H -°, L 7° | Tomorrow: 
H 17°, L 4°“The courts of our state belong not to the lawyers and the judges, but to you — the public.” This is the message from Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson that graces the home page of the Wisconsin Court System’s website. The website is home to the Circuit Courts Access Program, which provides access to thousands of case records for both criminal and civil cases to the general public. But a bill that recently passed out of an Assembly committee would threaten the sentiment of Abrahamson’s message by restricting the public’s access to records of pending cases and cases that end in acquittal.
The bill is being defended as protecting those that have been wrongfully accused from embarrassment but has come under attack as being in violation of Wisconsin’s open records law, which states “all persons are entitled to the greatest possible information regarding the affairs of government and its official acts.”
The Circuit Courts Access Program can be used by anyone to perform a background check for court activity. It is often used by reporters, landlords or employers to determine if someone has been accused or convicted of a crime. Not all court records are posted to the site, but it has been proven useful for both court employees and the public alike as a quick way to get information.
Court records available on the site range from records of divorce to homicide, small claims court cases to misdemeanors and felonies — with many more in between. However, if you’re searching the site, don’t expect scores of information on cases; the details on the cases are kept to a minimum. The site’s job is to provide information, not transcripts of courtroom dramas.
The bill, proposed by Rep. Marlin Schneider, D-Wisconsin Rapids, would allow full access to court records to police, court employees and reporters, but only allow the public to see cases that ended in conviction. Schneider claims expunging the records of those proven innocent would save them from discrimination associated with the court records, but there has been no evidence that such discrimination occurs on a regular basis.
A further discredit to the bill is that Schneider admitted to exaggerating the number of complaints he has received about the current CCAP, turning 22 letters over a three-year period into “hundreds.” Gov. Jim Doyle, who won the Wisconsin Newspaper Association’s Badger Award for his commitment to the open records law in 2004, agreed that changes must be made to protect those that have been exonerated, but he does not fully support the bill.
The truth of the matter is no one seems to fully support the bill. No trade groups have registered as supporting it, and the 22 people who contacted Rep. Schneider are certainly not enough for it to be deemed essential. The bill has also been clouded in misconceptions about the CCAP as it stands. Many citizens are up in arms about the fact that their traffic record is available for all to see, but upon inspection they would find minor traffic violations like speeding tickets are removed from the site after 5 years.
Another point of contention is with things such as drinking tickets, but non-traffic juvenile records aren’t posted to the site, so employers don’t have access to offenses of those under 18. Essentially, the average citizen has nothing to fear from the CCAP.
Schneider is trying to get the bill passed to protect those proven innocent from the negative connotation of having a record. While there is nothing wrong with this hope, denying the public information is not the way to go about it. Cases that have been dismissed are clearly marked as such, and the site explicitly states if the defendant was convicted or not.
As to whether or not those who were acquitted of a crime have suffered because of their association with it, there is no real way to measure the damage done, and the embarrassment of a select group of people should not be enough to justify amending a law. The bill has only 22 letters of protest to go off of, and in a state of over 5.6 million people, that number is negligible.
While it certainly is important to protect the innocent, the bill would do more harm than good. The CCAP website is accessed between 3 and 5 million times a day, proving it is not just judges and journalists doing the searching. By denying the public equal access to court cases, the bill would be doing them a disservice. As citizens, we are fully entitled to services protected by the open records law that keep the courts in our hands. That right cannot and should not be denied.
Allegra Dimperio ([email protected]) is a freshman majoring in theatre and intending to major in journalism.
IP hash: 6ac7847b
“non-traffic juvenile records aren�t posted to the site, so employers don�t have access to offenses of those under 18.”
Wow, so they took down my ticket for being in a park after closing from when I was 17?
All that lofty rhetoric about the rights of the individual and not one good point. A criminal record in America is a brand that prevents those who have paid their debt to society from re-entering normal every day life. If CCAP provided more transparency to the court system itself, I would support it in its entirety, but as is the program is a terrible invasion into the privacy of the average individual.
The fact of the matter is that there are too many stories like mine. Some cop/court reporter recorded their story wrong and now any busybody can call up the records.
It’s not like I’ve been crippled by this, but I could easily see it happening.
IP hash: c2dbea76
CCAP would be fine if people didn’t expect an immaculate record and shun people who didn’t have one. As it stands, your underage drinking ticket (that you got when you were 19, thank you) can keep you from getting into grad school, getting a job, or even getting an apartment. It’s ridiculous. How are you supposed to live after even a small mistake like that? How is it productive or advantageous in any way for society to create a website to brand people as “criminal” or “fringe?” And people wonder why America isn’t globally competitive. Recidivism rates - for everything you can be listed on CCAP for - are at less than 50%, meaning that the probability lies with a person never doing it again.
I find it interesting to note that the author of this is a freshman, thus likely being just over 18 and therefore having had very little experience with an unnecessarily and ludicrously merciless system like this. Pontificate after you know what you’re talking about.
