat Ventures and Greylock Partners.

Their search engine, called Cuil, debuts Monday. That's Irish for wisdom (and is pronounced "cool"). It displays long descriptions of each search result, alongside images, scattered across the entire page. "We want you to be able to tell if that's really the page you were looking for," says Costello.

Cuil will pull results from 120 billion Web pages, which is, it claims, roughly three times the reach of Google, Yahoo! or Microsoft. Is that nearly all of the Web? "We think it's close, but we've learned the Web is larger than we thought," says Costello.

Patterson and Costello's impressive feat is that they've done this with a total of 1,400 eight-CPU computers (1,000 find and data-mine Web pages, the remaining 400 serve up those pages), while the big search services have warehouses of servers numbering in the many thousands.

Cuil attempts to see relationships between words and to group related pages in a single server. Patterson says this enables quicker, more efficient searching: "While most queries (at competitors) go out to thousands of servers looking for an answer, 90% of our queries go to just one machine."

Patterson and Costello believe this yields more insightful results. "We aren't a popularity contest," says Costello, knocking Google's well-known "PageRank" method, which counts not just relevance of a page but the number of other sites linking to it.

Cuil pays scant attention to the links but aims to do a better job with relevance. "Two pages about bonsai trees might be linked to each other, but that doesn't mean either of them is any good. The sites have to be talking about the right concepts to rank high with us," says Patterson.

A big part of Cuil's selling proposition is privacy. The established, big-name search firms look at which pages people click on, both to judge which are useful pages and, increasingly, to target advertising. Cuil disavows the latter goal.

If the link in the bottom right hand of the page gets all the traffic, Cuil might bump it up (as would Google), but it doesn't keep track of any particular user's history. "We don't care about what you've looked at in the past, and whether that might make you attractive to advertisers," says Costello.

Patterson adds that Cuil won't need Google's army of lawyers to answer subpoenas. If a prosecutor wants to know whether a murder suspect was searching for articles about poisons, it can say it doesn't know.

As Cuil's servers began pinging the hinterlands of the Web, it instantly heard back. One full-time staffer is managing the e-mail flows from pleasantly surprised Web site owners (and spammers). "We get a lot of people thrilled that they're getting attention from our servers. They suddenly feel relevance they didn't before," says Costello.

Firms big and small have struggled to make a dent in Google's massive market share. Costello and Patterson are quick to say they didn't build Cuil to be a Google-killer. Instead, they want to spark competition in search that has been lacking. "Yahoo! and Microsoft have tried to beat Google by being Google. It hasn't led to more choice in search," says Costello.

Patterson and Costello have lured two important engineers away from Google. Russell Power, a Cuil co-founder, was a lead engineer on Google's largest index, called TeraGoogle. Louis Monier, vice president of products, led Google's shopping infrastructure, and before that, built up eBay's search technology. He has a Ph.D. in math and computer science from Paris Orsay University.

Cuil's founders are quick to point out that there will be kinks: "Sometimes our results are more useful, sometimes less, and sometimes completely wacky," says Patterson. "This is a launch. It's the beginning, not the end."

To try out Cuil, go to Cuil.com

Reference: forbes.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (USPRS.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (People-Searches.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com)

People-Search Engines Try to Be More Specific Than Google

2008-07-24T08:14:00.002-06:00

Locate a long-lost friend or old classmate. Get dirt on a potential hire.

These are just a couple of the uses of an emerging group of search engines that find information about people.

Rather than scouring the entire Internet, these search engines troll only Web sites that are rich with personal information. The results they provide are individual profiles coupled with links to where users can find more details.

The goal is to cut through the clutter that Google and other general-purpose search engines sometimes offer when users enter the name of a friend, co-worker or celebrity. Internet users will flock to people-search upstarts, their founders hope, to get more-relevant information more quickly.

"The ways people want to find one another are increasingly moving online," said Michael Tanne, chief executive of Wink, a people-search engine that premiered in March. "A service like ours can give you a bead on the person you're looking for - 'Oh, they live in Santa Cruz' - or about the person you're interviewing with for a new job."

Enter the name of tennis star Roger Federer into a people-search engine, for instance, and you are likely to get a profile of him as the top result that includes photographs, a brief biography and links to some other Web sites about him.

For a lesser-known individual, the results can be hit-or-miss. A query of the average company vice president may fail to return a photograph and biography, but instead point to that person's resume on the LinkedIn business networking site.

Users can also search by attribute, like Scientologist, to get a list of individuals identified online as being part of that religion.

In addition to Wink, in Los Altos, there's Spock, unveiled this month to great fanfare. The Redwood City company received so much attention on its first day that its servers were overloaded and nearly ground the Web site to a halt.

Pipl, PeekYou and WikiYou are also in the people-search mix, though they feature far smaller indexes and therefore more-spotty results. ZoomInfo, a people-search engine focused on the business world, is a relative industry veteran, founded in 2001.

A central question is whether people-search engines are useful enough to steal a significant number of users from the general-purpose sites. Even challengers that focus on a particular niche have a poor track record.

Sapna Satagopan, an analyst for JupiterResearch, agreed that finding information about individuals - aside from celebrities - can be difficult on Google and its rivals. But she questioned whether there is enough room for all of the people-search engines that are trying to dominate the niche.

"I'll still go to Google and another search engine," Satagopan said. "But I don't need to go to three of them."

In general, people-search engines plan to make money from advertising. For now, their efforts are mostly limited to a few search-engine-style ads, although the executives behind the companies say that more-ambitious types of advertising are planned.

ZoomInfo is an anomaly in that it charges subscriptions for a souped-up version of its service that is aimed at recruiters and marketers.

People-search engines cull their information from Wikipedia, MySpace, LinkedIn, Friendster, various blogging services and other public sources. But the fact that they are offering up only public information hasn't insulated the engines from problems.

Lists of keywords, or tags, that the engines automatically generate for individuals, based on what's online about them, are sometimes unflattering. Someone who has written about child abuse, for example, may be linked with the tag "pedophile."

In addition, the information the search engines provide isn't always reliable. The results occasionally include fake profiles or profiles of people who are only tangentially related to a query.

"People say they are George Bush or Superman," said Jaideep Singh, chief executive of Spock. "It's an ongoing battle."

Filtering has removed many fake profiles from the service, he said, though he acknowledged that some still slip through.

People-search engines invite users to become members, which opens the door to additional participation. Users who sign up can "claim their profile" and edit the information it contains.

Allowing users to add biographical information, images or tags is supposed to give them a chance to project a more complete image of themselves to the world. It also does the job of improving the Web site's quality.

Policies for removing inaccurate or embarrassing material vary. Spock allows users to vote down an image or tag so that it isn't as prominent. Users also can flag an item for the Web site's staff to review and remove.

Wink allows users to edit information themselves. Users also can have their profile removed entirely by contacting Wink through its customer feedback system.

For now, traffic to people-search engines is relatively light. ZoomInfo reported 895,000 unique U.S. users in July, while Wink had 90,000, according to comScore Media Metrix. Neither site even approached 1 percent of Google's 124 million visitors during the month.

Third-party numbers for Spock weren't available. However, the company claims do be outdoing the rest of the field with more than 1 million unique visitors during the first few weeks that its Web site was publicly available.

The executives operating people-search engines also say that their services, as they are, are a far cry from what they'll be like in the future. The Web sites will offer users more profiles that feature additional kinds of information such as video from more sources.

"In six months," said Singh, of Spock, "it's going to be a different story with how much content is on the site."

People-search engines
Looking for an ex? Planning a family reunion? Anyone owe you money? Try out these free search sites:

-- Spock ( www.spock.com)

-- Wink ( www.wink.com)

-- Zoominfo ( www.zoominfo.com)

What they do
Rather than scouring the entire Internet, these search engines look only at Web sites rich with personal information, like Wikipedia, MySpace, LinkedIn and Friendster. The results they provide are individual profiles coupled with links to where users can find more details.

Reference: sfgate.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (FreeSocialSearch.com) and (FreeSocialNetworking.com)

Secrecy Prevails in Legislature

2008-07-24T07:21:00.002-06:00

North Carolina residents who believe in access to public information (and we'd like to think that's all of us) have reason to feel disappointed about the General Assembly's recent session.

Not only did the cause of transparent and accountable government fail to advance, it actually lost some ground.

A group of well-meaning but overly fearful legislators wanted to clamp down on information about children in publicly sponsored recreation leagues.

They had the idea that exempting this material from state public records law would prevent sex predators from combing through names looking for potential victims - a scary scenario that even the bill's proponents admitted had never taken place in real life.

The more likely outcome would involve making it more difficult for local newspapers to publish a photo of a young athlete getting a base hit or scoring a goal without the caption underneath reading as if the National Security Agency composed it.

After the bill initially cleared the House, however, Gaston County's David Hoyle rationally pointed out the flaws to his colleagues during a speech on the Senate floor. A few other senators rose to concur.

The final version that passed both House and Senate does not exempt the information from the public records law, but it does give local officials the power to deny requests - which almost certainly means that sooner or later, someone will exercise this power without good reason.

A solution in search of a problem usually creates actual problems.

On the other hand, a different piece of legislation aimed to address a situation in true need of fixing. Hoyle filed a bill to restore the requirement that government agencies successfully sued for public records violations pay the plaintiffs' legal bills. The reasoning is both simple and sensible.

Governments tend to have much deeper pockets (meaning yours) than the private citizens and organizations behind these lawsuits.

Without the guarantee of taking a larger financial hit if they lose, public bodies have less incentive to follow the rules and keep themselves out of court in the first place.

Unfortunately, the bill failed to pass the full General Assembly by the time the short session adjourned. For the time being, governments can continue rolling the dice on attorney fees.

This situation actually is more like a stalemate, but we consider it a setback. Open government needs to do more than simply maintain its position, because secrecy doesn't have a long session or a short session.

It remains a constant threat, so a failure to advance against it at every opportunity essentially signals a retreat.

When legislators reconvene in January, let's hope that your right to know what the government does in your name and with your money gains ground.

Reference: jdnews.com

(LegislatureRecords.com) and (LegislativeRecords.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com)

The Ultimate Amateur Private Eye Guide: 50 Free Services to Dig Up Info on Anyone

2008-07-24T07:02:00.002-06:00

Whether you’re an employer trying to research a sketchy job candidate, someone suspicious of the show-off date they found online, or trying to research sex offenders in your area, there are a number of free Web tools to turn you into an amateur private eye.

Check out our list of 50 totally free services that will let you dig up the dirt on anyone.

All-in-One Services and Public Records Search:

Searching through public records is easy when you turn to these free sites that connect you to databases of court records, jail records, corporate records, and more.

Free Public Records Finder: Search free public records by state, view corporate records, court records, criminal records and more on this site.

Net-Investigation-com: Search by state to look up court records on almost anyone. This site also provides a background check crash course and tutorials for how to find the most relevant information.

Public Record Finder: This site uses "the largest public records search database on the World Wide Web" and pours through public records from the U.S., Canada and even Mexico.

Abika: At Abika, you can verify licenses, do criminal records checks, find contact information, dig up marriage and divorce records, and do a license plate search, trace e-mails, and more.

Dates and Love: Run a background check, reverse cell phone number lookup, employee screening or people search on this site for free.

Criminal Background Checks:

To find out if anyone has a criminal history, perform a free criminal background check on them using one of these tools.

Zimbio: Here you can run a free criminal background check by searching "millions of records at blazing fast speeds."

CrimCheck-com: CrimCheck-com connects users to over 1,330 public records and websites to help you with your search.

eFindOuttheTruth-com, Inc.: If it’s your birthday, you are eligible to perform a free background check using this site’s quality search services.

RecordCheck-com: Conduct your search on this site, and if you don’t get any results, you won’t be charged for the search.

Detective Unlimited: This site connects users to a free version of the Intelius service. Results bring up addresses, lawsuits, sex offender information, property ownership, relatives, neighbors, marriage records and more.

Instant Background Report: Type in the name and state of the person you want to search and you’ll find out approximate ages and cities where people who have that name live. You do have to pay for more specific information, though.

Direct Pass: Non-subscribers to this service receive a description of each database used in their search plus access to the public record locator.

Public Records Information: Search by state and county on this site and get links to investigation records, judicial organizations, sex offender registries and more.

Contact Information:

Verify addresses and other contact information by going to one of these free search sites, from the White Pages to the more elusive Internet Sleuth.

White Pages: The White Pages is a perfectly free way to find addresses and contact information for individuals.

Free Address Lookup: Browse by state or just type in a name to find out where someone lives in the U.S.
The Search Advisor: Search the U.S. database on this site to find missing people, do a quick address verification or find your birth family.

Addresses-com: This website offers a White Pages search, Yellow Pages search, cell phone caller ID and e-mail lookup.

AnyWho: To find a person or a business through this site, you need to type in their land line phone number.
MelissaDATA: You can verify and look up addresses on this website, which prompts you to type in a street address, zip code or city.

PhoneNumber-com: Conduct a people search or business search on this site, where you can find and verify addresses and phone numbers.

Superpages-com: Look up addresses, phone numbers and e-mail addresses on Superpages.com.

Internet Sleuth: Internet Sleuth searches databases at Addresses-com, Whitepages-com, SmartPages, 411-com, Anywho and Yahoo! to bring you contact information for your people search.

411-com: At 411-com, search the white pages or yellow pages, do a reverse phone number check, reverse address check, look up an area or zip code and more.

Marital History and Genealogy:

Has your date secretly been married before? Find out by digging into marriage and family records by state or county.

GeneaLinks: The free marriage records database lets you search ancestors’ records and link up to marriage records on other sites to maximize your search.

A - Z Marriage Records: Look up marriage records in the US, UK, Canada and Ireland on this site.

FamilySearch-org: This site lets you do a basic look up of named family members within a specific year range, country. You can choose a certain life event, too, like a birth, death or marriage.

Census Diggins: Browse marriage and divorce records by state and county from the 1700s to the present.

I Dream of Genealogy: This site is another service that provides free marriage records organized by state.

Employment Screenings:

Employers need to be careful about who they hire, and there are several free services that allow you to verify contact information, past work experience, and even driving records.

Free Employment Screening: This site offers a "comprehensive employee screener search engine" that lets you search by name or combine a name with city, zip code, employer and birth year.

BackgroundSearch-com: Do a pre-employment background search by typing in a name and birthday. Using a SSN to narrow down your search is optional.

DatabaseRecords-com: Sign in with your name and e-mail address to get access to a free employee screening report here.

Switchboard: Verify that an applicant’s past work experience is legitimate by verifying their business here.

Driver’s License Search: Find court records and driving records by looking up your applicant’s driver’s license here.

Real Estate and Rent:

Run a tenant check on a seedy looking applicant to find out if they’ve been blacklisted on one of these sites.

LandlordOnline-com: When you sign up for a free basic membership on this site, you’ll be eligible for two free credit reports and three free industry reports.

Deadbeat Tenant: Start by selecting your state and then conduct an eviction check or criminal record check on applicants.

Bad Tenant: This site offers free membership and a search to find out if an applicant has been blacklisted in the database.

Sex Offender Sites:

Protect your family and your neighborhood by looking up sex offenders by name or zip code. Some sites even offer photos of each offender.

National Sex Offender Registry: The family watchdog on this site directs users to a search by location or search by name.

FBI Crimes Against Children: Click on a state to conduct a sex offender search from the FBI’s website.

MapSexOffenders.com: There are over 300,000 sex offenders listed in this database. You can view maps of the offenders and search by name.

Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Registry: On this site, you can type in a name, zip code, county or city to perform your search. Results include a photo, names and aliases used by the offender, registration information and address.

Free Sex Offenders Search: Perform a sex offender lookup by state and get public access to criminal records and jail records.

SexOffender-com Database Search: Look up sex offenders and anyone who has a history or record of violent behavior towards children.

US-Sex-Offenders-com: This site can search information and addresses for sex offenders in 27 different U.S. states.

People Searches:

To conduct a general people search on someone, use one of these sites, which feature search options like reverse telephone number look up, e-mail addresses, online profiles and more.

Zaba Search: This free people search and public information search engine features search options by name, phone number or social security number.

Free Public Records Directory: Find death records, court records, marriage and divorce records and a lot more on this "absolutely free" site.

Yahoo! People Search: Conduct a U.S. phone and address search, reverse phone number check or e-mail search here.

Bigfoot: Find individuals or businesses through this site, which can reveal e-mail addresses, phone numbers, addresses and more.

Peek You: Peek You is "the smartest way to find people online." You can find out if someone has any risqué pictures or information on their online profiles, on any site.

pipl: pipl is another online people search site that brings up social networking profiles, public records, mentions on blogs and the Web, and even customer profiles on sites like Amazon.com.

Reference: internetservicedeals.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com)

Report Finds Gaps in Federal E-Mail Records: GAO Says Agencies Are Inconsistent in Preserving Electronic Documents

2008-07-11T18:28:00.002-06:00

Federal officials inconsistently preserve government e-mail, creating gaps in the public record and making it difficult for the public to understand the activities of the government, according to a report released by the Government Accountability Office yesterday.

The report came before a scheduled House vote today on a bill that would create standards for the electronic storage of e-mail by federal agencies.

As the use of e-mail has increased dramatically, federal agencies are struggling to determine which e-mails can be deleted, which must be preserved as public records and how those records should be stored.

Current law gives agencies broad discretion to determine how electronic records and communications are maintained. Quality varies widely, according to the GAO.

Investigators looked at four agencies -- the Homeland Security Department, the Federal Trade Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Housing and Urban Development -- and found that all used an inefficient and insecure process of "print and file": printing e-mails and storing them in paper form. Only one agency, the EPA, was converting to an electronic system to store e-mail records.

The GAO examined electronic records kept by 15 senior officials at the four agencies and found that seven complied with all federal requirements governing the preservation of electronic records, but eight did not consistently meet them.

Meanwhile, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the federal agency charged with ensuring that other departments properly store e-mail, stopped making inspections shortly after President Bush took office in 2000, the report said.

The legislation to be considered today would require the national archivist to regularly inspect record-keeping systems at every agency and the White House and certify that they comply with the law.

"This will impose upon government agencies to put in place a system to keep track of their e-mails and be able to retrieve them," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which has been investigating the disappearance of years' worth of e-mails generated by the Bush White House.

"This bill sets out the opportunities for a periodic review of whether agencies are complying with the law, so we don't find out at the end of an administration that records are missing," Waxman said.

The White House's electronic record-keeping system is the subject of several lawsuits. In one court filing, the White House acknowledged that from 2001 until late 2003, it transferred e-mails to backup tapes and routinely "recycled" them, resulting in the purging of the e-mails. The administration has said it does not know how many of those overwritten e-mails can be retrieved and preserved.

During that period, the administration faced some of its biggest controversies, including the Iraq war, the leak of former CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson's identity and the CIA's destruction of interrogation videotapes.

Last year, the White House said additional e-mails concerning official government business may have been lost because they were improperly sent through private accounts intended for only political activity. White House aides, including former presidential adviser Karl Rove, used e-mail accounts issued by the Republican National Committee to communicate about government business.

Although it has sponsored six studies of agency record-keeping since 2003, the National Archives has not conducted any inspections since 2000, the GAO report found. "Without a consistent oversight program that provides it with a governmentwide perspective, NARA has limited assurance that agencies are appropriately managing the records in their custody, increasing the risk that important records will be lost," the GAO said.

Officials at the National Archives told GAO investigators that inspections took too much time and money. Instead, they chose to inspect only when they learned of a clear and egregious record-keeping problem. No record-keeping challenges have reached that level in the past eight years, archives officials said.

The archives also seriously curtailed its "targeted assistance" -- help it provides agencies to improve their records processes. In 2002, it completed 76 such projects; last year there were none.

Reference: washingtonpost.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (USPRS.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (WhiteHouseLogs.com)

Playing Games with Public Records

2008-07-10T23:51:00.002-06:00

It's not unusual for newspapers, or lawyers in Public Records Act or Freedom of Information Act cases, to accuse the government of trying to "hide" things.

Now a San Bernardino County case has revealed what may be a criminal attempt at hiding public records, a reminder about the importance of access to information about government.

San Bernardino County officials June 30 arrested Adam Aleman, a 25-year-old assistant assessor. Aleman was charged with six felony counts - among them a count for destruction of public records.

That count alleges that he destroyed the hard drive of a laptop computer that had been issued by the county to Assessor Bill Postmus during Postmus' tenure on the Board of Supervisors.

The link to Postmus is significant.

He was the central figure in a Public Records Act lawsuit brought by the California First Amendment Coalition and the Daily Bulletin's sister newspapers, The Sun, claiming that Postmus should have disclosed calendars and e-mails relating to a two-week period in the summer of 2006 when fires raged in San Bernardino County and Postmus, then the chairman of the Board of Supervisors, was mysteriously absent.

A San Bernardino County judge ordered a few calendar entries and e-mails released but upheld the county's decision to withhold many calendar entries based upon the county's claim of "deliberative process."

But during the case, the judge ordered the county to prepare a "privilege log," an inventory of withheld records and the county's reasons for withholding them.
The log revealed a gap in the summer of 2006 during which Postmus seemed to have been cut off from e-mail.

His spokesmen offered conflicting accounts about where Postmus was and whether he had e-mail access.

The DA's office has not linked Aleman's indictment to the mysterious events surrounding Postmus (and Postmus himself has not been charged with any crime).

However, the hard drive may have been destroyed in June or July of 2006 - the same summer Postmus was absent during the raging fires in his home county.

Was the hard drive destroyed in response to CFAC's and the newspaper's record request? Or in response to inquiries from newspaper reporters that preceded the record request?

Hopefully, the criminal proceedings against Aleman will provide answers to these questions.

Prosecutions of public employees or officials for destruction of public records are highly unusual, although the legal authority for doing so seems quite clear. Government Code section 6200 makes it a crime (punishable by up to four years imprisonment) to "willfully destroy alter or falsify" any "record filed or deposited in any public office."

The other counts against Aleman allege that he falsified and backdated documents for submission to a county civil grand jury that has been conducting an investigation of the Assessor's Office.

The grand jury's report, issued just hours after Aleman's arrest, is highly critical of Postmus' management of the office and alleged use of employees and resources for political purposes.

During its investigation, the grand jury apparently reported to the district attorney on its suspicions about evidence given to the grand jury by Aleman.

In April, investigators served a search warrant on the Assessor's Office and seized computers and files.

Public records, as the California Supreme Court explained last year, can expose "corruption, incompetence, inefficiency, prejudice and favoritism."

The alleged destruction of a laptop computer here can only lead people to wonder what the records on the laptop would have revealed.

Karl Olson is a partner at the law firm Levy, Ram & Olson and a member of CFAC's board of directors.

Reference: dailybulletin.com

(PeopleSearches.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

Government Lags in Providing Public Records to Media, Others

2008-07-10T23:22:00.002-06:00

The federal government is falling short in making public records readily available under the Freedom of Information Act, according to a study by the Coalition of Journalists for Open Government.

The recently completed study showed that 25 federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Securities and Exchange Commission, have made little progress in reducing their record backlog of FOIA requests, despite a 2006 directive from the White House to reduce delays.

The percentage of FOIA requests that remained uncompleted at year end was reduced slightly, from 39 percent in 2006 to 33 percent last year, but the study indicates that the reduction stemmed largely from a decrease in requests rather than improvements in service. The CJOG found that the combined federal agencies received 63,000 fewer, but only processed 2100 more requests than in 2006.

The greatest backlogs were found at the Department of State (85 percent backlogged), Department of Homeland Security (62 percent backlogged), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (55 percent backlogged).

The median processing time for a request was found to exceed the legal FOIA deadlines in fifteen of the twenty-five agencies studied. Fifteen of the agencies were slower than last year to respond to “simple” requests, and thirteen were slower at processing “complex” requests.

Twenty-one of the agencies missed the twenty-day processing deadline for more than half of processed requests.

Of the requests that were processed, fewer were actually granted. 40% of records requests were not granted, the highest percentage since agency reporting began in 1998. The study also found that records appeals were granted at the lowest levels in ten years.

Despite the presidential order to improve public access to records, spending on FOIA requests has been reduced $7 million within the past year, and FOIA staffs were reduced by 209 positions.

A June report from the Department of Justice painted a different picture of the status of FOIA requests, claiming “remarkable improvements” in backlogs and request processing at federal agencies.

The report points to the agencies’ reduced backlog and high volume incoming requests as evidence that the agencies are improving service.

Reference: capitolweekly.net

(PeopleSearches.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

Yahoo to Offer Its Search Services to Outside Firms

2008-07-10T23:12:00.003-06:00

Yahoo Inc will let customers, academics and even rivals build customized Web search services on top of its own technology, introducing a resale model into a major Internet market where it ranks a distant No. 2 to Google Inc.

In the embattled Internet company's biggest step yet to carve out a more distinctive strategy in the Web search market, Yahoo said on Wednesday it is introducing a new strategy it calls "Build your Own Search Service" (BOSS).

In addition to deep access developers get to create their own text-link search services, Yahoo is also unlocking its image and news databases to let outsiders create their own permutations of Yahoo News, or Flickr, its photo-sharing site. Yahoo would even supply spell-checking services to partners.

Yahoo is fighting to remain independent in the face of a challenge by dissident investors seeking to dump its management and board in order to reopen talks with Microsoft Corp on a merger to form an Internet giant to compete with Google.

The move highlights Yahoo's own ambition to continue to compete against Google even as it partners with its crosstown rival in a related market.

Last month, Google and Yahoo reached a deal in which Yahoo will let Google sell a portion of the Web advertising that runs alongside Yahoo's own search results.

Yahoo estimates that for start-ups to develop new search technologies and run that across the entire Web takes a minimum capital investment of $300 million in terms of hardware, networks, data, coding and expertise.

"We want to disrupt the search market by removing that entry barrier and make room for more players and more ideas," Prabhakar Raghavan, the chief strategist for Yahoo Search, said in a phone interview.

Were Yahoo's search services to be embraced by new start-ups, Yahoo envisions a scenario in which its market share might remain steady but its resale partners and developers would explode, taking share from rival Google.

Based on recent industry data, Google had a 62 percent share of the U.S. Web search market.

Raghavan envisions over time seeing that share sink below 50 percent, while Yahoo's own share, now at 21 percent, might more than double through its resale partnership strategy.

Yahoo is seeking to make its search technology the underlying engine for the next generation of search services, borrowing a tactic familiar in the mobile phone industry, where established operators rent out spare network access to Virgin Mobile, for example, which owns no capacity of their own.

REMOVING BARRIERS TO ENTRY

Raghavan envisions attracting start-ups seeking to build services in the field of social search -- where the search results users see are influenced by what their friends find interesting.

He sees the rise of industry-specific search firms focused on medical or finance, for example, or visual search, which allows users to search by image rather than by text.

Two early partners Yahoo has signed up to work on Boss are personalized search start-up Me.dium and natural language firm Hakia, which relies on semantic search technology similar to that of Powerset, which Microsoft recently agreed to acquire.

First Amazon.com Inc, and lately Google have adopted a similar approach by allowing start-ups and other companies to rent access to their massive data centers, storage and certain Web applications. But Yahoo is going several steps further by giving access to sophisticated search technology.

BOSS is the second phase of Yahoo's year-long effort to remake its Web search strategy. In April, Yahoo introduced SearchMonkey, a service that allows Web site owners and developers to control how Yahoo searches appear on their site.

SearchMonkey allows a site aimed at feline fanciers to display a version of Yahoo search that only has pictures of cats. BOSS goes far beyond how Yahoo search might appear on a Web site to allow a developer to tinker with the basic mechanisms of Yahoo search to build separate services.

BOSS gives creators of new search services deep access to Yahoo search technology including query handling, search ranking, indexing and Web crawling under any label they choose.

Eventually, Yahoo plans to require that customers run Yahoo search advertising alongside searches in exchange for the tools. The strategy for so-called "search monetization" for BOSS will be revealed in the future, Yahoo officials said.

Beyond the commercial potential for BOSS, Yahoo said it is working with top universities including the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Carnegie Mellon, Stanford, Purdue, MIT and the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay. This promises to allow computer scientists to perform academic research on search trends across the entire Web, something never before affordable due to the cost of such operations.

Reference: uk.reuters.com

(BuildOwnSearchService.com) and (USPRS.com) and (BuildYourOwnSearchService.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com)

White House Threatens to Veto House e-mail Storage Bill

2008-07-09T18:38:00.002-06:00

Ahead of a scheduled House vote today, the White House threatened to veto a bill aimed at forcing the president and federal agencies to improve preservation of e-mail records.

Comment on this article in The Forum.House aides said that while they expect the measure to get bipartisan support, it will be considered under regular rules because of the veto threat.

The bill has generated some Republican opposition due to a provision the White House says gives the National Archives and Records Administration new responsibility for overseeing White House record-keeping.

The legislation would upset "delicate separation of powers" created in the 1978 Presidential Records Act and would "require the archivist to intrude, in an excessive and inappropriate manner, into the activities of an incumbent president and his or her staff," the White House said in a Statement of Administration Policy issued Tuesday.

Introduced by House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman and two committee Democrats, the bill attempts to legislate a fix to problems that have left the Bush White House unable to find hundreds of days' worth of e-mails.

A committee investigation into the missing e-mails focused on the White House's scrapping of an e-mail records system created during the Clinton administration and eventual reliance on a less-sophisticated system that one former White House technology officer called "primitive." A committee report cites e-mail preservation problems faced by the Clinton White House as well.

The bill would require the National Archives to set standards for White House electronic records and to report annually to Congress on implementation of its recommendations.

Archive officials as well as the White House have said argued the bill unnecessarily expands the agency's job from advice to oversight.

But at a House Rules Committee hearing Tuesday, House Oversight and Government Reform Information Policy Subcommittee Chairman William Lacy Clay, D-Mo., said the bill, of which he is a co-sponsor, only affirms the National Archives’ job of advising the White House on record-keeping.

Clay said the bill is meant to offer a nonpartisan fix. The committee "tried to take out the hype of the controversy … and protect records in an apolitical manner," he said.

A less-discussed but farther-reaching part of the bill updates the Federal Records Act to require federal agencies, also under standards set by the National Archives, to save all e-mail records electronically and create systems to allow electronic searches.

According to GAO and a committee report, most agencies now use “print and file” records systems for keeping e-mail, many of them spotty. Historians and open government advocates have said that approach has not kept pace as agencies increasingly reach decisions via e-mail, causing loss of important records.

The White House argues the storage provision “is onerous and overly broad” and “could impose enormous unfunded costs on agencies.”

It is not clear if the bill would require storage of instant messages, so-called wikis and emerging communication technology, the White House statement says.

"Existing policy and guidance under current law is sufficient," the statement says.

Reference: nextgov.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (USPRS.com) and (LegislatureRecords.com) and (LegislativeRecords.com)

Supreme Court says Public Records Can Be Kept From Inmates

2008-07-06T20:54:00.003-06:00

Prisoners are entitled to government records, but jailers can keep those records from actually reaching an inmate's hands if the information is deemed illegal contraband, a divided state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The 5-4 ruling could have broader implications for the way officials treat Public Records Act requests from inmates in Washington.

In particular, the ruling seems to conflict with recent legal arguments made by Attorney General Rob McKenna, who contends in a separate case that convicted felons have fewer rights than regular citizens when it comes to accessing public information.

At issue in Thursday's ruling was a request from Michael B. Livingston, who was serving time for armed robbery when he asked for the training records of a corrections officer.

The Department of Corrections sent Livingston copies of the requested records, but they were intercepted at the Cedar Creek Corrections Center in Thurston County.

Cedar Creek officials then told Livingston he wasn't allowed to receive records about employees of the prisons agency, but could have them forwarded to someone else who was not in custody.

Livingston sued.

"The Public Records Act does not limit the department's discretion in prohibiting entry of public records that it reasonably deems inappropriate in a prison setting," Justice Barbara Madsen wrote for the majority.

Reference: seattlepi.nwsource.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com)

San Leandro Launches Electronic Records Database

2008-07-02T21:13:00.002-06:00

Whether you're a gadfly looking to dig up some dirt on city officials or just an average person wondering what happened at last month's City Council meeting, public records requests just got a lot easier.

The city recently launched its online public records database, officially taking the plunge into the digital age.

It doesn't negate the old-fashioned way of looking up city files (go to City Hall, fill out a form and wait several days for a set of documents to arrive at your request). But the new electronic system is at least more convenient and more private — and will probably save residents gas, too.

Under the old system, "we had to do it all manually," City Clerk Marian Handa said. "This way, the public doesn't even have to request anything. They can go online and get it themselves."

The city has long stored a large number of public records in both paper and electronic formats. But with this new system, which uses the Web publishing tool Weblink — approved by the City Council in 2004 at a cost of about $20,000 — some electronic documents that weren't previously available for public view now are, and at no cost to the viewer.

The online database can be accessed through the city's Web site, www.ci.san-leandro.ca.us, and all the documents can be e-mailed, printed and saved as PDF files.

The only drawback, Handa said, is that the records in the new system go back only as far as 2006.

However, she added, the database is meant to be viewed as a work in progress.

Ultimately, the city hopes to make available all public records dating to the city's incorporation in 1872, she said.

Reference: insidebayarea.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com)

Criminal Records Just a Click Away

2008-07-02T21:09:00.002-06:00

Long ago, in a county not so far away — okay, it was last month in Pasco — criminal dockets could be accessed only two ways:

You could use a dial-up modem (Google it) that would allow you to look up the dockets — stuff like criminal court dates and defendant's names. Or you had to drive to government offices in Dade City and New Port Richey and look it up by typing onto an MS-DOS screen (look it up on Wikipedia.com.)

But not anymore. The last piece of Pasco's digital puzzle has finally — and silently — fallen into place:

Pasco County's criminal records are now online for all to see.

"Oh my gosh, people love it," said Chief Deputy Clerk of the Court Paula O'Neil. "It's so easy to use."

Far easier to use than the nearly three-decade old Criminal Justice Information System (or CJIS), a Byzantine behemoth of a computer mainframe that's all keystrokes, no mouse clicks.

For years Pasco residents have become accustomed to accessing all kinds of public records instantly online from the offices of the property appraiser, tax collector and supervisor of elections.

Last year the Pasco County Sheriff's Office joined the digital age with a Web site that lets the public check who's in jail and why deputies were in their subdivision.

The Clerk of the Court's Web site has long enabled public access to civil dockets: to check court dates and key rulings in divorce, guardianship and civil cases.

Surrounding Pinellas, Hillsborough and Hernando counties have had those online capabilities and one more: criminal records you could read on the Internet.

But until June 19, criminal records could not be accessed online via the Pasco clerk's Web site. Not until 5:30 p.m. that June day, when the Clerk of the Court changed its Pascoclerk.com site so that a few clicks would allow online access to criminal records.

"We've been stealthy about it because we have about 10 attorneys using it on a trial basis," O'Neil said.

Those lawyers have already found errors — some defendant's names seem to be missing online — which the Clerk's Office will work on with an eye on a more public debut later this month.

There wouldn't be a criminal justice system in Pasco without CJIS. There would be no place to store case numbers, nowhere to check court dates and no way for officers, lawyers and judges to do their jobs.

But at least they could access CJIS at work. Some lawyers even paid for dial-up access. But the larger public — especially residents in fast-growing central Pasco — had to drive to east or west Pasco to look up criminal records themselves.

CJIS hasn't been replaced — that's another feat county officials are still working on. Instead, CJIS data from 1990 on has been made available for online viewing.

The agencies that control CJIS gave the Clerk's Office permission to put the data online in March 2007.

Doing so didn't require any significant extra expenditures, O'Neil said, but they did get plenty of technical help from the Florida Association of Court Clerks and Comptrollers.

The toughest task proved to be keeping information that is not public — juvenile records, the identities of certain victims — from appearing online.

"It was like moving a mountain to get that data from a mainframe to something you can search (online,)" O'Neil said. "It was a huge process."

New Port Richey civil attorney Gary Davis is one of the early testers. He remembers accessing CJIS when it first came online, when he was a young prosecutor.

"The last time I saw a CJIS screen it looked just like it did back in 1980," Davis said.

But not anymore.

"It was the missing piece," Davis said. "But now we have everything available."

Reference: tampabay.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (IDTheftDefense.com)

Public Access Counselor to Rule in Phone Records Dispute

2008-06-22T11:51:00.002-06:00

Indiana's public access counselor is investigating whether environmental officials violated public records laws by failing to release complete records of phone calls made about the time of a public hearing on the BP Whiting oil refinery's air permit.

Public Access Counselor Heather Neal is expected to issue an official opinion on the Post-Tribune's public records complaint by June 26.

The northwest Indiana newspaper filed the complaint last month after the Indiana Department of Environmental Management said it did not have all the itemized cell phone records requested.

The newspaper had asked for records of cell phone calls made Feb. 1 through March 20 by Dan Murray, assistant commissioner of the agency's Office of Air Quality. That included March 14, the date of a public hearing on BP's air permit.

IDEM said it didn't have records for Murray's calls for the month around the hearing and that it only receives itemized bills when Murray goes over his allotted minutes. After the Post-Tribune filed the complaint, IDEM found more records with assistance from the state Office of Technology, which it said keeps the records.

Those new records, however, still don't cover March 13 through March 18, the five days bracketing the hearing date. The Post-Tribune also reported on its Web page Wednesday that some of the records that were released appeared to have been redacted.

The Associated Press left a phone message seeking comment from IDEM on Wednesday.

Robert Keene, IDEM's assistant commissioner of the Office of Legal Counsel and Enforcement, said the cell phone records were not kept by the agency in the ordinary course of business.

"The Agency has not denied access to any records that it possessed or knew to exist and has now obtained and delivered all requested records (in) respect to Dan Murray," Keene said in a June 12 response to the Post-Tribune complaint.

The released records show Murray made four calls to BP in February and made two calls to Stan Sorrels, the BP Whiting refinery's manager for health, safety, security and environment, on March 11 and 12, the Post-Tribune reported.

Environmental groups have filed three appeals against the air permit issued by IDEM on May 1 that allows BP to expand its oil refinery along Lake Michigan.

Reference: chicagotribune.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (PeopleSearches.com)

Judge Hears Police Public Records Case Lawyers in Private

2008-06-22T11:30:00.008-06:00

A court session in a lawsuit aimed at gaining public access to Police department records was held in private Friday while the plaintiff and a reporter were left waiting outside.

"Isn't it great irony that we are here to talk about open government," said John Chasnoff, an activist who filed the suit demanding internal documents about officers who used 2006 World Series tickets that had been seized Scalpers.

"I'm really frustrated about today. I wanted to see the judge's reaction and hear the attorneys outline their arguments," said Chasnoff, of the Coalition against Police Crimes and Repression. He and the group are the plaintiffs.

Circuit Judge Ed Sweeney summoned lawyers to his chambers. A court clerk said the meeting would not be public.

Sweeney later defended the closed 45-minute session as not unusual. He said it was a procedural meeting in which no transcript was kept and no arguments were heard. Sweeney said he would rule on the issue at hand — both sides' motions for a ruling without a full trial — based entirely on documents filed by the lawyers.

"Had either (attorney) said they wanted this to be in open court, we would have
done it there," Sweeney said.

Court records show he plans to rule as soon as July 11.

Jane Berman Shaw, attorney for the police department, declined comment.

Anthony Rothert, the American Civil Liberties Union attorney for the plaintiffs, said there was no dispute over facts. The issue is how to apply a recent Missouri Supreme Court ruling, Guyer v. Kirkwood.

It says an internal affairs report involving a criminal allegation against an officer should be open when the investigation concludes. Rothert said the ruling gave anyone access, but the police department argues that only an officer under investigation can get it.

The department calls the material "highly sensitive, confidential and closed documents."

Chasnoff and the coalition filed the suit July 18, claiming the documents were by then public.

The department has acknowledged that some officers admitted keeping some 30 tickets seized from scalpers and letting family and friends use them before returning them to an evidence room.

In April 2007, the police board accepted Chief Joe Mokwa's recommendation to suspend and demote eight officers. Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce decided they would not face criminal charges.

Mokwa also said there was no evidence to support rumors that high-ranking officers had used some of the tickets.

The file Chasnoff seeks includes video and audio tapes, lab test results, phone records and transcripts of interviews with a scalper whose complaint set off the investigation.

Chasnoff is not the only one seeking the records. The Missouri Department of Public Safety, which licenses police, subpoenaed the files after the department twice denied its request for them. The materials also were not provided in response to a Post-Dispatch public records request.

Reference: stltoday.com

(PolicePublicRecords.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (PeopleSearches.com)

Why Opting Out Isn't So Simple

2008-06-13T07:24:00.002-06:00

MyPrivacy aims to help consumers wrest control of their personal data

If you think Web users have given up on privacy, take a look at Michael Fertik's e-mail inbox. "I have a restraining order on my brother and he is tracking me down. I keep getting death threats. I believe he is finding my information online. Can I hide my phone number and addresses?"

"I am a corrections officer and I want all my information off the Internet ... especially my address. Can you help me?"

These messages came from customers of MyPrivacy, a subscription service Fertik launched last fall to help people pull their details out of the hands of companies that package personal data and sell it on the Web. For $5 a month he offers his subscribers a list of sites where their identifying details are hung out for all to see, and when possible, gives them the option to have them erased.

The problem: MyPrivacy still doesn't work. Fertik's ambitious program has been stonewalled by many of the data businesses it's sought to deal with and has hardly put a dent in the piles of personal information about his customers that are available on the Web. As of now the project has only shown how hard it is to keep from strangers data as basic as a phone number or an address.

The Web is populated by people-focused search engines like Intelius, Peoplefinders or US Search that peddle personal data: the value of your house, criminal records, salary information and employment history.

An Internet entrepreneur finding out just how difficult it is to protect privacy

Fertik, a 29-year-old graduate of Harvard Law, has built his career challenging the notion that online privacy is a lost cause. In October 2006 he founded ReputationDefender, a company that charges $10 a month to monitor references to its subscribers found on blogs and other sites. ReputationDefender also offers to remove or hide negative content about customers. The service sends friendly requests to offending sites, refers customers to lawyers and creates innocuous blogs and social networking pages to pad Google search results.

In its first year and a half ReputationDefender has seen modest success: The Company has grown to 55 employees and took in $2 million of revenue last year. "For every business action there's an equal and opposite reaction," he says. "The business action going on now is the eviscerating exposure of all your stuff, both public and private. People want to regain control of their online identities."

The idea for MyPrivacy came to Fertik two years ago. He began poking around the online data-aggregation companies that collect personal information from public documents such as tax forms, housing documents and criminal records. He says he also traced some data to more private sources like warranty cards and magazine subscriptions.

Fertik counts 230 sites that offer personal information to Web users. Half of them, he says, take requests to opt-out. He saw an opportunity to create a one-stop opt-out shop. As proof of concept, Fertik points to the national do-not-call list, which includes 73% of U.S. households. "You can't get 73% of Americans to do anything except pay taxes and drink Coke," he says. "This is not a niche."

Taking advantage of companies' opt-out offers, however, has been complicated. In December MyPrivacy began attempting to opt its 800 initial customers out of the database of Intelius, one of the Web's largest collections of background-check data. The Bellevue, Wash. site says in its privacy policy that it will, "as a courtesy," remove any user who sends a faxed request with his or her name and address.

Fertik took the company up on its offer. He started sending hundreds of opt-out requests a month to Intelius' fax number. Intelius e-mailed asking him to stop "spamming" its fax machine. (Intelius denies this.) Fertik requested a meeting to find an easier solution. The company's representatives initially seemed responsive and later asked Fertik to send his opt-outs in a single daily e-mail. Intelius says it is unaware of this request.

Then, about a week after Intelius filed for its initial offering in early January, Fertik received an e-mail referring all further communication to William Beaver, the company's general counsel. Since then Fertik's e-mails and faxes have received no response. As far as he is able to determine, not one of his customers has been removed from Intelius' database.

Some sites have been more responsive: Fertik says Yahoo has removed his customers from its basic people search, as has Switchboard.com, which powers the people search function for sites that include Excite.com. But, Fertik says, other sites with opt-out policies, like InfoSpace, WhoWhere.com, MetaCrawler, USA People Search and Fonecart, have ignored his requests.

Edward Petersen, an Intelius founder, says that his company doesn't accept opt-out requests from a third party.

Unlist Assist, a two-person company in Cheyenne, Wyo., offers a modest workaround. It mails its customers forms they send to data aggregators that don't accept third-party opt-outs. Using that approach, Unlist Assist has successfully opted its 2,000 or so customers out of many databases, including Intelius'.

But even then, Unlist Assist founder Eric Busby admits that the business model has limits. "Data aggregators are in the business of selling information, and they have to keep that information alive," he says. "If 100,000 people started opting out, they might change their tune."

Fertik isn't giving up. His new solution is to pay the aggregators to give up his customers' data. How much? A rough calculation shows that an information-broker giant like ChoicePoint makes at most 40 cents a month from each of its dossiers connected with an American adult. A background-check search engine likely makes far less.

MyPrivacy could still make money passing along some of its $5-a-month fee as an incentive to delete its customers' data. "This is the way to avoid regulation and make more money," argues Fertik. "Because the privacy clamor is not going to stop."

There's not much in the statute books to protect people who value their privacy. A lot of states have moved their motor vehicle records out of sight, but home ownership and voter registration are wide open.

So far, no one has taken Fertik up on his payout offer. Intelius' Petersen says it sounds a bit like blackmail. "So I've got your data and I'm going to hold it hostage till you pay me five bucks?" he asks.

What Fertik wants may be impossible. Many data brokers lack any opt-out policy. There are plenty of other sites, says Petersen, that lack the ethics or resources to honor them. Fertik's cloak of invisibility? "It's not a realistic goal," says Petersen.

Reference: msnbc.msn.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com)

U.S. Public Records -- Offering People Search and More

2008-06-05T17:40:00.002-06:00

People Search: Information is important for everyone, which is the reason why public records are essential in meeting your need for accurate data about certain people or companies.

Information can be needed in various ways. You may need it for security reasons, or when hiring people for your company or when you start a business, or maybe when you want to look for someone you have not seen for a long time already.

For an easy people search, USPublicRecords.com can help you by providing tips for a successful search. The website can offer you the data that you may need about people, but it will not give away private or personal information with the reason that although these are public records, some may still be private as they may be containing sensitive personal data or private matters regarding the person.

When trying to get private information about someone, you will need a very good reason since there is a U.S. law that protects the personal privacy of a person.

For a number of years, the U.S. Public Records has been searching for useful and essential links to public records from around the world, including United States public records, Canadian and Mexican public records, and other foreign public records.

People Search can provide you with different kinds of records: birth and death records, marriage and divorce records, court and criminal public records, business information, property records, unemployment benefits, employment searches, and much more.

A lot of controversies have surrounded the matter of bringing public records out in the Internet. Since the Internet has provided access to the information of a vast majority, the number of scams and the chances of dishonest profits are now increasing.

But more than the negative effects that it brings, public records are also very helpful in a lot of cases like background checks, records on criminal arrests, security, and people searches.

People Search
The number of people who are in need of information on public records has increased and is continuously rising.

With People Search, access to certain public records is made possible. Criminal history, driving records, and military information are some of the public information that can be accessed online, while educational records as well as medical details are not to be released to the public.

Regret often comes to those who fail to do background checks. Oftentimes, when you are in a rush of hiring someone for your company, you end up getting the wrong person for the job, thus affecting the entire productivity of your projects. You would not want that to happen, right?

Now that access to public records and people search is made easy through USPublicRecords.com, there is no more reason why you can't perform the needed background check. You would not want to hire someone with bad employment records, and you certainly would not want to hire a criminal on the loose.

With U.S. Public Records, all these can be avoided. Do not compromise your family's safety, or your business's future. With U.S. Public Records, make smart choices, make smart decisions.
http://www.squidoo.com/people-searches

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

Internet Posting of Court Records Considered

2008-06-04T20:41:00.001-06:00

Most court documents are open to the public.
Would posting those records on the Internet open up Pandora’s Box or simply be a more effective manner to shed light on what is already public information? “Public” is what it is.

The reality, however, is that when you post to the Internet, all of a sudden, a piece of paper goes from sitting in a court house shelf and being available if requested by somebody, to being accessible with a few clicks on the computer from anywhere in the world.

Now that’s public.

The state Supreme Court May 28 heard testimony from individuals and groups weighing in on a proposed rule change to expand access to judicial records by posting them on the Internet.

The proposed changes come after a two-year study by the Supreme Court Special Committee on Public Access to Court Records, chaired by Associate Justice Barry T. Albin. That report concluded access should be increased due to a presumption of openness. Along with that presumption, comes a new “user-friendly” Rule 1:38 enumerating exceptions to that general rule.

But with the considerations that go into making records more accessible to the public on the Internet come concerns with the immediate and worldwide access the Internet provides.

These include guarding against identify theft, protecting domestic violence victims and rehabilitating juvenile offenders, among other things.

The report acknowledges the unique character of the Internet.

“Internet posting results in a hyper-dissemination of court records, raising concerns different from those related to specific requests for court records. Because of privacy concerns, the Judiciary should proceed cautiously with Internet posting after further study,” it states.

With that in mind, some of the specific recommendations include:
• Certain “personal identifiers” will be confidential and litigants should be required to omit them from documents submitted to the court, including Social Security, driver’s license, vehicle plate, insurance policy, financial account and credit card numbers.
• But in collection cases, portions of certain confidential personal identifiers may be included such as the last four digits of financial account numbers, and a debtor’s Social Security number. A financial account may be identified when it is the subject of the litigation.
• While “dates of birth and home addresses should continue to be made available in paper files, at public access terminals in courthouses, and in court records released in bulk,” that same information would be limited on the Internet to display only birth year and the municipality and state rather than the full home address. The exception is matters including civil judgment — to include full home address and date of birth — and Tax Court docket information — a full property address or block and lot designation.
• In cases posted on the Internet, minors should be identified only by their initials.
The recommendations state the judiciary should start the Internet posting of case docket information with civil docket and criminal conviction information. Family and Municipal docket information posting should await an analysis of these first steps.

Many of these topics came up in testimony before the court.

Keith Miller, representing New Jersey Media Lawyers Association, said the organization strongly supports the new rule.

“We believe the new rule is much more in the spirit of OPRA (Open Public Records Act),” Miller told the justices.
He urged the court to consider full posting of criminal as well as civil docket information.
David MacMilllan of New Jersey Legal Services cautioned justices to be wary of the disproportionate impact these rules might have upon the poor.

“One thing we do know: (personal) identifiers are a valuable commodity,” he said.

Low income consumers are often the least able to protect themselves from identify theft, he said.

He cited incidents of identity theft tied to the PACER system in Florida, an Internet court docket posting system; further, that some states have tried Internet posting of court information and reversed course after problems arose, such as in Virginia, Ohio and Florida.

There is no set date for when the rules are expected to be adopted, according to a judiciary spokesperson.
While the openness of court records is integral to our democratic system, there are those who would take advantage of such openness to harm others. We trust the Supreme Court will proceed cautiously. Only with the proper controls in place, will Internet posting of public court information do more good than harm.
To view the entire report http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/publicaccess/.

Reference: capemaycountyherald.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

Public Domain Information (FAQ)

2008-05-31T15:08:00.001-06:00

What is Public Domain Information?
Anything which legally has no owner is said to be in the public domain. Once there was even public domain land, but now public domain is pretty much limited to intellectual property where copyright protection has expired or the creator has formally given his work to the public. There is no "official" list of public domain property because something becomes public domain due to the absence of any law giving anyone claim to ownership. For example, if no one can find any law which gives them legal claim to a property, then that property is considered in the public domain.

What is Intellectual Property?
Intellectual property is any product of the human intellect where ownership can be claimed and protected by law. This includes creative works such as music, lyrics, books, poetry, or art as well as more typical business applications such as inventions, chemical and biological advances, or computer software systems. Intellectual property is most often protected by copyright, patent, and trademark laws.

What is a Copyright?
A copyright is a "limited duration monopoly" provided by the U.S. Constitution to authors, inventors, and other creative individuals. Copyright law is written to encourage the growth of knowledge by giving authors and artists limited time exclusive rights to use and profit from their creations. If a song or book or anything else is under copyright protection, you cannot use it without the author's permission. Usually a music copyright owner will charge fees called "royalties" in exchange for permission to use his music.

What Can Be Protected by Copyright Law?
Any original creative work expressed in a tangible form can be protected by copyright. In addition to music and lyrics, this includes items such as books, letters, paintings, movies, television programs, computer software, photographs, and video games. Ideas and facts cannot be protected by copyright law, although they can in some instances be protected under patent or trademark law.

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com)

Digital Footprints: Online Identity Management and Search in the Age of Transparency

2008-05-08T23:27:00.002-06:00

The vast array of data points that make up "personal information" in the age of online media are nearly impossible to quantify or neatly define. Name, address, and phone number are just the basics in a world where voluntarily posting self-authored content such as text, photos, and video has become a cornerstone of engagement in the era of the participatory Web.

The more content we contribute voluntarily to the public or semi-public corners of the Web, the more we are not only findable, but also knowable.

Internet users are becoming more aware of their digital footprint.

Unlike footprints left in the sand at the beach, our online data trails often stick around long after the tide has gone out. And as more internet users have become comfortable with the idea of authoring and posting content online, they have also become more aware of the information that remains connected to their name online.

Nearly half of all internet users (47%) have searched for information about themselves online, up from just 22%, as reported by the Pew Internet Project in 2002. Younger users (under the age of 50) are more prone to self-searching than those ages 50 and older.

Men and women search for information about themselves in equal numbers, but those with higher levels of education and income are considerably more likely to monitor their online identities using a search engine.

Few monitor their online presence with great regularity.

Just 3% of self-searchers report that they make a regular habit of it and 22% say they search using their name "every once in a while." Three-quarters of self-searchers (74%) have checked up on their digital footprints only once or twice.

Most internet users are not sure exactly what personal information is available online:

Roughly one third of internet users say the following pieces of information are available online: their email address, home address, home phone number, or their employer. One quarter to one third of internet users say they do not know if those data points are available online.

One quarter of internet users say a photo, names of groups they belong to, or things they have written that have their name on them appear online.
Few internet users say their political affiliation, cell phone number, or videos of them appear online.

In interviews with the Pew Internet Project, privacy advocates and professional researchers argued that many of these data points are indeed available about most people, either on the open Web or in select online databases.

Most internet users are not concerned about the amount of information available about them online, and most do not take steps to limit that information.

Fully 60% of internet users say they are not worried about how much information is available about them online.

Similarly, the majority of online adults (61%) do not feel compelled to limit the amount of information that can be found about them online. Just 38% say they have taken steps to limit the amount of online information that is available about them.

Online adults can be divided into four categories based on their level of concern about their online information and whether or not they take steps to limit their online footprint:

Confident Creatives are the smallest of the four groups, comprising 17% of online adults. They say they do not worry about the availability of their online data and actively upload content, but still take steps to limit their personal information. Young adults are most likely to fall into this group.

The Concerned and Careful fret about the personal information available about them online and take steps to proactively limit their own online data. One in five online adults (21%) falls into this category.

Despite being anxious about how much information is available about them, members of the Worried by the Wayside group do not actively limit their online information. This group contains 18% of online adults.

The Unfazed and Inactive group is the largest of the four groups -- 43% of online adults fall into this category. They neither worry about their personal information nor take steps to limit the amount of information that can be found out about them online.

Internet users have reason to be uncertain about the availability of personal data; 60% of those who search for their names actually find information about themselves online, but 38% say their searches come up short.

The majority of internet users who have the inclination to query their names with a search engine do find some relevant results (60%), but a sizable segment (38%) report that a simple search does not yield any information connected to their name.

Among those who have searched for their name online, 62% find that the amount of relevant information about them generally matches their expectations. One in five self-searchers (21%) are surprised by how much information they find online about themselves, while 13% express disbelief at how little information comes up in their results.

Fully 87% of self-searchers who locate information connected to their name say that most of what they find is accurate, up significantly from the 74% who reported this five years ago.

In contrast, 11% of self searchers who find information about themselves online say that most of it is not accurate, down from 19% five years ago.
Just 4% of all online adults say they have had bad experiences because embarrassing or inaccurate information was posted about them online.
One-in-ten internet users have a job that requires them to self-promote or market their name online.

While most Americans do not actively manage their online presence, a segment of internet users have jobs that require them to market their name on the internet or make information about themselves available online. As one might expect, those motivated by work-related expectations are much more likely to use a search engine to track their digital footprints.

Those with the highest education levels report a greater tendency towards managing their professional presence online. Fully 18% of working college graduates report that their employer expects some form of self-marketing online as part of their job, compared with just 5% of working adults who have a high school diploma.

Employees who are required to market themselves online are far more likely to monitor their presence with a search engine. Fully 68% of these "public personae" use a search engine to look up their own name, compared with just 48% of employed internet users who are not required to market themselves online as part of their job.

One-in-five working American adults (20%) say their employer has a special policy about how employees present themselves online -- including what can be shared and posted on blogs and other websites.

Among adults who create social networking profiles, transparency is the norm.

The Pew Internet Project has reported extensively on teenagers' use of social networking websites, finding that 55% of online teens have created an online profile and that most restrict access to them in some way. Looking at adults, their use of social networking profiles is much lower (just 20%), but those who use the sites appear to do so in a more transparent way.

Among adult internet users who maintain an online profile, 82% say that their profile is currently visible compared with 77% of online teens who report this.

Among adults who say they have a visible profile, 60% say that profile can be seen by anyone who happens upon it, while 38% say their profile is only accessible to friends.

Teens with visible profiles make more conservative choices with respect to visibility; just 40% said their profile was visible to anyone, while 59% reported access that was restricted to friends only.

More than half of all adult internet users have used a search engine to follow others' footprints.

When asked about eight different groups of people one might search for online -- ranging from family and friends to romantic interests and business colleagues -- 53% of adult internet users said they had looked for information connected to at least one of these groups.

Most are casually curious in their searches for others. Just 7% of those who have searched for information on key people in their lives report doing so on a regular basis.

Users are most likely to search for someone they have lost touch with. Fully 36% of adult internet users say they have used a search engine to find information about someone from their past.

19% of adult internet users have searched for information about co-workers, professional colleagues or business competitors.
11% of adult internet users say they have searched online for information about someone they are thinking about hiring or working with.

9% of online adults say they have searched online for information about someone they are dating or in a relationship with. Perhaps due to safety concerns, online women tend to do their dating homework more than online men.

Basic contact information tops most searchers' wish lists.

Despite all the new forms of personal information available online, the most popular type of "people search" relates to finding someone's contact information, like an address or phone number.

72% of people searchers have sought contact information online.

37% of people searchers look to the Web for information about someone's professional accomplishments or interests.

33% of people searchers have sought out someone's profile on a social and professional networking site.

31% have searched for someone's photo.

31% have searched for someone else's public records, such as real estate transactions, divorce proceedings, bankruptcies, or other legal actions.

28% have searched for someone's personal background information.

Reference: Pew Research Center

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (USPRS.com)

US Public Records Search - How to Search US Public Records

2008-05-08T22:48:00.003-06:00

US Public Records Search - How to Search US Public Records

US Public Records search can be carried out at various resources. Generally, you can find such records in the government archives, courts, places of worship like churches, and other public community centers. Most services are not free though. You may wish to note that there are specific rules and regulations governing the way the information obtained can be used when you search US public records.

The major search engines are excellent archives when it comes to searching US public records. Records that are published on websites can be found quite quickly on the internet. Government websites that are accessible to the public can also allow you to conduct a search using their public records databases.

However, one thing most people find irritating is to have to dig through piles and piles of irrelevant information in order to find what they want. On top of that, there are no central databases that hold every piece of record together. So you can be searching for birth records at one place and the next moment digging for information on the person's residential address at the other location. Many public records are still stored and tucked away in some old store rooms.

You can also hire a private investigator if you think you can afford it. The PI would help you to run the errands and conduct the necessary checks for you on the records. This process can take a while and you need to be prepared to wait for at least a few weeks to a couple of months before you can find the information you need. This really depends on how much details go into the report. And it can be quite expensive and not everyone can stomach that.

It is until recently those online portals that provide an integrated database for US public records search appear. These services can offer you a wide array of records. When you do search there, you can find practically any record from birth and death records to bankruptcy records and even family tree records. So if you want to do a detailed background check on a person, you probably can find more information about him or her that he or she may even know.

The services are paid naturally. The mode of payment can be either a one-time membership fee for unlimited US public records searches or a per search fee. Most people would rather opt for the unlimited access to search US public records. The fee is less than $60 in a lot of cases for a paid membership.

So if you want to find out more about the most widely searched online portals you can use to search US public records, come to my records blog.

Instantly search US public records immediately to track down every public record you want. Also learn how to conduct a public records search.

Reference: ezinearticles.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (PeopleSearches.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (USPeopleFinder.com) and (PeopleSearchers.com)

Culver Tells Agencies to Charge for Review of Public Records

2008-05-06T17:42:00.002-06:00

Gov. Chet Culver is asking state agencies to begin charging for the cost of having attorney review information requested under the state's open-records law.

Many city and state agencies have charged citizens or the media to retrieve and copy records, but they have not passed along the cost of having attorneys review the records.

Open records experts said such a fee, estimated at as much as $35 an hour, is largely untested in Iowa courts and across the country.

"Lawyers are expensive," said Kathleen Richardson, executive director of the Iowa Freedom of Information Council. "Even if a request doesn't take a whole lot of time, it will still add a whole lot of money to the cost."

The decision by Culver's office to begin charging for attorneys to review documents follows two large, unrelated requests for public e-mails by The Des Moines Register in March.

James Larew, an attorney for the governor, said the requests would have involved thousands of e-mails.

Larew said the governor's office has considered the matter of handling requests for large amounts of public information for more than a year. He said the governor's office consulted with the attorney general's office about the new charge.

"Our goal overall has been, and continues to be, to keep Iowa open records as available as the statute would allow but also to make sure costs are not unduly borne to the taxpayer," he said.

Culver's office has not provided agencies with any guidelines as to when they should charge for an attorney's time.

The state's open records law says a "reasonable fee" can be charged to retrieve copy and supervise the examination of records.

It also reads: "Actual costs shall include only those expenses directly attributable to supervising the examination of, and making and providing copies of public records. Actual costs shall not include charges for ordinary expenses."

Even without charging for legal review, the cost of retrieving documents can be expensive.

Iowa State University charged the Register $745 to search and copy nine CDs of e-mails.

Lucy Dalglish of the Virginia-based Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, a watchdog group for government openness, said Iowa's law leaves more discretion for such costs than some other states.

"I don't like statutes that allow states to charge for retrieval costs, but ... if you run a public agency, the last thing you want to do is have one of your lawyers spending several days reviewing" e-mails, she said.

The Register pared back one of its requests made in March, but Culver's office wants the newspaper to pay more than $3,100 for two lawyers from one agency to spend about 103 hours to review 10 months of e-mails.

In the newspaper's second request, made from a different agency, the cost of a technician to retrieve existing e-mails from two computers was more than $2,300. The estimated cost of an attorney to review the e-mails was 551 hours of time at a cost of more than $20,000.

The governor's office said the two requests could have yielded as many as 40,000 e-mails.

The Register has not paid the legal fees and neither of the requests have been fulfilled.

Reference: chicagotribune.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

'Silver Alert' Shows Success in Finding Missing Elderly

2008-05-04T10:43:00.001-06:00

All but 3 who disappeared have been found in time to save their lives, statistics say

The state's new Amber Alert-style system for finding lost elderly people has been highly effective so far, helping to locate all 30 seniors who've been reported.

Since "Silver Alert" went into effect seven months ago, the missing people were located in time to save their lives all but three times, according to state statistics reported in Saturday's Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

The system is modeled after the Amber Alert, named after Arlington's Amber Hagerman, a 9-year-old who was abducted and killed in 1996. The system notifies the public when a child is reported missing.

The "Silver Alert" is designed to inform the public when older people with mental impairments such as Alzheimer's disease are lost and may be in danger.

Last week the system helped track down 80-year-old Lawrence White, of Bedford, who went for a drive then was lost for nine hours. A Fort Worth police officer saw White walking out of a store looking confused, then ran his license plate to learn he had been missing.

"Oh, our family is so thankful for that system and everyone who helped to find him," said White's wife, Bobbie.

To activate a Silver Alert, law enforcement must contact the Governor's Division of Emergency Management. Once confirmed, the Texas Department of Public Safety alerts local, state and federal law enforcement agencies, the news media and various state agencies.

The program was approved in the 2007 legislative session, a bill pushed because about 900 seniors were reported missing each year.

The number of alerts has outpaced the better-known Amber Alert system, which responded to just 38 alerts in its six years. And the number of Silver Alerts is expected to increase as the state's population ages.

The state has more than 2.7 million residents older than 60, according to the Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services in Austin. Within 25 years, that number will be about 7.4 million.

"I believe we are seeing more reports because of the success of the Amber Alert," DPS spokeswoman Tela Mange said. "Law enforcement agencies are aware of what the Amber Alert has done to find missing children so they'll use it for elderly residents."

Reference: chron.com

(USPRS.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (MissingPeopleSearchers.com)

Public Should Be Able to See Election Records

2008-04-24T21:24:00.003-06:00

Our view: Technology shouldn't negate the people's right to check voting results

Pima County seems to have learned some lessons from the monumentally botched handling of voting during the Presidential Preference Election in February.

The county is also planning steps to enhance the security of its election system, but it is fighting to keep its election results database confidential.

First the good news. On Monday, the county announced that its first Poll Worker Academy will begin in May. Officials hope to train 2,400 potential poll workers by August, according to a memo from Brad Nelson, director of the Pima County elections division.

After a six-hour class, each pupil will take a written test. Those who fail will either be assigned limited roles on the next Election Day or won't be allowed to work in a polling place, Nelson said.

Those who pass the written test will become "Certified Poll Workers" and will undergo more training before the Sept. 2 primary election for state and county offices.

Nelson said county elections staff also is working on an on-site survey of all 400 potential polling places to assure that each is "adequate to serve as a polling place" and accessible for disabled voters.

We applaud the county's efforts: These two changes alone should go a long way toward improving the voting experience.

During the February primary, some election workers were so slow in verifying voters' identities that lines extended out the door while voting booths stood empty.

Some workers were befuddled by identification requirements and the procedure for casting provisional ballots. Problems with optical scanners, and confusion about polling places and eligibility to vote turned the day into a nightmare for many voters.

Unfortunately, what happens after the next Election Day is still in dispute.

The county and the Pima Democratic Party were in court on Monday arguing about access to elections databases.
The Democratic Party sued in an effort to obtain more than 1,100 election-result databases and in December, Pima County Superior Court Judge Michael Miller ordered the county to release the databases for the 2006 primary and general elections.

The county argued that if its databases are routinely released along with passwords and embedded software, then eventually hackers will get enough information to figure out a way to sabotage the system.

Miller said the databases fall under state public-records law and that political parties could not fulfill their duty to monitor the election without access to them.

The county complied; releasing those election results and also results from the Regional Transportation Authority vote.

On Monday, the Democrats asked Miller to require the county to release databases in time for objections to be raised before the election result is formally finalized. Miller did not rule.

Pima County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry said early this month that he would ask Secretary of State Jan Brewer to redefine the records as computer programs, which are not subject to public-records law.

Brewer said in an interview Monday that while she believes that Pima County "is taking the right position on keeping the database information confidential" because of security concerns, she does not have the authority to redefine the database as a program.

"The Legislature would have to do that," Brewer said.

Huckelberry has recommended about two dozen changes to enhance election security, including having consultants check out the county's computer system, hand-counting more ballots, dividing control over elections-tabulation hardware and software so that county employees can't change software after it's certified by the secretary of state, and improving ballot-verification procedures and chain-of-custody records.

Meanwhile, the county supervisors voted 3-2 in January to ask county employees to figure out how to make scans of actual ballots and put them online on the night of an election. Given that nearly 400,000 ballots would have to be scanned, we fear this solution would be too time-consuming and expensive.

We appreciate the county's concern about assuring the security and integrity of the voting system: If voters aren't confident that their vote will be counted and that elections are not rigged, then our system of government would be undermined, even unraveled.

But the public has a right to review election results as it always has. The use of computer programs hasn't changed that.

We hope through its continuing work to improve the voting process and enhance its system of security, the county will find a way to share results without risking the integrity of the system. The law is the law.

Reference: azstarnet.com

(USPRS.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (VoterRegistrationRecords.com)

White House Challenges Release of Visitor Logs

2008-04-21T19:11:00.003-06:00

A federal appeals court sought compromise Monday between a liberal group demanding the names of White House visitors and the Bush administration, which says releasing the names would erode the president's power.

If released, the documents would show how often prominent religious conservatives visited the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's residence, allowing a glimpse into how much influence they exerted on government policy.

White House calendars are not generally considered public records, but reporters and watchdog groups have used Secret Service documents, which normally are public, to report on White House visitors.

Rather than having those documents released on a case-by-casis basis, the Bush administration wants them considered White House documents, which would keep them from public view for more than a decade.

A federal judge rejected White House arguments in December and ordered the documents released.

On appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, government attorneys said the president has a well-established right to seek advice privately.

Releasing lists of visitors would trample on that right, said Justice Department lawyer Jonathan F. Cohn, and the logs should be treated like other White House documents.

The judges were skeptical. They said they wanted to find a way to protect the president's rights without broadly prohibiting access to information that should be public.

"What in the documents are so quintessentially presidential?" asked Judge David S. Tatel.

"The name of the person going in to visit," Cohn replied.

"That's a public building," Tatel said. "You can stand out on 17th Street and watch who goes in and out."

"The Secret Service might have some qualms with that," Cohn responded.

"They might have some qualms but they couldn't stop you from doing it," said Chief Judge David B. Sentelle.

Rather than balancing the president's interest with the public's, Tatel said, the government was simply disregarding the Freedom of Information Act. He said the policy would allow the president to "draw a curtain around the White House."

Judge Merrick B. Garland said he was concerned the Bush administration's policy could extend to other White House agencies such as the budget office, which normally releases public records.

Under the government's theory, Garland said, visits to the White House social planner, caterer and gardener would all be secret because the president needs to receive advice privately.

The judges seemed equally dissatisfied with the argument of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, the group seeking the documents. Sentelle and Tatel said the group was using the Secret Service as an end-run, a way to get documents that normally would not be public.

"I think Congress would be surprised that, by requiring the president to receive Secret Service protection, it was opening up his calendars," Tatel said.

Sentelle became frustrated and at one point put his head in his hands after pressing attorney Anne L. Weismann to acknowledge that the president must be allowed to seek advice privately.

He repeatedly urged her to explain how to balance the two interests.

"I don't understand what you don't understand," Sentelle said. "You're not acknowledging the separation-of-powers problem."

The judges pressed both sides to offer a compromise that would strike the right balance. Government lawyers said they couldn't discern from the logs which meetings were presidential policy meetings and which ones might not be sensitive, such as a meeting with the White House gardener. Weismann bristled at the idea that the government's only solution was blanket secrecy.

"I haven't heard from you a counter-suggestion," Tatel told Weismann. "We've never had a case like this."

Garland seemed to search for a solution short of the government's blanket secrecy but that would not allow journalists and special-interest groups to regularly request the names of every visitor to the White House. Under that scenario, he said, the president could never ensure that any meeting was confidential.

The court did not immediately rule on the case.

Nearly two dozen news organizations, including The Associated Press, filed court documents supporting the release of the Secret Service logs.

During the administration of President Clinton, political opponents made extensive use of Secret Service logs documenting White House visits by donors, money-raisers, pardon-seekers and former White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

Reference: ap.google.com

(SecretServiceLogs.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com)

Voter Registration Cards are Public Records

2008-04-20T22:27:00.003-06:00

Cape Girardeau County Clerk Kara Clark said she provided the copy the 1972 voter registration card used to certify Lawrence McBryde's 2001 easement signature.

Voter registrations are public record, she said, and she was complying with the state's Sunshine Law, which requires that copies of public documents must be provided within three days of a request.

"I've made copies for other people before on different things," she said. "If we give it to anyone other than the individual, we redact their Social Security number."

Clark said she was unaware the copy was being used for notarization purposes. She said Robb McClary came into her office looking for McBryde's card on a busy day just before the April 8 election.

"I had no idea what he was doing. The only thing he told me was that he was using it to verify a signature," she said.

Sherri Lomedico, a voter registration deputy for the county, wondered why such an old document was used.

"My signature's not the same as it was in 1972," she said.

Asked how often the registration cards are used to verify documents being notarized, Lomedico said, "Probably never. We do, in our office for absentee ballots, and we have to check whenever there are petitions. We have to check their signature with the voter's registration card."

She said registration cards are kept on file as long as a voter is "active, still here and still alive."

Reference: semissourian.com

(VoterRegistrationRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com)

City Auditor Cites Police for Poor Overtime, Comp Time Records

2008-04-18T12:44:00.002-06:00

A Denver police officer listed comp time from 1918.

One officer appeared to approve his own overtime.

Police officers may have improperly collected "broker" fees for coordinating other officers on second jobs such as patrolling Rockies and Broncos games.

Those were among the findings of a Denver police audit released Thursday that found sloppy and unreliable bookkeeping, which has long plagued the department and defied a quick fix.

The auditor's office could not say that any officers took part in any wrongdoing. But it stressed that poor recordkeeping made it hard to know whether officers were conforming to policies governing overtime, comp time and second jobs providing security from banks to bars to ballgames.

"You can't differentiate between an honest mistake and fraud because you have no adequate controls in place," said auditor spokesman Denis Berckefeldt.

In response to many of the issues raised by the audit, Denver Police Chief Gerry Whitman said: TeleStaff.

That is the name of a software program the department began implementing in December that Whitman says will replace the "outdated" way of tracking officer hours, which often relied on paper slips.

"TeleStaff," Whitman said of some audit concerns, "renders these issues moot."

The report by City Auditor Dennis Gallagher is 58 pages. Almost half - 23 pages - is devoted to Whitman's response.

In 2004, two Denver police commanders accused of double dipping and tampering with off-duty employment records were sanctioned by losing more than a month's pay each. Manager of Safety Al LaCabe said the officers did not double dip but cited them for splitting their shifts and banking comp time in a manner that was against department policy.

A third officer voluntarily resigned when an investigation was launched.

Uniformed officers paid by private businesses may guard banks, restaurants, bars and stores. Some second security jobs are more closely connected to city agencies, although Whitman called them all "an asset to the community."

But audit supervisor Nancy Howe explained that officers who work Broncos or Rockies games may pay a small fee to another coordinating officer who handles issues such as officer paperwork and attendance.

The audit cites a mayor's executive order that states: "No police officer shall serve as a broker to provide off-duty police services."

Whitman countered that, "The auditors confuse scheduling . . . with brokering."

In the case of comp time listed from 1918, Berckefeldt said it appeared to be "some sort of honest mistake."

But Whitman acknowledged, "The comp time system in use at the time of the audit did not identify and prevent human-caused data entry errors such as mistyped year, incorrect badge number for an approving officer or inappropriate numbers of hours worked."

The audit period was from June 1, 2005, to June 17, 2006.

As far back as 2000, the police department was looking for a better way to track officer hours, according to Whitman. It tried one program in 2001, but it had "shortcomings and limitations" and was scrapped. The department then settled on TeleStaff, which Whitman said will centralize and calculate officer overtime, comp time and hours spent on secondary jobs.

The auditor's office raised concerns about some of TeleStaff's abilities and Gallagher said he expects to review the program.

A blizzard of paper

Denver police were keeping track of employee work time mostly on paper records during the year reviewed by the city auditor (June 2005 to June 2006). The numbers for a year's worth of tracking:

1,700 officers and civilian employees of Denver Police Department
10,000 holiday pay entries
55,000 leave entries
84,000 secondary employment slips

Department has history of poor record keeping

The city auditor found failures in record keeping for Denver police officers doing outside work. But the issue of Denver police providing off-duty security has been contentious for decades:

* May 2005 City Council President Elbra Wedgeworth said she wanted to re-examine whether Denver police officers should be moonlighting in the wake of the fatal shooting of Detective Donald Young and the wounding of Detective John Bishop while the two were providing security at a party celebrating a baptism.

Liability was a chief concern for Wedgeworth.

"There are some businesses willing to pay workman's comp, and then you have organizations, such as where the shooting occurred, that don't have the money," Wedgeworth said.

In 2004, nearly seven out of eight cops had moonlighted to supplement their paychecks, racking up more than 400,000 man-hours, or 307 hours per officer. Side jobs included providing security at banks, nightclubs, sports stadiums and special events.

Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper said his administration would continue to evaluate the costs, but he was not ready to rush a dialogue on whether moonlighting should continue.

Because he was judged to have been enforcing the law at the time he was shot, Young's family received full workers compensation and survivor benefits.

Police Chief Gerry Whitman praises the off-duty work, saying the total of hours worked was the equivalent of having an extra 182 full-time officers on the streets fighting crime.

* August 2004 City Councilman Ed Thomas, a former police officer, introduced an ordinance that would have required police officers who work off-duty to arrange for their own liability coverage. The ordinance was stillborn after a show of opposition by uniformed officers in city council chambers.

* January 2003 Gary Lauricella, a well-known veteran police lieutenant, was discovered to have been working on city time as a $30-an-hour traffic guard at a private school, according to documents obtained by CBS4 News and reviewed by the Rocky. Lauricella was also found to have attempted to falsify records. Lauricella, who was paid about $80,000 a year by the city, agreed to take voluntary early retirement in the case.

Two other officers named in the double-dipping case agreed to suspensions and fines.

* December 1996 Denver police officials cut the number of off-duty hours officers were allowed to work at secondary jobs from 32 to 24 hours a week. Officers also were barred from working in topless bars and all-nude clubs.

The shift in policy came in the wake of a shooting in March 1996 in which officers Kenneth Chavez and Andy Clarry shot and killed Jeffrey Truax as he fled from a brawl at a nightclub on Broadway where the two officers were doing off-duty security work. Truax was killed and his passenger was wounded. The city subsequently paid $250,000 to the Truax family to settle a lawsuit.

* April 1996 As part of the Truax coverage, the Rocky reported that Denver had no clue how much off-duty overtime its officers worked. The police department did not know which officers handled the most off-duty assignments. And it did not always know when and where they were working.

"It looks like we have a mess here," Lt. Mike Monahan said.

Reference: rockymountainnews.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (PolicePublicRecords.com) and (USPRS.com)

Feds Record Keeping Called Deplorable

2008-04-17T17:29:00.003-06:00

New report says federal agencies have fallen "woefully" behind private-sector efforts.

The White House isn't the only government office bungling its document management responsibilities, according to a new report that claims there is an "appalling lack of progress" in moving federal agencies to electronic record keeping.

Instead, CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) said April 16 that the government is clinging to "outdated, inefficient and ineffective paper record keeping systems" when readily available off-the-shelf software is available for the task.

"The law requires the government to preserve federal records, which ultimately belong not to any single administration, but to the American people," Melanie Sloan, CREW's executive director, said in a statement. "These records, which often document serious policy matters, are being lost to future generations who might learn from them."

The summary of the report -- Record Chaos: The Deplorable State of Electronic Record Keeping in the Federal Government – said a survey of more than 400 agency records managers shows widespread ignorance of record-keeping regulations coupled with little oversight and passive management by NARA (National Archives and Records Administration), the agency in charge of ensuring compliance with the law.

"The federal government has fallen woefully behind its private-sector counterparts and NARA has failed to affirmatively assist agencies in developing and implementing records-management policies as the Federal Records Act requires," the report states. "Many agency employees do not even understand what a federal record is, much less how it must be preserved."

CREW also is battling the White House over five million missing e-mails from between March 2003 and October 2005. In addition, CREW contends that until October 2003, backup tapes allegedly containing some of the e-mails were recycled. The missing e-mails cover the start of the Iraq war, the Valerie Plame outing and the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Federal agencies currently have broad discretion to determine how electronic records and communications are preserved. Since many agencies still rely on antiquated "print-and-file" systems for preserving electronic records, CREW suggests, many federal records may be lost to history.

To correct the problem, U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., introduced legislation April 16 to modernize the requirements of the Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records Act. H.R. 5811 directs the Archivist of the United States to establish standards for the capture, management, retrieval and preservation of e-mails and other electronic communications of the White House and other federal agencies.

"H.R. 5811 will help government officials and the public have better access to the electronic communications that influence governmental decision making," Missouri Democrat William Lacy Clay, a co-sponsor of the bill, said in a statement. "As we move forward, this bill ensures that our federal agencies and future administrations efficiently and effectively preserve their work product in a format that is easy to find and easy to reproduce."

CREW criticized the proposal as "anemic and fails to make the substantial changes necessary to bring the federal government into the 21st century."

Reference: eweek.com

(PresidentialRecordsAct.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com)

A Place Where Public Records Aren't Public at All

2008-04-13T13:40:00.002-06:00

Something stinks in Freemansburg, and it's not just the nearby Bethlehem sewage treatment plant.

It's the small-town secrets held by officials more concerned with covering dirty laundry than upholding Pennsylvania law.

A standard request to inspect a police incident report two weeks ago has revealed the following:

The police department doesn't keep a blotter, a list of calls that provides the basics about the nature and times of police response. As such, it's not available for public inspection, and that's a violation of state law.

The mayor doesn't speak publicly about any borough issues. At least that's what he told me when he took my call and referred me to the borough lawyer.

Strange, given that Mayor Gerald Yob has been in office since 1982 and four years ago was named Outstanding Mayor of the Year by the Association of Mayors of the Boroughs of Pennsylvania. Must have been a short acceptance speech!

The borough doesn't allow public access to police incident reports -- ever. It says so right on the sign in the police station, another break from state law. The borough's lawyer, Carl Williamson, denied my written request to see an incident report, saying such reports often contain the names of witnesses and minors and are compiled solely for review by the district attorney. Bullspit.

These brash departures from common procedure and state statute unfolded after a tipster told of more trouble for a borough police officer, Kevin Kovalovsky. Turns out the tip was dead-on accurate.

But it took more than a week for details to surface publicly, and even then the documentation came from district court -- not the borough police department or any of its officials who obviously withheld the information after repeated attempts to collect it.

Freemansburg officials have been circling the wagons since Kovalovky was charged with drunken driving Dec. 15. He allegedly crashed his own vehicle into parked cars in Bethlehem Township and was found parked on the side of Route 33 in Bushkill Township.

On March 3, Kovalovsky bypassed a preliminary hearing and waived the charges to Northampton County Court.

Later in March, an anonymous caller to the newspaper said Kovalovsky was in trouble again after allegedly being found drunk in Freemansburg. Borough officials wouldn't comment, referring questions to their hired law firm, Fox Williamson Mattioli of Allentown.

Attempts to access a police report or police blotter were met with stonewalling. The same day Williamson refused public access to any incident report, March 27, reporters learned of a citation filed in district court.

It accused Kovalovsky of public drunkenness after police found him "very intoxicated" about 12:30 a.m. on March 18 in the 700 block of Washington Street. He had "recent injuries to his face that he stated he received in a fall," the citation said.

Here's the kicker: Though he had been suspended without pay for 25 days after the drunken-driving charge, Kovalovsky returned to work on March 26 -- just eight days after he had been charged again by his own department with public drunkenness.

No wonder mum's the word among the borough powers that be.

Embarrassing, yes, but it's no excuse for the blatantly obvious efforts to conceal the truth and flout the law.

Sadly, our experience in this exercise can only lead me to conclude that this sort of thing has been going on a long time in Freemansburg, a proud little hamlet of working-class folks who deserve better. It's gone on long enough.

This is what happens in a state where public records are anything but, where a bill that allows the public to view public records is hailed as landmark legislation.

There must be some method of public accountability. In Freemansburg, denying access to any police blotter and any police report doesn't enable any.

Reference: pennlive.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com)

Open Records Law Set For Changes

2008-04-02T19:43:00.002-07:00

Sen. Randy McNally is sponsoring a bill — making progress in the Legislature — that would require responses to open records requests be made within five days. Josh Anderson/File

The state’s open records law appears poised for its first major change in 25 years as a consensus looks to have been forged among state lawmakers.

Interested parties — from legislators, open government advocates and local governments — have signed off on a bill to change the state’s open records, said Sen. Randy McNally (R-Oak Ridge), the bill’s sponsor.

Originally, the Legislature and a blue-ribbon panel were considering reforming the open records and open meetings statutes.

But now, efforts to amend the open meetings law, which is more politically problematic, have been abandoned.

“They tended to be the more contentious things that there was not agreement on,” McNally said of proposed open meeting changes, including the most controversial one that would allow more public officials to meet in private.

Progress was made Tuesday though on open records as the Senate State and Local Government Committee approved McNally’s bill unanimously.

If it ultimately becomes law, the bill would mark the first time in a quarter century that the open records law has been changed, other than when exemptions have been added to close records to the public, said Frank Gibson, the executive director of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government.

The effort also comes through as more attempts are being made to close public records, including making state employees’ home address and phone numbers confidential as well as making handgun carry permit holders information confidential.

The open records bill requires all records open to the public to be made available within five days.

If the requested record were closed, the governmental agency would have to give the citizen an explanation on why the record is not public. Or, if it’s going to take longer than five days to fulfill the request, the governmental agency must tell the citizen how long it’s expected to take.

“It gives them a reasonable amount of time to respond,” Gibson said. “There is no deadline now, no time limit.”

Failure to respond would create a cause of action for the requesting citizen to go to court.

Sen. Thelma Harper (D-Nashville), who ultimately voted for the bill, raised questions about the five-day time limit provision.

Harper said governmental agencies or employees “shouldn’t be required to go to court” when they’re doing “the very best they can to respond” to the records request.

Harper said an unidentified man from Knox County had been seeking records from her office and she didn’t think it was “fair” for her staffers and herself to “instruct someone who lives in Knox County.”

“He was so persistent that, I didn’t want to go to court on him,” Harper said. “I really wanted to go upside his head.”

Sen. Joe Haynes (D-Goodlettsville) said nothing in the bill related to harassment from citizens.

Rather, Haynes said local governments have been the ones usually harassing through a “glorified run around” of the open records law.

Besides the five-day time limit, the open records bill would create the Office of Open Records Council. That office would house the state’s ombudsperson.

The bill prescribes the duties of the Office of Open Records Council. Those duties include the ombudsperson issuing advisory opinions and giving citizens advice on what local government records are open and which are not.

“It creates a place for the public to go if they have some questions about whether they are entitled to a record or not,” Gibson said.

The newly created office would not give advice, however, on accessing state government records. Citizens are theoretically supposed to go through the state attorney general’s office for that, but critics say there is not a direct mechanism since citizens cannot request attorney general opinions.

In addition, a nine-member advisory committee would be created to advise the state on open records and meeting laws.

The bill is now headed to the Senate Finance, Ways and Means Committee. It is scheduled for a House subcommittee hearing today.

Reference: nashvillecitypaper.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com) and (USPRS.com)

Be Specific; Avoid Jargon When Asking for Public Records - There May Not be Documents to Match Request

2008-03-25T19:24:00.002-07:00

When it comes to accessing city, county and state public records, a vague request or an unkempt filing cabinet can cause unforeseen delays.

While state law mandates access to public records, record-keeping methods vary across agencies and departments.

That means records staff often must think creatively to contact the proper person or department, or find a way to access records that — although they’re public — may be difficult to come by due to logistical barriers.

“One of the difficulties between people who are outside of the city government asking for records is (they) don’t know how we keep the records,” said Adelle Ringus, records manager for the city of Bellingham. “Sometimes people ask for things that the city doesn’t have or isn’t required to have.”

Some examples include birth and marriage records, which aren’t kept by the city, Ringus said.

“People don’t always understand what kind of records are maintained by a particular agency,” Ringus said.“ Records are filed in a fashion that helps city people do their jobs and that doesn’t always correspond to the way that someone from the public might want to access those records.”

Contrary to popular belief, agencies are not required to create a record to match a request. If the record doesn’t exist in the form requested, the request will need modification.

A recent request to the city by The Bellingham Herald asked for all noise complaints to businesses in the Central Business District within the last four years, to be used in a story about music venues clashing with downtown residents over noise.

Those police reports are public, but Ringus explained that the city does not keep records by neighborhood.

An amended request asked to search by zip code, but that search turned up so many results that the story deadline arrived long before all those records could be pulled and examined.

Finally, The Herald compiled a list of every downtown business that had hosted live music in the last four years, and requested police reports for only those businesses.

“The more specific you can get, the better off you are,” said George Reid, public records officer for Whatcom County. “If you have a date range, a permit number or enforcement case number that helps even more. If not, you’re liable to get a phone call requesting clarification.”

Another problem Ringus sees is when requests contain complex terminology or jargon.

She said this problem can be solved by using layman’s terms if possible, or including very specific technical terms that experts in the related field could assist in understanding.

Both Reid and Ringus said part of their job is to help requestors understand what’s available and where they can get it. That’s easier if people are patient and courteous, Ringus said.

“If someone’s yelling at me my creative thought process is pretty much stifled,” she said. “I too am human and a little bit of honey doesn’t hurt.”

Reference: bellinghamherald.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Use Caution When Accessing Newly Available Army Records

2008-03-22T21:39:00.002-07:00

Finally, the enlistment records of nearly 9 million men and women who were in the U.S. Army during World War II can be accessed online. That’s good news for researchers who have long been frustrated by privacy laws and loss of records in a fire at the National Military Personnel Records Center in St. Louis.

The digital enlistment records include the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps and are available through the National Archive's Web site. They can be a rich source of information, showing an enlistee's serial number, place of birth, race, marital status, civilian occupation, education level and more.

We genealogists welcome access to as many records as possible. But, as usual, we have to question what we get and accept information with caution. This seems especially true with these files.

According to the government, more than a third of the digital enlistment files contain a scanning error. This is mostly because of problems when microfilm copies were made years ago.

The digital records are the second reformatting of the original files. During World War II, the Army created the original records on IBM punch cards for each enlistee. After the war, it transferred the punch-card records onto microfilm and destroyed the cards.

But the scanning mechanism used to move information from punch cards to microfilm was imprecise. It wasn’t able to read various characters on the cards and replaced any unreadable character with a blank space. It also incorrectly converted other characters, introducing more mistakes.

About 13 percent of the punch cards - 1.5 million - couldn't even be scanned. So be prepared not to find whoever you're looking for, even though they were World War II Army veterans.

The electronic records were created from the microfilm by the National Archives in 1994. This was to support the reconstruction of military files lost in the 1973 fire at the records center in St. Louis.

On the archives site, you'll see pound (or number) symbols (#) in the digital enlistment files. The symbols are substitutes for the blank spaces put into the microfilm copies by the faulty scanning mechanism.

I did a quick field test of the digital files by looking for my father-in-law's record. He served as a radio operator with the 305th Bombardment Group in the 8th Air Force of the Army Air Corps, stationed in Chelveston, England. Now 85, he was seriously injured on a mission over Magdeburg, Germany, in 1945.

Dad was able to quickly spot what we believed was a mistake. His occupation is shown as "mail carrier," which he gruffly told me wasn't right and brushed it off. I later gently guided the conversation back to his occupation when he enlisted and found he had been giving it some thought.

Before enlisting, he worked for the railroad as a messenger. If you think about the broad categories the government often casts us, it makes sense that a "messenger" became a "mail carrier." It is an excellent example of how genealogists need to question their preconceived notions. Dad and I both assumed the government files incorrectly said he worked for the postal service.

Because many World War II veterans have passed on, it's not always possible to directly confirm whether an enlistment file is correct. It's up to us as genealogists - knowing there are mistakes in these records - to find other ways to verify the information.

To view the digital records, go to the National Archives' Access to Archival Database section at aad.archives.gov/aad. Remember these are files of Army veterans; servicemen and women who were in the Navy and Marine Corps during World War II aren't included.

Reference: www2.tbo.com

(EnlistmentRecords.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

Police Public Records: 3 Reasons Why You Need To Begin Searching Today.

2008-03-22T19:55:00.003-07:00

Are you ready to begin searching the Police Public Records? There are many reasons to check the Police Public Records; this article will describe three reasons for you to begin looking into the Police Public Records today.

Police Public Records Reason #1 Your Safety

The first reason why you need to check into the Police Public Records is for the safety of you and your family. As you search the Police Public Records, you will be able to find out the past experiences of your neighbors, co-workers, friends and potential friends (or suitors).

Imagine if you found out that a person wanting to date you was a convicted rapist? Or if a potential business partner had been convicted of fraud? This information might cause you to think twice about dealing with that person.

You can also find all sex offenders in your neighborhood as you search the Police Public Records. Not all people are as they appear. The safety of our children is so important in these times and it is good to be armed with the power of knowledge. With the help of the Police Public Records, you can find out the truth about anyone you want to know about, by doing a criminal and background check today.

Police Public Records Reason #2 Your Peace of Mind

As you begin to look over the Police Public Records, you will soon realize that there is a ton of information available about anyone (including yourself!). You can use this information to bring you peace of mind. Peace of mind about those who you work for or with. Peace of mind about those who live near or around you. Peace of mind about who you deal with on a regular basis (coaches, Sunday school, teachers, etc).

Public records are not limited to criminal searches either. With the right tools, you can find pertinent information about anyone using a nearly unlimited number of resources, such as financial records, court records, civil records, employment records, housing records, driving records, arrest records and even phone hook up records just to name a few.

Police Public Records Reason #3 Your Curiosity

Have you ever wanted to know something, just to know? Well now you can, with the right tools, know all that you ever wanted to know about anyone! There are literally billions of records available to search through to find hidden information about all the people that you know.

Some people will begin searching the Police Public Records for their own safety, others for their own peace of mind, while others will do it, just to know. What are you waiting for? The information is available; you just need to know how to start.

Reference: ezinearticles.com

(PolicePublicRecords.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

How to Obtain Copies of Your Passport Records

2008-03-21T11:34:00.003-07:00

There are two options for obtaining copies of your passport records:

1. Passport Records for Issuances 1925 - Present

a) Requesting Your Own Record

Passport Services maintains United States passport records for passports issued from 1925 to the present. These records normally consist of applications for United States passports and supporting evidence of United States citizenship, and are protected by the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 USC 552(a)). Passport records do not include evidence of travel such as entrance/exit stamps, visas, residence permits, etc., since this information is entered into the passport book after it is issued.

The Privacy Act allows you to obtain copies of records in your own name and the records of your minor children.

To request these records, please submit a typed or clearly printed NOTARIZED request that provides:

1. your full name at birth and any subsequent name changes and/or the full name of your minor child or children, if you are requesting their records;
2. your date and place of birth and/or those of your minor child or children;
3. your current mailing address;
4. your current daytime telephone number;
5. your current e-mail address, if available;
6. your reason for the request;
7. the dates or estimated dates your passports were issued; and
8. your passport numbers or any other information that will help us locate your records.

A search for your passport record is free with your notarized request. However, there is a $45.00 search fee for each individual, other than yourself and your minor children, for whom a record search is requested. A check or money order made payable to "Department of State" must be included with your request.

The search fee is waived for passport records to be submitted in connection with a request for Federal, State, or municipal benefits or when a court of competent jurisdiction orders production of the record. A copy of the court order signed by a judge should be submitted with your request.

b) Authenticated Passport Records

Authenticated copies of passport records may be requested. If you would like an authenticated copy of a passport record, the authentication fee is $30.00 for the first authenticated copy of an individual's record and $20.00 for each additional authenticated copy of that record. Checks or money orders should be made payable to "Department of State".

There is no charge for authenticated copies of records to be submitted in connection with a request for Federal, State, or municipal benefits or when a court of competent jurisdiction orders production of the record.

c) Third Party Requests

Third party requests must include one of the following: (1) authorization of consent from the owner of the passport records, (2) proof of guardianship, (3) death certificate, or (4) court order signed by a judge of competent jurisdiction requesting the Department of State to release passport records. The only exception to this requirement is when the owner of the passport records was born 100 years or more ago. Your third party request does not have to be notarized but should include the information described in the section above that covers requesting your own record and a $45.00 search fee for each individual for whom a record search is requested. Checks or money orders should be made payable to "Department of State".

d) Mailing Address

All requests for passport records issued from 1925 to present should be mailed to:
Department of State
Passport Services
Research and Liaison Section
Room 500
1111 19th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20524-1705

2. Passport Records for Issuances Prior to 1925

The National Archives and Records Administration maintains records for passport issuances prior to 1925. You may write to them at the following address:

National Archives and Records Administration
Archives 1
Reference Branch
8th & Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20408

Reference: travel.state.gov

(StateDepartmentRecords.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

Who's Buying Cell Records Online? Cops

2008-03-20T19:54:00.002-07:00

Net sellers tell Congress they supply law enforcement officials with call lists

Both federal and local level law enforcement officials have purchased cell phone records and other private information from Internet-based data collection services as an investigative short-cut, MSNBC.com has learned. At least one Web-based data seller has told Congress that the FBI is a client.

Critics of the practice say it encourages alleged illegal behavior by Web site operators, who often obtain the information by tricking telephone company customer service representatives into revealing it.

A hearing on the sale of cell phone records is scheduled for this week before the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The phone records are generally acquired by the resellers through fraudulent means and would not be admissible in court as evidence, but they are still helpful as an investigative tool, say officials familiar with the investigation.

The alleged use of the customer records by law enforcement officials could raise legal and ethical questions, as it would circumvent due process and years of established laws protecting consumers from random eavesdropping on electronic communications.

The U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee and its Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee are looking into the fraudulent acquisition of consumer cell phone records by private investigators and online data sellers — an issue that exploded into the public sphere earlier this year after a blogger was able to purchase cell phone records of former presidential candidate Gen. Wesley Clark.

But the business was thriving online long for years before that, with hundreds of Web sites advertising that they could obtain anyone's cell phone records for about $100.

The committee is attempting to learn who's selling the cell phone records, and who's buying.

FBI says it looks to private firms for help
As part of its inquiry, the committee has asked dozens of Web sellers to reveal their customers lists. MSNBC.com has viewed one such list, and spoken with several other data sellers.

One seller, Advanced Research Inc., which operates ADVSearch.com, told the committee that it has sold data to the FBI.

"On occasion, ARI (Advanced Research) has done work for municipalities, banks, mortgage and insurance companies, private companies, foreign governments, law enforcement, even the FBI," ARI's letter to Congress said.

FBI spokesman Richard J. Kolko said Sunday he could not confirm or deny whether the bureau had received mobile phone records from Advanced Research, but acknowledged that the FBI sometimes buys or receives data from private companies to help with investigations. But he said agents would never break any laws to obtain such evidence.

"The FBI, in pursuit of its investigative priorities, at times gets information from private companies that provide information to the public, or at least to others outside of the government," Kolko said. "This investigative technique is used to support investigations or other aspects of our missions. When this is done, we adhere to all established DOJ guidelines, FBI policy and the law."

Kolko also said he could not comment on processes the FBI may have in place to ensure that data it receives from private companies has been acquired legally by intermediaries.

Congress is now investigating how Web phone records sellers obtain their data; officials at state and federal agencies have said acquisition of customer mobile phone records without their consent is a criminal act.

Many buyers involved in debt collection
The dozens of Web sites now being investigated by Congress sell to a wide cross-section of customers buying data. Evidence gathered so far suggests many purchasers are involved in debt collection. But a steady stream of evidence also implicates law enforcement officials, who occasionally use the services as a shortcut, avoiding the need for court orders generally required to see phone records.

The phone records are often obtained by private investigators through a tactic known as "pretexting." Investigators call mobile-phone companies posing as legitimate customers and trick service representatives into delivering copies of records.

Many Web site sellers maintain the practice is legal, but cell phone companies, the Federal Communications Commissions and numerous state attorneys general have said impersonation of consumers is fraud. Several states also have sued data brokers over the acquisition and sale of phone records in recent months.

Just this week, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a bill making acquisition of cell records through pretexting explicitly illegal. Those who obtain such records could face up to 20 years jail time under the bill that passed by a vote of 409-0 on Tuesday.

In its response to an inquiry by congressional investigators, Texas-based PDJ Investigations — which runs several look-up sites — stated that it provide records to law enforcement officers.

"On numerous occasions a wide variety of law enforcement officials on a federal, state and local level have asked for investigative assistance, which PDJ has provided free of charge," the company wrote.

The lawyer for another firm that's being questioned by Congress — IEI Investigations, also known as BestPeopleSearch.com — said he believed his client also has provided services to law enforcement for free and said the practice is common in the industry.

"It's a much easier and cheaper path to gather information," said the company's Los Angeles-based lawyer, Larry Slade. "But when law enforcement uses it, it raises other issues."

Civil liberties attorneys say the use of illegally obtained cell phone records as part of a criminal investigation raises serious questions.

‘Established legal procedures’ circumvented
“There are established legal procedures for obtaining phone records that provide checks against improper access,” said Chris Hoofnagle, an attorney at the Electronic Privacy Information Center who complained to the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission last year about the availability of cell phone records online. “These legal procedures allow fast access to phone record for law enforcement and provide accountability. That’s what missing here, the accountability.”

A publicly elected official caught up in the congressional inquiry also has said publicly that he obtained phone records for law enforcement officials. Colorado state Rep. Jim Welker, owner of Universal Communications Co., told the Rocky Mountain News earlier this month that he sold phone records to law enforcement officials, as well as debt collectors and financial companies.

"I look at it (the business) as helping the good guys find the bad people," he told the paper. Welker -- an enigmatic figure in Colorado politics who recently said at a press conference that legalizing gay marriage would eventually lead to inter-species marriage -- did not return phone calls from MSNBC.com seeking comment.

One potential customer of MPIS Inc.'s PublicPeopleFinder.com service was the Ruston, La., Police Department. In January, Ruston Police Chief Randal Hermes told MSNBC.com that he sent an e-mail to MPIS asking about the Web site’s ability to locate cell phone calling records.

"We are finding the need more and more often to search cellular telephone records," the letter said. "It's unbelievable to me how difficult it is in this day and time to identify the subscriber of a cell phone."

In reply, MPIS's Jodi Leatherman wrote, "We're always looking to help law enforcement," Hermes said.

When asked about the e-mail exchange, Hermes said his department was investigating a string of cell phone thefts, and had "run into some pretty rough road blocks" trying to get records from cell phone companies. Up-to-the minute calling records are the best way to find a thief after a cell phone is stolen, but the records can be hard to get, he said.

‘You want the records quickly’
"If your phone is stolen and you want the records quickly, it's impossible to do," he said. "We were looking on the Internet to see if there were other places we could go that had cell phone records."

Hermes said he never obtained any records from PublicPeopleFinder.com, however. Soon after the Jan. 25 exchange with Leatherman, Hermes found a helpful employee at a cell phone company and the department was able to obtain the records through standard procedures, so he no longer needed the Internet-based services, Hermes said. “It didn’t go any further,” he said.

One company under investigation replied to the Congressional inquiry letter with what appears to be a a partial customer list, which was viewed by MSNBC.com. The spreadsheet, titled "Copy of Call Record Customers," revealed that most cell phone record buyers were small companies, most likely hoping to perform debt collection. The list included several apartment complexes, doctor's offices and law offices.

Also on the list is an employee of a major insurance provider who works in the company's "special investigations unit."

The list also includes a Washington D.C.-area resident who says on his Web site that he's a consultant for law enforcement officials in the D.C. area, and an expert in CALEA — the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act. Federal officials and police officers often utilize CALEA statutes to legally obtain consumer telephone record information.

The Washington D.C.-area resident did not return requests for comment. It is not clear that he ordered cell phone records on behalf of law enforcement officials.

The use of extreme means by debt collectors is hardly new; one professional pretext caller interviewed by MSNBC.com, who spoke under condition of anonymity, said that use of cell phone records to track debtors is an important cog in the lending system. Without it, lenders would have no hope of collecting from customers who default on loans — and would have to stop lending money to consumers with lower credit scores.

The anonymous pretext caller said he occasionally did free work for law enforcement. In one case, the source said, he helped a police detective in Nassau County, N.Y., who wanted to prove an association between two alleged criminal accomplices. The suspects denied knowing each other, but their cell phone records showed otherwise.

"He knew it wasn't admissible, but he used it to shake them down (during interrogation)," the source said.

Witness: 'Not being fully investigated'
Rob Douglas, an information security consultant who operates PrivacyToday.com, performed research for the House committee conducting the investigation. He recently quit because he said significant issues “were not being fully investigated.”

In a letter announcing his resignation, Douglas said the committee needs to look into dramatic allegations that officials from the Homeland Security Department are among the law enforcement officials purchasing the cell phone records.

"There have been allegations made by one party in the investigation that the Department of Homeland Security purchased American's phone records from a company in Texas," Douglas wrote. "It is not clear that this lead is being fully and aggressively explored."

Russ Knocke, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, said his agency would not use cell phone records Web sites to obtain information.

"There are privacy laws in this country,” he said. “We had the NSA (eavesdropping) debate already.”

The use of the records can cut both ways for law enforcement. On two occasions reviewed by MSNBC.com, a data broker traced a cell phone number for an Internet buyer and revealed that it belonged to a law enforcement official. The records suggest those consumers could also have been able to obtain call records for a police officer's cell phone — exactly the nightmare scenario the Chicago police department warned its members about in a January memo.

Douglas said some commercial data brokers, in an effort to boost their argument that obtaining cell phone records is legal, have in the past exaggerated claims of working with law enforcement officials. Still, the sheer amount of evidence pointing to the use of illegally obtained phone records by law enforcement official warrants deeper investigation, he said, adding that the current witness list for an upcoming Congressional hearing on the matter does not include law enforcement officials or other government officials accused of purchasing the records.

“The constitutional issues raised by government agents looking at Americans' phone records absent judicial oversight are serious,” he said. “Equally important is the protection of those very same agents from criminals buying their records in an attempt to do harm to the agents or their investigations. Congress must fully explore these issues and not short-cut the current investigation."

A hearing on the committee’s findings is tentatively scheduled for May, Douglas said. A spokesman for the committee said in an e-mail statement that it would not comment on the committee's work until it is finished.

"The committee is conducting an extensive investigation into potential breaches of basic privacy. Until that inquiry is complete and we're satisfied about the reliability, authenticity and significance of the raw data coming in now in response to requests and subpoenas, we will defer trying to characterize it," wrote Larry Neal, deputy staff director for the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He also wrote that there may be as many as a "half-dozen" investigative hearings, and that the committee has not yet decided whom to call.

The Federal Trade Commission is separately conducting its own investigation of cell phone record online sales, as are several state attorneys general.

Reference: msnbc.msn.com

(USCellRecords.com) and (USPublicRecords.com)

College Student Records: Legal Issues, Privacy, and Security Concerns. ERIC Digest.

2008-03-18T18:44:00.004-07:00

As the practice of entering student records online has become more widespread, many colleges are struggling with the technical and legal complexities of protecting the privacy of student data. There have been a number of reports in the news of hackers breaking into college websites to steal student identifies, tamper with grades or other information, and illegally view student records.

Many colleges have established policies to comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974, also known as the Buckley Amendment, which enumerates legal guidelines regarding the privacy of student records. However, changing technologies and the new law, the US Patriot Act, which amends some provisions of FERPA, forces colleges to reexamine how they can protect student records.

This digest will briefly discuss the provisions of FERPA and the US Patriot Act, and the measures some colleges are implementing to comply with these laws and improve the security of electronic student records.

FAMILY EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY ACT (FERPA)

FERPA established specific rights to parents regarding their children's education
records. These rights transfer to the student when he or she turns 18 years of age, and these students are called "eligible students" under the law. FERPA applies to educational institutions that receive federal funding.

The rights established by FERPA are posted on the U.S. Department of Education website: (http://www.ed.gov/offices/OM/fpco/ferpa).

The basis tenants of the law state the following:

1.) Parents or eligible students have the right to inspect and review the student's
education records maintained by the school, and schools are to comply with these
requests.

2.) Parents or eligible students have the right to request that a school correct records
which they believe to be inaccurate or misleading. If the school denies the request, the parent or eligible student is entitled to a hearing. If after the hearing, the school still denies the request, the parent or eligible student has the right to place a statement in their education records about contested information.

3.) Generally, schools must have written permission from the parent or eligible student to release information from a student's educational record. However, FERPA allows school to disclose educational records without consent to particular parties such as school officials with a legitimate educational interest.

4.) Schools may disclose, without consent, directory information such as name,
address, and date of birth. However, schools must notify parents and students about
directory information, and given them sufficient time to opt out of the disclosure.

Finally, schools must notify parents and students annually of their rights under FERPA. The Family Policy Compliance Office, with the U.S. Department of Education, responds to all complaints or alleged violations under FERPA, and gives advise to colleges and schools on how to comply with the law (Walsh, 2002a).

For the first time, the U.S. Supreme Court, in 2002, heard two cases based on FERPA. In February 2002, the court unanimously decided in Owasso Independent School District v. Falvo (No. 00-1073), that the practice of peer grading and students calling out each other's grades to the teacher, did not violate the provisions of FERPA (McCarthy, 2002).

In Gonzaga University v. Doe (No. 01-679), the U.S. Supreme Court rules 7-2, that individuals do not have a right to sue over alleged violations under FERPA, and that individuals cannot seek compensation under that law (Walsh, 2002b). The Gonzaga ruling reaffirms the process by which the U.S. Department of Education enforces FERPA.

THE US PATRIOT ACT

As a result of the US Patriot Act, educational institutions must comply with aspects of the law that require the monitoring of foreign students and the disclosure of student records to track suspected terrorists. The US Patriot Act allows the U.S. Attorney General to access student records and collect information on foreign students, such as name, address, and visa classification which are maintained by educational institutions through the Student Exchange and Visitor Information System (SEVIS).

The law also permits the U.S. Attorney General to apply for a court order to access student records maintained by educational institutions for the purpose of an investigation or prosecution relating to terrorism (American Council on Education, 2001). The law exempts both SEVIS and information obtained from student records by a court order from the disclosure clause required by FERPA.

Many colleges and universities are grappling with the complexities of the law, in particular their obligations and role. A number of colleges are worried that responses to an invalid request will prompt lawsuits under the Fourth Amendment (Carlson & Foster, 2002).

In response to the requirements of the law, some colleges are drafting compliance checklists for staff use to more effectively respond to law enforcement requests to search confidential university records. Librarians are concerned about privacy rights of readers since patrons' book loan records could be investigated under the U.S. Patriot Act.

ELECTRONIC SECURITY ISSUES AND COLLEGE POLICIES

Electronic information is protected not only by technology such as firewalls, password protection, and other measures, but also by the college employees who safeguard and manage the information. Some colleges have created electronic communications procedures to educate staff on how to protect student information.

The University of California, Los Angeles has a policy that restricts the level of access to student information based upon what the particular staff member needs to know. For instance, academic counselors have a different level of access compared to financial aid officials.

Also, before any faculty or staff member can access information, they must fill out a
form detailing what they want to view and why. The form must be approved by the
computer-systems manager of the registrar's office (Foster, 2001). For computer
records maintained by centers other than the registrar, U.C.L.A. gives departmental
discretion to other campus managers on whether or not to retain files of websites that students visit.

Another complex issue is under what circumstances college officials have the right to
view student emails or other electronic files. Many colleges reserve the right to view
student emails under certain conditions.

EDUCAUSE, a nonprofit association which promotes the advancement of higher education through information technology, recommends that colleges notify students about their privacy rights, have policies stating how online activity is monitored, and inform students about how their records will be used (Foster, 2001).

Also, the widespread use of Social Security numbers has come under fire by those concerned with security issues. Some colleges, like the University of Illinois, are phasing out the use of Social Security numbers as student identification numbers.

One college official states that the use of Social Security numbers is problematic on many campuses because many colleges do not have a disclosure policy which states how and why the college will use the information (Foster, 2002b). Under FERPA, colleges must inform students whether or not the disclosure is voluntary.

The widespread use of Social Security numbers to tract student records has made
many student records vulnerable to identity theft by computer hackers or other
criminals. In February 2003, hackers broke into a University of Texas database and
stole the names, Social Security numbers, and email addresses of over 55,000 students and employees ("Hackers Breach Student Database at the University of Texas," 2003).

In 2002, a Swedish hacker broke into an Indiana University database and downloaded the names and Social Security numbers of 3,100 students (Foster, 2001). In 2002, a University of Delaware student allegedly changed her grades online after successfully impersonating a professor by finding his Social Security number online and guessing the password to the professor's computer account (Read, 2002).

Incidences like these often occur because software glitches or errors by university staff leave the electronic system vulnerable to attack, the lack of safeguards in protecting student information, and even organized crime rings (Foster, 2002a). Occurrences of security breaches have prompted students and some lawmakers to pressure college officials to curtail the use of Social Security numbers.

Although some colleges have limited the use of students' Social Security numbers to identification purposes, many college administrators are reluctant to alter their practices, arguing that changing their procedures is too costly and time consuming and ultimately ineffective (Foster, 2002a). Laws have been passed in Arizona, California, Maryland, New York, and Wisconsin which restrict a college's use of student Social Security numbers.

CONCLUSION

The complexities of the digital age, combined with new laws designed to protect
National security has altered the ways in which educational institutions provide access to, monitor and safeguard student records.

Colleges and universities have created policies tailored to the needs of their institution both to protect student records from unwanted intrusions and to comply effectively with new and complex legal and law enforcement requirements.

Active debate surrounding these issues continues as educational institutions try to accommodate and balance the sometimes conflicting pressures of privacy concerns versus legal directives.

Reference: ericdigests.org
(CollegeStudentRecords.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (UniversityStudentRecords.com)

Public Records Raised Questions About Colleges

2008-03-16T11:04:00.001-07:00

Public records were the smoking gun that led to the forced resignations of two Maricopa Community Colleges presidents.

Public records provided evidence of financial malfeasance that caused a high-profile college director to be fired and called a $2 million project into question.

Public records revealed that a U.S. congressman steered more than $1 million in federal funds to a college program that his daughter was hired to direct.

But in some of these cases, the so-called public records weren't easy to get.

The law says records are supposed to be turned over in a timely manner. Instead, they often had to be wrested from officials who attempted to delay or stonewall their release. Records could not be located for weeks, some records were intentionally destroyed and others were kept secret until a court forced the college to turn them over.

Today marks the beginning of Sunshine Week, an annual effort to focus the public's attention on how its government agencies are operating and to encourage citizens to fight for their right to access records and information.

In the college cases, the Arizona Public Records Law protected taxpayers' rights, forcing the disclosure of documents that exposed fundamental failures by administrators to oversee public money at the nation's largest community-college system.

But the college cases also revealed how far public officials will sometimes go to keep records secret. And this is not an isolated incident.

Every day across the state, routine requests for records and information are routed through the dizzying bureaucracy of city, county or state agencies. Records that should be readily available are often delayed or denied.

Media and members of the public often have to write repeated requests for information and make formal demands under the law. The media may threaten legal action, plead cases in court and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills to get records.

Arizona's Public Records Law requires government officials to maintain all manner of records and make them available to the public. The law applies to financial, police, court, campaign, employment and hundreds of other reports, e-mails, memos and documents.

With few exceptions, the law carries a presumption of openness, meaning the public has a right to these records, and it requires officials to respond promptly to requests.

But that hasn't stopped agencies from making it difficult.

The Maricopa County Attorney's Office this year encouraged county employees to ignore requests not directed at the proper officials and told employees they were under no obligation to name that official.

The county attorney's office also tried to charge thousands of dollars for electronic files that could be copied in a few minutes onto a CD for just pennies.

Several agencies have refused to release records unless requests are put in writing, something not required under state law. Other agencies have gone so far as to create a complicated form that officials say must be filled out in order to release documents.

The disgraced former Pinal County manager got a restraining order to prevent the release of e-mails on his county computer that ultimately revealed his plans to take an African safari with developers, among other things.

The Maricopa Integrated Health System is fighting to keep private a report detailing why the public county hospital was denied preliminary accreditation, going so far as to sue The Arizona Republic over its attempt to obtain the record.

The media have no more right to records than any other member of the public. But media do have resources to fight legal challenges that private citizens lack, a point underscored by the Maricopa Community Colleges cases.

The Republic's yearlong investigation sparked criminal investigations, multiple audits and sweeping financial reforms in 2007. While there were dozens of stories, three issues were directly related to public records.

Reference: azcentral.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Text Messages Enter Public-Records Debate

2008-03-15T10:30:00.000-07:00

Those supposedly private messages that public officials dash off on their government cell phones to friends and colleagues aren't necessarily private after all.

Courts, lawyers and states are increasingly treating these typed text messages as public documents subject to the same disclosure laws — including the federal Freedom of Information Act — that apply to e-mails and paper records.

"I don't care if it's delivered by carrier pigeon, it's a record," said Charles Davis, executive director of the National Freedom of Information Coalition at the University of Missouri. "If you're using public time or your public office, you're creating public records every time you hit send."

A Texas judge agreed in December, ordering the city of Dallas to turn over e-mails written by some city officials as well as messages sent on handheld devices such as cell phones.

Journalists in Detroit are pressing for a similar ruling. Several media outlets, including the Gannett-owned Detroit Free Press, have sued the city for access to text messages Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick sent using his pager. Gannett, USA TODAY's parent company, owns the Free Press.

Through an independent source, the Free Press already has obtained thousands of text messages that seem to confirm the married mayor and his top aide were having an affair and had decided to fire a deputy police chief investigating the mayor's personal conduct.

Herschel Fink, a lawyer representing the Free Press, said there's no doubt the text messages are public.

"The lesson to public officials is don't do anything crooked because there are myriad ways you can be found out," he said. "And this is one of them."

Kilpatrick's messages were saved for several years because his pager came from a company that archived them, Fink said.

But many such messages don't hang around long enough to be retrieved. They may remain stored inside a pager or cell phone for only a few hours, depending on the device's storage capacity.

Some consider the casually written text messages more like conversations than e-mails and say they don't meet the standard of a traditional public record.

Text messages sent via cell phone are stored on the cell phone company's servers or backup tapes, but they disappear as those records are purged.

ELECTRONIC MESSAGES: State officials try to keep them under wraps
QUIZ: How much do you know about open records?
Even if the actual text messages have vanished, advocates for open government say the logs of such conversations — which would look similar to a phone bill listing called numbers — should be made public.

That's what Thomas McAfee got last year when he asked the University of Arkansas for the text messages and other cell phone records of the school's head football coach, Houston Nutt. McAfee, an avid Arkansas football fan, wanted to see whether a school booster was unduly influencing Nutt's play-calling decisions.

Arkansas' public records law doesn't mention text messages specifically, but it does cover "electronic or computer-based information."

The logs McAfee got from the school show Nutt not only communicated with the booster but also frequently used his university-issued cell phone to text message a female TV news anchor. McAfee subsequently asked the school's board of trustees to investigate the conduct of Nutt, who is married. Nutt has denied any improper relationship.

State lawmakers in New York are working on a revision to the state's open records law that would specifically add text messages to the types of documents covered. Davis, at the National Freedom of Information Coalition, said that shouldn't be necessary.

"If every time a new technology emerges we're going to argue it's not a public record, and then our view of public records is very cramped," he said. "If it's not a piece of 8x10 glossy white papers, then it's not a public record? We've got to embrace the future."

Reference: usatoday.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Voting Isn't a Private Affair

2008-03-09T16:52:00.001-07:00

Dems, GOP to use public data about recent vote to court support for November

Anthony Peña: You've got mail. And phone calls. And door knocks.

You, a twenty something writer on Houston's east side, voted last week in the Democratic primary for the first time in your life. That night you caucused for Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Now, because the names and voter registration numbers of primary voters are public record, your name is being added to computer databases lovingly maintained by political consultants and political parties as if they were puppies.

If you voted early for the primary — when you voted is public record also — Democrats who want to win local races as well as the presidency probably will call you before the November general election to remind you early voting has begun again.

They will call you to urge you to vote Democratic again, too. Local Democratic candidates likely will knock on your door. They'll leave a campaign leaflet if you're not home.

And any local Republican candidates on an October "block walk" probably will skip your dwelling. They will have a computerized list of whom not to waste time on.

Perhaps one of the lasting effects of the record primary turnout for both parties is newly found enthusiasm for the democratic process. "It just seems kind of like a cool fresh time," you said in an interview a few days after the primary, Mr. Peña. "It seems pretty optimistic."

But more tangible as a consequence of the primary is the now-expanded voting record that will be used by a variety of political foot soldiers in the war for November votes.

Election turnouts

Democrats gleefully counted 405,784 votes for presidential candidates in their Harris County primary. The largest number of votes ever cast in the county for a Democratic presidential nominee in a November election was 475,865 for John Kerry in 2004. (President Bush got more, with total county turnout topping 1 million).

If Democratic operatives were to get all primary voters back to the polls in November through direct contact, it would put them well on the way to a stronger-than-ever showing in the general election.

"That's half the battle right there, figuring out who these people are, and then we can use our resources to pull these people back out," said Amber Moon, Houston-based spokeswoman for the Texas Democratic Party. "I think the people who are excited today will be excited in November — and we will make sure they are excited."

The Republican primary here attracted 169,178 voters to its less dramatic presidential race, but the number still was a record high. GOP turnout set new marks in Fort Bend and Montgomery counties, too. And from election records, campaigns will be able to find new voters and returning Republicans in that batch.

Grass-roots efforts

"To see that someone has voted in the Republican primary years ago and has missed a few and now has come back into the fold, that's someone we are excited about," said Bech Bruun, Austin-based executive director of the coordinated GOP campaign called Texas Victory 2008.

Of course those voters, and others in different categories on the GOP target list, will hear from Republican candidates and groups by mail, telephone, maybe e-mail and in person.

"We want to focus on what we consider to be traditional, grass-roots, get-out-the-vote, people-to-people contact," Bruun said.

Houston-based Republican political consultant Allen Blakemore, who uses voter databases to target voters with tailored messages from his candidate-clients, explained how some of the projects work:

For about the price of a music compact disc, the Harris County Clerk's Office sells computer discs containing the list of everyone who voted in each primary — and whether they voted by mail or in person, early or on election day. For not much more money, private vendors match the names with computerized lists of mailing addresses, telephone numbers and sometimes e-mail addresses.

Banking on loyalty

Harris County residents with a record of voting only in general elections, and who also live in neighborhoods that may prove crucial to local elections, may get a mailed leaflet or a phone call with a campaign message that differs in tone or content from what primary voters received. If grocery stores can send customers coupons based on their individual previous purchases, candidates can get in on the action, too.

Certainly, some voters who participated in the Democratic primary may end up voting for the Republican presidential candidate in the fall, and others will "cross over" in different ways.

But as the experts comb through the data generated by last week's election, they will bank on the idea that, because Anthony Peña voted in the Democratic primary, he is likely to vote Democratic in November. And the communications flood he will experience in the fall will take that assumption into account:

"The greater turnout in the primaries just gives us a great population pool to put in one pigeonhole or another," Blakemore said.

Reference: chron.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Database a Way For Public to Search Records

2008-03-09T16:44:00.002-07:00

While a search has long been available to the public to seek out teachers’ credentials or status of their licensure, a new Ohio Department of Education database provides more information on actual disciplinary records.

Anyone can simply pull up the Web site, type in a name or school district and see what comes up.

‘‘This one is just easier to use, has more detail,’’ said ODE spokeswoman Karla Carruthers.

It does not include pending cases or those under investigation.

Listings include links to documents, like board resolutions concerning the issue or letters of admonishment sent to the employee in question. Carruthers said the department will continually develop the database.

Lakeview schools Superintendent Robert Wilson said the database is beneficial to education, though he does at times question so much information being made public.

‘‘I’m a little overprotective of individual rights. But, I think it’s a good thing,’’ Wilson said.

Kathryn Hellweg, superintendent of the Warren City School District, said she worries over what is on the database, and worries more about what isn’t there.

For example, it will list if an educator’s license has been revoked, but does not list whether it has been reissued. Nor does the database determine whether someone was on a substitute list or was a full-time employee. Some who come up in a search have actually never even entered a classroom.

‘‘The whole picture’s not there,’’ Hellweg said.

Investigations last year found that ODE often would not be notified if a teacher resigned before being fired for misconduct or if a teacher committed a crime while already licensed because additional background checks had not been conducted.

To that end, the state tried to ensure that those with serious criminal records remain out of classrooms and that teachers disciplined for misconduct are reported: House Bill 190 and House Bill 79.

Going into effect in November 2007, House Bill 190 requires applicants for any license or permit with the ODE to complete an Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation background check and FBI criminal background check.

The measure immediately affected applicants who were seeking new licenses, those renewing or advancing their licenses or those seeking the same for adult education and student activity permits.

It also mandates that beginning Sept. 5, all current certificate holders must have both checks completed every five years.

Hellweg said that Warren generally will not hire anyone with a record, but certain situations will be considered. And while these regulations being put into place at the state level are beneficial, teachers who have possibly been disciplined in other states may still make their ways into Ohio schools.

‘‘It’s always in the back of your mind. But usually if you’ve done a good job in terms of records check and they’ve cleared the FBI and BCI check, that’s a fairly substantial check,’’ Hellweg said.

House Bill 79 went into effect in March 2007, and requires districts to report misconduct under a variety of circumstances.

Those include:

n When an employee has pleaded guilty, been found guilty or been convicted of certain criminal offenses;

n When an employee has been fired or a contract has not been renewed due to an action found to be unbecoming of a teacher;

n When an employee resigned under the threat of firing or non-renewal;

n When an employee resigns during the course of an investigation into alleged misconduct.

Trumbull County Educational Service Center Superintendent Vicki Giovangnoli said this law really puts a stop to instances when an educator may have escaped a report to the state regarding an incident and then later was hired in another district.

And while the state must be notified, cases don’t immediately appear on the database. Carruthers could not estimate how long it takes to process each.

‘‘We try to get them done as quickly as possible,’’ she said.

For example, Andrew Tripoulas was fired from the Warren school system last year after nude photos of the high school math teacher were found on the online community MySpace, as well as at a local bar.

The Warren school board decided that Tripoulas allowed the photos to be taken and then failed to retain custody of them — what they found to be conduct unbecoming of a teacher. While months have gone by since that action was taken, Tripoulas’ name has not yet made it onto the database of teachers who have been disciplined.

Reference: tribune-chronicle.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

A Check on Name Checks: How Useful are FBI Background Reviews for Green-Card Applicants?

2008-03-04T22:49:00.002-07:00

THANKS to a new fee structure, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services faces a backlog of 140,000 green-card applications.

To reduce the backlog, the agency said it will give green cards to many people who are in the country legally without first completing required FBI background checks.

If these FBI checks don't contribute to national security, this new rule's ability to safely and expediently improve the lives of tens of thousands of law-abiding immigrants is commendable. But if the checks do contribute to national security, skipping them will have been a terrible decision. The problem is that USCIS hasn't investigated to find out.

Currently, green-card applicants must undergo three background checks: checks against fingerprint databases, consolidated federal law enforcement databases and FBI investigative files (called name checks). Ninety percent of FBI name checks are completed within 60 days, according to the FBI. The remaining 10 percent can wait years while the FBI locates paper files scattered around dozens of field offices.

Under the new rules, to take effect in mid-March, a green-card applicant whose name check has been pending for more than 180 days will automatically get approval if the applicant has cleared every step but the FBI name check.

If the name-check process, which would continue, later yields information that should be acted on, the green card would be revoked and the person deported. USCIS argues that this rule affects only people who would be living in the United States anyway while awaiting their green cards, and so it will promote expediency without harming national security.

For practical reasons, it's harder for USCIS to revoke a green card than to deny one in the first place. Thus the new rule could potentially allow permanent residency for dangerous immigrants who would otherwise have been denied green cards. USCIS says "anecdotal" evidence suggests the "majority" of name checks don't turn up negative information that would affect the status of applicants, so the risk of this happening is remote.

But since the agency has no statistics about how many bad actors were caught through name checks after not being flagged through the other required background checks, it doesn't actually know what additional national security risk, if any, the new rule will present.

The usefulness of putting every applicant for a green card (and for naturalization) through this third background check has been questioned before by immigrant advocacy groups and USCIS's own ombudsman. (FBI spokesman Bill Carter said only that "our position is that we have no position" on whether USCIS's new rule will affect national security.)

Rather than adopting a tough-sounding process and then disregarding it, USCIS needs to do a thorough assessment of whether this third check yields valuable information.

If FBI name checks are effective, USCIS should demand the resources needed to perform them. If they're not, it shouldn't. Officials can't have it both ways.

Reference: washingtonpost.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Keeping a Light on Government

2008-03-04T22:42:00.001-07:00

We had grave reservations about a proposal that would have made it more difficult to find out what our public servants in state government were up to.

So, we were glad to hear Monday that the measure, being shaped by House Majority Leader Alice Madden, likely will die before it's ever introduced.

The bill would have modified Colorado's open records laws to, among other things, make it easier to shield some lawmakers' e-mails from public scrutiny. It also would have erected barriers to getting information, such as requiring proof of Colorado residency.

Even if the idea is dropped this year, we imagine it will return in some form in the future as lawmakers try to get a handle on the increasing number of requests for public information.

If it does, lawmakers should find ways to encourage people to participate in government, not shut them out.

Madden, D-Boulder, said the draft measure was an effort to curb "fishing expeditions" that take up a lot of staff time and sometimes end with the requester not even picking up the materials. But in the month since the draft was written, Madden said she has come to realize how difficult it would be to target these situations.

"I want to protect the Sunshine laws in this state but I'd also like the requesters to know that these laws aren't there for their amusement," she said.

Madden and others are concerned about the robust community of bloggers and Web-based journalists, some of whom have a political point of view, making more records requests.

Political orientation should not be a consideration in access to records. Bloggers and other non-traditional journalists have the right to seek information about how government is functioning. It is, after all, public information.

We understand that the digital age may require certain tweaks in the law, but the principles should remain the same.

For instance, lawmakers are concerned that records requests sent via e-mail might be diverted by spam filters, so Madden's draft talked about requiring requests be delivered in person or by mail. That seems reasonable, though certified mail seems to be an unnecessary obstacle.

Another provision would have allowed government to refuse to release any documents containing confidential information, such as Social Security numbers. Now, that sensitive information is simply redacted.

One of the more troubling modifications would have lowered the standard applied to whether "constituent correspondence" could be exempt from public records requests.

Now, the law says if a communication "clearly implies" it's meant to be confidential, it can be exempt. The change would have exempted anything that a "reasonable person would expect" to be confidential.

Too much could fly under the radar with such a change. We've seen no compelling reason for a standard revision.

In fact, there has been little justification for the revisions beyond the aggravation of a few legislators.

Democracy thrives because it is a participatory and accountable system of government. Open records are an important part of that, and we're glad to hear this draft measure likely will wither away before seeing the light of day.

Reference: denverpost.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Open Government Forum Relevant to All of US

2008-03-02T12:50:00.002-07:00

Look around the globe, and it’s evident how fragile the concept of freedom really is.

The New York Times reported last Sunday that Vladimir Putin’s Russia is an increasingly autocratic place in which all sorts of freedoms have been limited in recent years.

In anticipation of this summer’s Beijing’s Olympics, the Chinese government has cracked down on some human-rights advocates.

And in the Southeast Asian country of Myanmar (formerly Burma), peaceful protests by monks were met last year with government-led violence.

The Burmese example hits especially close to home, since refugees from that country make up the largest group of newcomers arriving in Utica these days. Hundreds of Burmese now live in the Mohawk Valley, hoping to experience the freedoms denied them in their homelands.

On March 10, the Observer-Dispatch is sponsoring a forum focused on just one of the freedoms we enjoy – that of seeking information from our government.

Robert Freeman, executive director of the state Committee on Open Government, will speak from 6 to 8 p.m. Monday, March 10, at Kunsela Hall at SUNYIT in Marcy. He’ll be joined by a panel of government representatives and citizens with their own perspectives to share on the strengths and weaknesses of New York’s laws governing open meetings and access to records.

The state’s so-called sunshine laws came into being during the early 1970s, an era when public distrust over government actions in matters such as Vietnam and Watergate spawned a push across the nation for more transparency in how government operates.

Our state’s sunshine laws are based on two key principles:

OPEN MEETINGS: Government bodies such as city councils and town boards must conduct virtually all of their business out in the open. These bodies must state clearly and vote on why certain matters delineated by law might be discussed behind closed doors. An example would be a review of a law-enforcement investigation.

AVAILABLE RECORDS: The public has the right to ask for and review public records, whether they be property assessments, the mayor’s salary or e-mails about a controversial project. Again, only a limited amount of records delineated by law may be withheld, such as a public employee’s performance review.

Government officials all too often resist aspects of these laws. Many who do tend to focus on “the media,” since often it is a reporter at a Town Board meeting who might contest the closing of a meeting or a reporter at City Hall who might ask for a sheaf of records about, say, the city payroll.

But open government laws protect all of us. When the O-D publishes an in-depth look at the 2007 Hinckley Reservoir crisis based on 2,000 pages of documents and e-mails obtained through FOIL, it can empower citizens to ask new and better questions about how to fix things for the future.

When an anti-wind turbine citizens’ group in rural Herkimer County sued in a landmark lawsuit because its members were booted from two towns’ discussions of a turbine project in Jordanville, a judge ruled in their favor because the law says the public has a right to observe government deliberations.

And if you want to see what your neighbors’ property assessments are to see if yours is fair, you have that right.

Even in our free society, it’s all too clear that many public officials are either ignorant of open government laws or resist them out of a fear of possible public embarrassment. The law makes clear, however, that giving citizens access to public deliberations and to government records is in our democracy’s best interests.

Reference: uticaod.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Legislature Tinkers with Public's Right to Records

2008-03-02T12:42:00.001-07:00

The public's right to government records could shrink or expand depending on the outcome of five bills vying for lawmakers' approval this session.

While one measure would allow judges to keep the public from seeing sexually explicit evidence in criminal trials (a response to a notorious teen sex case), another would raise the bar legislators must clear to keep records from the public eye.

Just two weeks ago, contractors' bids and contracts with development authorities -- documents the public has a right to view -- seemed headed toward secrecy under House Bill 1200, sponsored by Rep. Wendell Willard, R-Sandy Springs. However, the House State Planning & Community Affairs Committee tabled the bill and a motion to revive it failed this week.

In keeping with the failure of that bill, advocates of public access say that Georgia's Open Records Act has gained strength over the past 15 years.

But that's not to say practice always follows the intent of the law, said Atlanta-based real estate attorney Matt Mashburn, a frequent user of the Act.

Though legislation has sought to aid access, keepers of government records have increasingly taken a broader view of what records are exempt from the Act, Mashburn said. "Now the pendulum in the past couple of years has started swinging the other way," Mashburn said. "They haven't clamped down, but there has been a subtle trend toward expanding these exemptions."

Making it harder to create an exemption is at the heart of Senate Resolution 970, which resides in the hands of the Senate Ethics Committee.

S.R. 970 proposes a constitutional amendment that would require any new exemption to the Open Record Act to get a two-thirds majority in the House and Senate, a so-called supermajority that now is reserved for proposed constitutional amendments.

The measure's sponsor, Sen. David Adelman, D-Atlanta, said the number of exemptions already in the Act leaves it riddled with holes.

For example, records of farm water use are exempt, and they are documents the public or press might want to view in times of water restrictions.

"Transparency in government is what protects our democracy. It should be very hard for the General Assembly to create exceptions to our open records and open meetings laws," Adelman said.

But Mashburn called the supermajority legislationl too cumbersome, adding that it would enable a small minority of recalcitrant lawmakers to block an exemption that may be worthwhile.

"There might be a good reason to exempt something, but a small group may say no, "and the will of the public is stymied," Mashburn said.

Another public access bill deals with criminal trials. Sen. Emanuel Jones, D- Ellenwood, seeks to give judges the right to clear a courtroom when sexually explicit evidence is shown at trial, and to allow judges to determine who has access to that material under Senate Bill 481.

That irks the Georgia First Amendment Foundation, which decries the potential limitation on public records.

Yet Jones said the intent of S.B. 481 is not to block public access, but to prevent a repeat of the Genarlow Wilson case, in which prosecutors released to the media a sex tape used as evidence in the then-17-year-old's trial on charges of sexual assault of a 15-year-old girl.

"I don't think any district attorney should have so much power to see fit to distribute material for children in compromising positions of pornographic nature ever again," Jones said.

Additionally, S.B. 481 would align Georgia law with federal law, he said.

Hollie Manheimer, executive director of the Georgia First Amendment Foundation, countered that even the federal legislation is embroiled in lawsuits over its First Amendment implications.

On another issue, Sen. Chip Rogers, R-Woodstock, wants the state to post its financial records on a free, searchable Web site, under Senate Bill 300, dubbed the Transparency in Government Act.

Rogers said his research showed such Web sites in other states cost little to start up and can offer a hefty savings. Oklahoma set up a site for about $8,000, and Texas was able to shave $2.3 million off of its spending when the Web site revealed redundant purchasing within departments, he said.

"Other savings come to light where you let this information out to the general public. It's just good government," Rogers said.

Kelly McCutchen, executive vice president of the Georgia Public Policy Foundation, an Atlanta-based think tank, said posting spending records online, a movement gaining speed in several states and at the federal level, serves the public and government.

"It roots out waste, but it also builds confidence in government," McCutchen said.

If politicians go begging for a tax increase, their constituents may be more apt to hear them out if they have evidence their money is being spent wisely, McCutchen said.

Reference: news.mywebpal.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

County Treasurer Accused of Tampering With Public Records

2008-02-22T20:55:00.002-07:00

Curry County Treasurer Rhonda Bookout was indicted Friday on the charge of tampering with public records, a fourth-degree felony, according to District Attorney Matt Chandler.

Bookout surrendered to law enforcement following the indictment. She was released on a $5,000 appearance bond around 3 p.m., jail officials said.

If convicted, she could face up to 18 months in prison and a $5,000 fine, Chandler said.

Upon the advice of her attorney and in agreement with county officials, Bookout voluntarily placed herself on leave without pay, Chandler said.

Bookout’s home phone had been disconnected Friday afternoon and she could not be reached for comment. She did, however, issue a written statement through her attorney, Hal Greig.

“Based upon my high esteem for the citizens of Curry County, and my desire to remove any appearance of impropriety concerning the county treasurer's office, I have decided while this process proceeds forward that it would be best for me to take a leave of absence without pay,” Bookout said in the statement.

“This way, you, the citizens of Curry County, can be assured that the treasurer's office will operate for the best needs of the county.”

Bookout turned in her keys to county offices on Friday, according to County Manager Lance Pyle.

A grand jury found probable cause existed “that Curry County Treasurer Rhonda Bookout intentionally altered and falsified public records with regard to the amount of revenue actually received during the Curry County Fair,” Chandler said in a press release.

A search warrant served on Bookout’s office Feb. 14 stated Bookout had made entries into accounting records that a deposit had been made when it had not. The warrant also said she shifted figure amounts from a miscellaneous account to cover a shortage in the fair fund account.

The grand jury was convened to investigate approximately $11,000 in unaccounted-for fair funds, Chandler said.

The investigation into the unaccounted-for fair funds is ongoing, Chandler said.

“At this point Mrs. Bookout has not been indicted for the taking of the unaccounted-for fair funds, the state auditor is still assessing that,” he said. “We believe the investigation into the unaccounted for fair funds is certainly far from over.”

“The New Mexico State Police, the state auditor, (the district attorney’s office and county officials) are working hand-in-hand to attempt to locate the unaccounted-for fair proceeds to determine if they’re missing ... That investigation is still moving forward,” Chandler said.

Pyle said the state auditor is continuing to review the 2007 county fair revenue as requested. If he deems it necessary to expand his audit, the county will assist in anyway possible, he said.

Curry County Commission Chairman Albin Smith believes the system to protect taxpayer money worked correctly.

“I think there are things to keep these things from happening, but the good thing is, if there is some good, is that it was detected,” he said. “That should add confidence in everyone’s perception of government.”

Smith said much of what has occurred regarding the unaccounted-for fair funds has been new territory for the commission and has been a learning process.

“I would really like to hope that when this is all said and done, that Rhonda will be cleared of any (wrongdoing),” Smith said.

Pyle said he is confident taxpayer money is well cared for.

“We as county officers are concerned regarding the unaccounted for funds and we’re going to do everything we can to get to the bottom of the situation,” he said. “The county receives audits each year, we have a financial (manager) who is a certified public accountant and I’m very confident in the individuals that we have employed at the county.”

Pyle said the treasurer’s office is small, with only three employees and the treasurer.

“We’re like a little family. You spend more time with your coworkers than you do your family,” he said. “I would expect it’s hitting (Bookout’s colleagues) hard.”

Reference: cnjonline.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Cops Can Run Background Checks on Passengers: Justices Back Police in Motor Vehicle Stops

2008-02-14T18:17:00.003-07:00

In a precedent-setting ruling for New Jersey, the state Supreme Court said yesterday police have the right to run a criminal background check on a passenger in a vehicle they pull over.
The decision raises the question of whether background checks on passengers will become routine.

Saddle Brook Police Chief Robert Kugler, president of the state Association of Chiefs of Police, said such checks would not occur without reasonable suspicion and the public should not expect them to become routine.

"Every case is going to be fact-specific," he said. In the case that led to yesterday's ruling, Kugler said, "the police officer's action was more than reasonable."

But Robert Carter Pierce, a Cedar Grove attorney who argued against passenger checks, said passengers who have committed no crimes may now have to sit and wait while police "conduct a fishing expedition."

"I can imagine what every motor vehicle stop will lead to," he said. "What happens next? Police stopping people on the sidewalk and saying, 'Let me detain you to run a check?'"
The Supreme Court ruled 6-0 that a passenger in a vehicle stopped by police is considered in custody and that it is not unconstitutional for an officer to run a background check on the individual.

The high court held Carteret police did not violate the federal or state constitutional rights of Sulaiman Sloane, 34, of Carteret, when they ran a National Crime Information Center database check on him after they stopped the car he was riding in on Nov. 11, 2003.

The driver of the car, Sherma Moore, was found to have a suspended license. That led officers to run an NCIC check on her, which showed there was a warrant out for her.

After Moore was arrested, Sloane asked if he could return the car to his uncle, who owned it. But Sloane could not produce a license. Police ran a check on him and found his license was suspended. They then checked his name in the NCIC database and discovered Sloane was wanted for a parole violation and two outstanding arrest warrants.

During a search of Sloane at police headquarters, officers found crack cocaine in his shoe. Sloane eventually pleaded guilty to drug possession and served three years in prison.

A state appeals court ruled once the police found Sloane had a suspended license, their jurisdiction over him ended and they had no further reason to seek additional background. The panel held the NCIC check was impermissible. Without the results of the NCIC check, Sloane would not have been arrested and searched, the judges declared, so the drug evidence should have been suppressed.

One of the Appellate Court judges, Helen Hoens, now a Supreme Court justice, recused herself from yesterday's ruling.

The Supreme Court said during a motor vehicle stop, a passenger is considered "seized" under the federal and state constitutions and police do not need a reasonable suspicion to run a background check.

"Because the decision to check the NCIC database was within the scope of the traffic stop and did not unreasonably prolong the stop, there is no basis to suppress the evidence found," Chief Justice Stuart Rabner declared.

The justices said Sloane "had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the public records maintained in NCIC -- his two outstanding warrants and record of a parole violation ..."
State Deputy Attorney General Paul Heinzel said background checks are a routine part of traffic stops.

"Police have onboard terminals," he said. "They go online, and it tells them if the name they are entering has an outstanding warrant in any jurisdiction."

Pierce, Sloane's lawyer, said the "only thing Mr. Sloane did was to be a passenger in a motor vehicle operated by an unlicensed driver. Both the Supreme Court and appeals court found he cooperated and did nothing to provoke an officer to suspect criminal activity."

Sloane is serving five to six years in Bayside State Prison on unrelated convictions.

Reference: nj.com
(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

First Amendment Protects West Virginia Web Site Operator Who Posted Public Records

2008-02-09T17:09:00.000-07:00

A county tax assessor cannot prevent a West Virginia Web site operator from posting legally obtained tax maps on the Internet, Public Citizen argued Tuesday in a case that could help decide how much control government officials have over the dissemination of their public records.

Kanawha County Tax Assessor Phyllis Gatson is asking a court to force Seneca Technologies of Clarksburg, W.Va. to remove the maps from its Web site, http://foiamaps.senecainfo.com/.

The West Virginia State Department of Tax and Revenue provided Seneca the maps after the company won a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.

Under the FOIA ruling, Seneca obtained electronic versions of the maps for a $20 processing fee, rather than the $225,648 the state wanted to charge for 28,206 maps.

In turn, Seneca President Will White is making the maps available free-of-charge on his company’s Web site, which raised the ire of Gatson, who like all West Virginia tax assessors, charges $8 per each paper copy of a map.

Barring White from posting the maps is an unconstitutional prior restraint of free speech, said Paul Alan Levy, an attorney with Public Citizen, which represents Seneca, along with Charleston, W.Va. attorney Anthony Majestro.

Levy filed a brief on behalf of Seneca Tuesday with the West Virginia Circuit Court of Kanawha County in Charleston. Levy will argue the case in court on Friday.

The county’s claim that White is improperly posting copyrighted material is wrong, Levy said. The maps cannot be copyrighted because they convey only facts and not ideas or expressions, Levy said.

Even if the maps were subject to copyright, the state court does not have jurisdiction in cases of federal Copyright Act violations. Posting of the maps is “fair use” as defined by federal copyright law, Levy said.

“The tax assessor’s reasoning is not only flawed, it’s unconstitutional,” Levy said. “All citizens have a right to share public government documents with each other, whether it’s in the town square or on the Internet.”

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

What Others Think: Public Records Decision Needed

2008-02-08T14:19:00.000-07:00

Lawmakers are concerned there may be too much information available on voter registration lists sold to individuals and political parties.

South Dakota lawmakers are continuing to struggle over open records and what is and is not a public record. The latest tussle concerns voter registration cards.

The cards have been considered public records for years and the secretary of state and county auditors often sell the lists to political candidates or parties.

But are the lists really public records?

Sen. Jason Gant, R-Sioux Falls, says they are not. He bases that belief on a recent interpretation of the state’s public records law by the South Dakota Supreme Court.

In that ruling the court said information on a given matter doesn’t have to be made public if there is no state law requiring that a record of it be kept.

Gant argues that since there is no state law requiring county auditors to keep voter registration cards on file then the cards aren’t public records.

In addition to the person’s name, address and party affiliation, the card also lists the voter’s date and year of birth.

It is worth noting that no one can point out any identity theft cases in South Dakota from the voter registration lists.

Gant proposed to the Senate Local Government Committee that voter information still be made available, but with no mention of the birth day or month, only the year.

The measure passed the committee. Gant also said he plans to introduce legislation requiring auditors to keep voter registration lists.

State lawmakers need to come up with a simple explanation of which records are public and which are not.

Our elected officials should also re-examine their attempts at fixing problems that don’t exist.

This is clearly a case where our government is expanding to prevent the possibility of something happening. That is a dangerous and ominous precedent.

Refrence: jamestownsun.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

SpoofCard.com Helps 'Untraceable' Movie Make Untraceable Phone Calls

2008-02-02T21:13:00.000-07:00

SpoofCard.com, the leading provider of Caller ID spoofing service, was chosen as the phone tool of choice for making anonymous and untraceable phone calls in the upcoming Sony Pictures Entertainment high-tech thriller, Untraceable.

Toms River, NJ (PRWEB) January 23, 2008 -- SpoofCard.com (SpoofCard.com), the leading provider of Caller ID spoofing service, is proud to announce its phone card service, used to help make anonymous and untraceable phone calls, can be seen in the upcoming high-tech thriller, Untraceable, opening in theaters across the United States on January 25th, 2008.

SpoofCard was chosen by Untraceable's technical advisor for its widely renowned and highly regarded communications privacy service which businesses, local and government law enforcement agencies and privacy advocates have been using to make truly private and untraceable calls since 2005.

SpoofCard is a one-of-a-kind calling card that works from any telephone and offers its users the ability to change their number that appears on their recipients Caller ID display as well as their call logs. SpoofCard helps eliminate any record of a call taking place from a users phone, making their call virtually untraceable by the recipient.

SpoofCard can also record phone conversations, which can then be downloaded or played back at a later time, and even change its users voice in real-time to sound like a man or a woman. SpoofCard focuses on bringing back communications privacy in an age where privacy is rare, yet, more important than ever.

"We're excited to see a movie, with such technical accuracy as Untraceable, shedding light on how to make anonymous and untraceable phone calls with our SpoofCard service," said SpoofCard company officials in a recent interview.

"Many people are not aware of how they can take simple steps to protect the privacy of their phone number and their call records with a service such as SpoofCard."

Untraceable, set in Portland, Oregon and starring Academy Award nominated actress Diane Lane, centers around the FBI division dedicated to investigating and prosecuting criminals on the Internet. This is the front line of the war on cyber crime, where Special Agent Jennifer Marsh, (Diane Lane) has seen it all, until now.

A tech-savvy Internet predator is displaying his graphic murders on his own website (www.killwithme.com) and the fate of each of his captives is left in the hands of the public: the more hits his site gets, the faster his victims die. When this game of cat and mouse becomes personal, Marsh and her team race against the clock to track down this technical mastermind who is virtually untraceable.

For more information on Untraceable, please visit: http://www.sony.com/untraceable.

About Sony Pictures Entertainment
Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE) is the media/entertainment unit of Sony Corporation of America (SCA), the US subsidiary of Japanese based Sony Corporation. Sony Pictures Entertainment's global operations encompass motion picture production and distribution, television programming production and syndication, home video acquisition and distribution, studio facility operation, development of new entertainment technologies and distribution of filmed entertainment in 67 countries around the world. Sony Pictures Entertainment can be found on the web at http://www.sonypictures.com.

About SpoofCard.com
SpoofCard.com is a cutting-edge calling card service owned and operated by TelTech Systems Inc., a developer of best-in-class telephony applications and services. SpoofCard.com is TelTech's revolutionary communications product allowing anyone seeking to maintain their anonymity to send any phone number as their Caller ID.

Additional features include; call recording and a real-time male or female voice changer. Additional products offered by TelTech include the popular LoveDetect (http://www.lovedetect.com) and LiarCard (http://www.liarcard.com) voice-analysis calling cards. SpoofCard can be found on the web site SpoofCard.com.

Reference: prweb-inc.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

People and Phone Search Tips

2008-01-31T21:58:00.000-07:00

People Search Tip
Despite the vast amount of free, publicly available information and community sites, performing a people search for someone you have not seen in a while usually involves a bit of detective work beyond the free people search engine results.

The obvious beginning for your people search is to enter as much information as you remember about the person you are looking for. This typically includes the first and last name of the person you are searching for and the city and state they reside in or last resided in.

Narrowing Down Your Free People Search Results
Typical people search results include name, city, state and age listings best matching the person searched for.

The white pages listing displays addresses and phone numbers that match the name you entered in the people search fields. This is where the first bit of detective work becomes part of your people search. Locate the people search listings where the age of the person listed matches the age or approximate age of the person you are searching for.

For each age match, note the corresponding address. Match this address to the white pages listings with the same address, creating a short list of potential contact information for the person you are searching for.

White Pages People Search Tip
Occasionally, filling in all of the fields when performing a free people search will cause white pages people search to return zero results. If this happens, retry your white pages people search using only the first and last name of the person you are searching for.

This tends to narrow the white pages people search results returned, allowing you to cross match the white pages results with the people search results.

International People Search Tip
Performing an international people search on Whowhere.com is a great way to begin locating a friend or colleague in a foreign country.

Like any people search, some detective work may be necessary to locate the person you are looking for, especially when the trail of addresses may end in the United States.

Looking for Additional Clues
After narrowing your people search down to a few candidates, seeking additional clues on a social website is often helpful for completing your people search.

Even the most basic of profiles on a social network contain information about where the person you are searching for went to high school or college as well as where they currently or recently reside.

For military personnel, a search on a social network could provide the missing international people search information you are seeking.

People Search by Phone Number Tip
Sometimes the only information you have on the person you are looking for is their phone number.

When performing a people search by phone number, it is important to include the correct area code in your search, as phone numbers are duplicated across the country.

Reference: whowhere.com

(USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Tighter Rules for Cellphone Directories Supported

2008-01-25T08:12:00.000-07:00

A cellphone directory couldn't list a subscriber's phone number without permission, under a bill progressing in the state House of Representatives.

The bill was referred to the House Appropriations Committee this week after the Committee on Technology, Energy and Communications passed the measure last week in an 8-4 vote.

If the appropriations panel approves it, the bill will go before the full House.

Proposed by Rep. Dawn Morrell, D-Puyallup, the bill was discussed in a hearing last week.

Morrell wants to update a law that made it illegal for cellphone companies to create a wireless-phone directory without permission from individuals holding listed numbers.

In new language she is proposing, most any company — not just cellular operators — could not create a directory without permission.

Morrell said she proposed HB 2479 after reading an Aug. 13 story in The Seattle Times about how Bellevue-based Intelius claimed to have a directory of millions of U.S. cellphone numbers available for a fee on its Web site. Since then, Intelius has filed for a $144 million initial public offering.

The proposed bill argues that the updated law is needed to protect privacy rights and because cellphone subscribers pay for outgoing and incoming calls.

"A subscriber's cellphone number should be kept private, unless that subscriber knowingly provides their express, opt-in consent to have that number made available in a public directory," the bill says.

A video of last week's hearing shows testimony from a number of companies, including Intelius, AT&T and Yahoo, as well as the WSA, the state's technology association.

Most were concerned by the proposal's breadth and the $50,000 fine that a mistake could cost.

In particular, AT&T and Yahoo asked what constituted a directory.

Another concern was about the proliferation of cellphones and how some people opt to port their landline number over to a mobile phone.

Would the companies be responsible if a phone number remained listed in a directory if it now belonged to a cellphone?

Ed Petersen, Intelius co-founder and senior vice president of sales and marketing, testified that the company is not against regulations but opposes this bill.

"The industry is bigger than just Intelius," he said. "It's not just a bill to prohibit Intelius' services, but it will have a sweeping impact on a lot of companies. ... What we would recommend is to be part of the solution. Don't rush through the bill; let us be a part of the solution going forward, and allow for some dialogue."

Petersen argued further that the cellphone numbers in Intelius directories come from public sources — either public documents or forms.

Still, House members questioned the intent of Intelius' services, which also include a person's address and home number.

"It's creeping us out actually; you have addresses that go back 17 years on me," said one committee member.

Petersen said the services are typically used by companies that want to check out job candidates, by parents worried about a baby-sitter or clients checking on a contractor.

Also, people often conduct a reverse search, in which they have a phone number but want to know whom it belongs to.

Another committee member asked whether former Seahawk Steve Largent ever got his money back after he conducted a search for his cellphone number and received incorrect information.

Largent, president of CTIA, the mobile industry's trade organization, was quoted in The Seattle Times story as saying that although his search returned incorrect information, he did not receive a refund when the CTIA asked for one.

Petersen responded: "I was hoping that wouldn't come up. We are a startup, and when we rolled it out, our customer service could have performed better."

Some of the bill's language was changed to address concerns from the testimony.

One addition states that if a cellphone number is listed without permission and had been ported from a landline within the previous 15 months, it would not be in violation.

Reference: seattletimes.nwsource.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Public Records, Possible Scams: Easy Access to Social Security Numbers on Recorder's Web Site

2008-01-20T11:49:00.000-07:00

In an effort to tamp down on identity theft and fraud, the state Legislature has taken Social Security numbers off driver's and fishing licenses.

Banks have implemented fraud help-desk hotlines.

More and more businesses employ a fraud division.

So why, with a first and last name, an Internet connection and three seconds to spare, can one still find, free of charge, Social Security numbers on the Kane County recorder's office Web site?

We live in a different world today, said Recorder Sandy Wegman.

When the recorder's office began scanning public records and putting them online in 1987, the service was considered a helpful one -- not something that could potentially lead to scams.

"The back documents are going to have all of the information on it," Wegman said. That includes Social Security numbers.

Wegman said the recorder's office does not fill out death certificates, land deeds, tax liens and so on, but only records and scans these documents, prepared by an attorney or other legal authority.

"For about four years now, the preparers of the documents have made a point of not putting Social Security numbers on the documents," she said.

Public documents kept at the recorder's office do not need a Social Security number or driver's license number on them, she added. And staff has developed a practice of double-checking with county residents whether they want those numbers on documents.

Wegman said her office alone has millions of records online, but she is considering going through them to erase Social Security numbers.

"We are looking into the redaction process. We're looking to see what's necessary."

Keeping Social Security numbers as secret as possible is key to stopping scammers, said Elgin Police Detective Jim Roscher, who specializes in financial crimes. The Social Security number is the key for those trying to steal a person's identity, he said.

"You need a name, date of birth and Social Security number. Then you own them," he said.

Roscher did not know Social Security numbers could be found on the recorder's office Web site, and added that most scammers get the number in a much more tangible way.

"The most common way is someone loses their purse or wallet and they had their card in there," he said.

This is why Roscher always tells people to never carry their Social Security card in their wallet or purse.

That small tip could possibly prove more effective than redacting millions of public records.

Redacting all identifying numbers, Wegman said, provides only a false sense of security.

"I don't mean to imply that identify theft isn't a real problem, because it is. But I don't think this is where the problem lies," she said of public record databases.

Reference: suburbanchicagonews.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Foreign Hackers Seek to Steal Americans' Health Records

2008-01-18T12:23:00.000-07:00

Foreign hackers, primarily from Russia and China, are increasingly seeking to steal Americans’ health care records, according to a Department of Homeland Security analyst.

Mark Walker, who works in DHS’ Critical Infrastructure Protection Division, told a workshop audience at the National Institute of Standards and Technology that the hackers’ primary motive seems to be espionage.

“They’ve been focused on the [Department of Defense] – the military – but now are spreading out into the health care private sector,” Walker said.

Early in 2007, a virus was placed on a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Web site, he said, and in April a Military Health System server holding Tricare records was hacked.

Walker said the hackers are seeking to exfiltrate health care data. “We don’t know why,” he added. “We want to know why.” At the same time, he said, it’s clear that “medical information can be used against us from a national security standpoint.”

Any health problems among the nation’s leaders would be of interest to potential enemies, he said.

DHS is increasing its analysis staff to monitor threats in several industries, including health care, and will be issuing more alerts about cyberthreats to health care data, he said.

Walker urged the audience to report data breaches to the authorities.

Only the Veterans Affairs Department consistently reports health data breaches, he said.

As a result, he added, “our understanding of the cyberthreat to health and human services is vague at this point.”

DHS wants to build a database of health information system intrusions so it can better analyze the threats and develop countermeasures, Walker said.

He said poor security practices among those who use health information systems and disgruntled employees are as much of a threat as cyber intruders.

Reference: fcw.com

(HealthCareRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

USPublicRecords.com - USPRS Gets Rave Reviews by KillerStartUps.com

2008-01-17T16:51:00.001-07:00

US Public Records.com is a web-based, constantly updated, central hub to literally millions of public records and other proprietary databases. Using this site you can fully investigate anyone.

For many years, access to personal information was restricted to government employees and law enforcement agencies; now, due to recent changes in laws that has changed. You can get information on job applicants, friends, family, neighbors, dates and almost anyone who is living in the United States.

You may discover full legal names and aliases, date and place of birth, address(es), phone(s) and email, bankruptcy, judgment and liens, property ownership and assets, relatives and neighbors national criminal and court records, marriage and divorce records, birth and death records, employment and personal background report and much more using the database links.

This database is the same used by the government and law enforcement.

Website's Review: http://www.killerstartups.com/Site-Reviews/Uspublicrecordscom---People-Search-Online/

Reference: killerstartups.com

(USPRS.com) and (USPublicRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

State Bills Aim to Open CPS Records

2008-01-16T11:42:00.000-07:00

State lawmakers are moving to make some child-welfare records, court proceedings and state employee personnel records open to the public in an attempt to shine light on the actions of Child Protective Services.

The proposals are part of a package of bills expected to be introduced soon by Reps. Jonathan Paton, R-Tucson, and Kirk Adams, R-Mesa, in the wake of legislative hearings this fall on the deaths of three children from Tucson whose parents had been investigated by CPS.

The underlying theme of the bills, which were unveiled at a legislative committee hearing Tuesday, is that "transparency will breed accountability," Adams said.

One bill would open up records in cases of a death or near-death of a child. A judge could decide not to open the files for certain reasons, such as harm to the child or siblings.

The bill was drafted in consultation with attorneys who represent The Arizona Republic and other media organizations.

CPS records on Brandon Williams and Ariana and Tyler Payne and the legislative hearings that followed were only made public after a successful lawsuit by The Republic and other publications.

Under current law, records remain closed in most cases, unless a judge rules to open them.

"At the end of the day, we believe disclosure and openness and transparency improves government," Paton said.

Another bill being drafted would affect all state employees by opening more personnel and disciplinary records to the public, mirroring the standards used by cities and counties in Arizona, Paton said.

In the legislative hearings, lawmakers had to subpoena disciplinary records of CPS employees because of restrictions in state laws, and could only discuss those records behind closed doors.

Court hearings involving permanent placement of a child or termination of parental rights would also be opened to the public, unless a judge moves to close them.

Rep. Steve Farley, D-Tucson, said it is important that the bills are drafted carefully so that child protection is not compromised by opening records to the public.

"I think sunshine is really important to be able to try to improve the process, but in the process of opening up the sunshine we don't want to open up the kids to sunburn," Farley said.

Other proposals would change relationships between law enforcement and CPS. One would give prosecutors more control over CPS investigations involving criminal conduct.

Another would set up a formal notification system when a child is missing, so that police can help CPS in finding them.

Lawmakers learned in their hearings that a sheriff's deputy had seen Brandon Williams and his mother the day before Brandon was killed but was unaware that CPS was searching for him, Adams said.

"Brandon Williams would be alive today if we had a formalized process to notify local police that a child is in imminent harm," Adams said.

Reference: azcentral.com

(CPSRecords.com) and (BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Rise in Homicides by US Iraq War Veterans

2008-01-14T09:37:00.000-07:00

A survey of public records by The New York Times found at least 121 US veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan committed a killing or were charged with one after returning home from duty, the newspaper reported on Saturday.

The Times said the numbers indicated a nearly 90 percent increase in homicides involving active-duty military personnel and new veterans for the six-year period since the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. Neither the Pentagon nor the Justice Department tracks such killings, which are handled by civilian courts.

An Army spokesman said the report did not offer a complete picture. Saying its research likely uncovered only the minimum number of such cases, the Times found three-quarters of the veterans charged were still in the military at the time of the killings, more than half of which involved guns.

Some 25 of the offenders faced murder, manslaughter or homicide charges for fatal car crashes resulting from drunken, reckless or suicidal driving. The overwhelming majority had no prior criminal records, the Times said, but it added that in some of the cases, “the fact that the suspect went to war bears no apparent relationship to the crime committed.”

The Times said about one-third of the victims were spouses, girlfriends, children or other relatives, while some 25 percent were fellow service members.

Army spokesman Paul Boyce told Reuters in an e-mail that Army statistics “show little or no increases in positive drug use, driving under the influence crimes or domestic abuse in the past years among the more than 300,000 soldiers who have deployed in this war.”

The findings stemmed from searches of local news reports, examination of police, court and military records and interviews with defendants, their lawyers and families as well as victims’ families and military and law enforcement officials.

Interviews with relatives of the veterans brought a common refrain of “He came back (from war) different,” the Times said, with references to substance abuse and mental instability such as paranoia.

Few of the 121 veterans received more than cursory mental health screening at the end of their deployments, the veterans, their lawyers, relatives and prosecutors said. While many showed signs of combat trauma, they were not evaluated for or diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder until after the homicides, according to the interviews.

Boyce said the newspaper’s statistics “appear to be based on a basic review of American newspaper crime stories from 2004 to 2006, rather than statistics provided by the US Army or the Department of Defense, or even any interviews with military medical or judicial professionals.”

Such methodology would make it “nearly impossible for reporters to determine the extent of highly personal mental-health assistance provided to individual members of the Armed Forces,” Boyce wrote.

Reference: arabtimesonline.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Technology Could Make Phone Calls Public Record

2008-01-14T08:34:00.000-07:00

Thankfully, voice mails are private. Right?

Those personal messages, the unconfirmed rumors and the confidential information you wouldn't dare reveal in an e-mail are safe on voice mail. Aren't they?

Phone messages are audio. There's nothing concrete. There's no paper trail.

Well, that's no longer the case for employees of Kendall County.

The county recently implemented software that gives workers the option to convert voice mails on their office phones into e-mails.

It's an option based on convenience.

Your office phone rings and someone leaves a message. You know this because an icon pops up on your screen.

You have to make a decision. You could stop what you're doing, pick up the phone, type in the code and listen to the message.

But why not just keep working while the voice mail plays over your computer's speakers.

No big deal. Or is it?

When you click the computer option, the audio message is sent to your work e-mail as a time-stamped WAV sound file. And voila -- your voice mail has just became public information.

What does this mean? A member of the public can file a Freedom of Information request and receive the contents of that phone message, which the caller probably intended to be private.

Kendall County Board member Bob Davidson put it succinctly: "Once you put it on paper, you're done."

There are a few county departments that do not use the computer option for legal reasons, including the state's attorney's office and the Health Department.

But State's Attorney Eric Weis told the County Board he has no opinion on the new phone system and doesn't care if leaders use it.

This new phone system should remind local leaders that their job is to serve the public. If they choose convenience over their commitment to the people, they may just find themselves in a heap of trouble.

Reference: scn1.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Bolster Public's Right to Open Government

2008-01-14T08:30:00.000-07:00

The 2008 session of the 82nd Iowa General Assembly, which convenes today, will have a historic opportunity to make state and local government more accessible to the people of Iowa.

Proposed legislation completed by a joint Senate-House committee last week would create a new Iowa Public Information Board to hear complaints from Iowa citizens who believe they have been illegally shut out of public meetings or denied access to public records.

The five-member board - appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate - would have the power to order a state or local government agency to comply with the public-meeting or public-records laws. It could even levy civil fines up to $2,500 against public officials in cases of knowing and willful violations.

This public-information board is the product of several months of work by a legislative committee created last year to consider complaints that the public and news media are increasingly confronted by barriers to government information.

The draft legislation would remove some barriers, including the use of "personnel records" to hide information about public employees and the practice of hiring public officials in near-total secrecy.

Unfortunately, the proposal would create some unacceptable new barriers, including a provision regarding "preliminary" drafts of government documents that would become a giant black hole for hiding government records.

The complaint the legislative committee heard most often was that Iowa's public-meetings and government-records laws are almost never enforced by the state attorney general or county prosecutors. Citizens who believe the law is violated have to hire a lawyer and go to court at their own expense.

Even local government organizations support the concept of a state board that would referee such disputes, in part because it would avoid litigation while providing guidance on what meetings and government records are open to the public and which ones are not.

Indeed, public-access agencies in other states report that the largest number of inquiries come not from the public or the press but from government officials.

Moreover, most citizen complaints elsewhere don't make it to a formal hearing. They are handled informally by staff or resolved through mediation.

While state public-access agencies typically have only advisory powers, the Iowa board is modeled on the Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission, which is considered to have the toughest enforcement powers in the nation.

University of Iowa Law Professor Arthur Bonfield, who assisted the legislative committee in drafting the proposed legislation, said the Iowa board would have stronger powers than even Connecticut's.

The interim committee, co-chaired by Dubuque Sen. Michael Connolly and Iowa City Rep. Vicki Lensing, proposed a major improvement in the law. Now the challenge is selling it to the full Legislature.

Legislators 40 years ago enacted requirements that state and local government meetings and records be open to the people of Iowa. Now, a new generation of legislators has the opportunity to create a powerful way to enforce those requirements. They should seize that opportunity.

Reference: desmoinesregister.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Intelius registers for IPO

2008-01-12T06:56:00.000-07:00

Intelius Inc., which provides background checks and other information services to consumers over the Internet, plans an initial public offering of its common stock, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Thursday.

The Bellevue, Wash.-based company did not disclose the expected size or price range of the IPO, but indicated the offering may total up to $143.8 million. Intelius noted the total offering price was estimated solely to calculate its registration fee and may change.

Intelius offers offers over 100 intelligence services using publicly and commercially available data, including background checks, phone number verifications, people searches and property and neighborhood reports.

The company sells its intelligence services on a pay-per-use basis through the company's network of owned and operated Web sites, including Intelius.com.

Since the company's inception in January 2003, Intelius intelligence services have been purchased by more than 4 million customer accounts.

President and Chief Executive Naveen K. Jain is the controversial founder and former CEO of InfoSpace Inc., the Internet search and directory company that soared during the dot-com frenzy and whose shares crashed when the bubble burst.

Intelius noted that Jain has been involved in several high-profile lawsuits related to his role at InfoSpace. One of the lawsuits is ongoing.

The company also noted that it is currently the subject of a Federal Trade Commission investigation regarding Fair Credit Reporting Act compliance.

For the nine months ended Sept. 30, Intelius increased its earnings to $6.1 million, from $4.4 million in the prior-year period. At the same time, the company's revenue rose to $60.2 million, from $39.9 million.

Intelius plans to use its net proceeds from the offering for working capital and other general corporate purposes. The company said it may also use some proceeds for acquisitions.

Deutsche Bank Securities, Bear Stearns, CIBC World Markets and Cowen and Co. are underwriting the IPO.

Intelius plans to list its shares on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol "INTL."

Reference: businessweek.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)

Searching for Public Records Tips

2008-01-10T17:14:00.000-07:00

Accessing public criminal records is an important task you should always do before hiring a caregiver, a driver, a tenant or an employee. Nowadays, anyone can assume false identities, present fake credentials and make stories to hide their criminal history.

You should always consider safety and security as the highest priority for your business and family.

Getting truthful information about people you deal with should never be optional – it should be mandatory.

Obtaining information from public records serve as your reference and helps you verify if a person is giving you accurate information about their identity and history.

Basically, public records are documents filed and kept by public offices.

These records are kept both in hard copy and electronic files by government offices. The government generally maintains these records are mostly available for public access.

Birth records, criminal records, court records, property records, business records, and telephone directories are some examples of public records.

As mentioned, these records are available for access to the general public by requesting it at government offices.

Public records also contain important information and help you discover if someone has ever been imprisoned, has been arrested for possessing illegal substance or has been convicted of serious crime such as theft or murder.

However, asking these records from government offices is, as you might have guessed, not an easy task. Visiting public offices would mean standing in long lines and patiently waiting for your turn.

Thankfully, public criminal records are becoming more and more accessible for everyone these days. PublicRecords.com is home to more than 2 billion public records and reports as gathered from county, state and national databases.

Access to public records has now become faster, easier and more convenient because of PublicRecords.com.

Aside from helping you verify a person’s identity, accessing public records and reports at PublicRecords.com may even assist you in locating lost loved ones, doing a research about your family history and finding unlisted contact information.

PublicRecords.com offers you fast access to honest, accurate information.

Reference: PublicRecords.com

(BackgroundCheckDirectory.com)