IP hash: 71261be4
The problem is with this paragraph:
The Circuit Courts Access Program can be used by anyone to perform a background check for court activity. It is often used by reporters, landlords or employers to determine if someone has been accused or convicted of a crime. Not all court records are posted to the site, but it has been proven useful for both court employees and the public alike as a quick way to get information. <<<<
Since court employees & media are exempt from the proposed legislation (reading helps, really), what you are really talking about is employers and landlords. The issue is that those two groups acting on most things one reads on CCAP is illegal under Wisconsin law. You’re not allowed to discriminate based on arrest or conviction record. The Legislature already made up their mind on that a while ago. More recently, they made it much more expensive to do so in the employer context.
Why should the state support activity which contravenes its own public policy decisions? If people want to do background checks, they can run a CIB. That’s just as fast and it costs $10. The only difference is there’s a record of that, which might be inconvenient if/when you have to go to court.
IP hash: 89f132db
“The truth of the matter is no one seems to fully support the bill”
I cannot believe what I am reading here. The Newspaper industry is so blinded by their desire to keep CCAP open that they will let anyone and everyone write about this topic. Regardless of how well they understand the issue.
The autor of this article admits that the damage done to INNOCENT PEOPLE does not matter. Unbelievable. Do I still live in America?
If you successfully defend yourself….you should feel GOOD ABOUT IT. But, with CCAP you are not made whole again. CCAP is the governments way of punishing people who have defended themselves.
“The CCAP website is accessed between 3 and 5 million times a day, proving it is not just judges and journalists doing the searching.” No DUH!! Who else is using it? Nosey Neighbors, CO-Workers, and other people who have no business forming an opionion based on accusations.
This system harms Wisconsin families who want to move on. But the Newspaper Association does not care. They want to DIG UP DIRT!
IP hash: b848e52d
I love how the Newspaper Association runs editorial and quasi-editorial hit pieces on something that everyone knows they are also lobbying against fiercely. They did the same thing with the recent expansion of the expungement motion and the increased discrimination penalties.
Ombudsmen much? How about the news community discloses their lobbying $$$ in the spirit of public openness they seem so eager to push on everyone else?
IP hash: 71261be4
By the way, BH, what in the WORLD are you doing publishing something on a reasonably complex legal issue from an eighteen year-old theater major?
IP hash: 89f132db
I accidently ‘voted’ for this article. Can I remove my vote? I don’t want people to think I agreed with the reporters twisted point of view.
IP hash: 5a8960e3
Currently, CCAP shows the charge record of people regardless of whether or not they have been convicted. This is wrong, because often cases are dropped for lack of sufficient evidence, or overturned by, among other things, illegal police activities such as improper searches. These illegal police doings are never posted on CCAP. In addition, even if a case has only been filed or a judgment deferred, it still shows the charge history of the person, which provides the imaginations of potential employers plenty of reason to deny employment. In addition, it often takes a while for CCAP to take off underage violations, if they even do at all. Ask my friend about how his underage theft ticket has affected his applications at grocery stores.
IP hash: e9b3ce01
I am very thankful to CCAP. When my associate dean was spinning hysterically out of control, abusing staff and making what could best be described as irrational, illogical and illegal staffing and hiring decisions, I looked her up in CCAP.
And what did I find but numerous DWIs while en route to dog shows, harrassing and stalking gay staff and numerous other frivolous lawsuits against local merchants for such tragic events as not getting all the wrinkles out of her silk scarves.
Several of her staff turned this public information over to top administration in HR, Chancellor’s Office, who responded, “this has no bearing on her professional performance on campus”.
Frustrated and increasingly fearful of her ever-escalating outbursts of insanity, several of us left and those that remained only became more frequent targets of her “professional performance”. This information made the decision to leave the university a bit easier for all of us.
Where is she today? Collecting a 6-figure salary in a “created-for-her” do-nothing university position which allows her more time for dog shows and harrassing more members of the local community.
IP hash: d0ca982a
But how CAN that be? I thought the U was cutting out all non-essential spending.
IP hash: 0740fa14
“Schneider claims expunging the records of those proven innocent would save them from discrimination associated with the court records, but there has been no evidence that such discrimination occurs on a regular basis.”
Lets get real here. Employers discriminate based on ccap every day, conviction, aquital, or still pending they use this to discriminate. Pretending this doesn’t happen is silly. I should know. I was involved in a traffic incident where another driver, after nearly hitting me got out and attacked me. He ended up impacting the side of my car as I tried to get away. I was charged with a hit and run missdemenor.
During this time I had relocated and was forced to return home for financial reasons. So I tried to get back into Mr. Walton’s company, where I had worked with a good record for 6 years. I was interviewed, sent for a drug screen and was set to be hired… then I hear nothing back. I called and found out I “do not meet there hiring requirements”. Even though I worked there 6 years??? I figured it was because of the charges that where pending, and tried to explain the details of the case to them and was told to “come back when it was settled”.
Ok this is AMERICA. INNOCENT TILL PROVEN GUILTY. Not the other way around, but the reality is that is what ccap turns it into when they list pending charges. These charges are due to be dismissed soon, (thank god) but I will still have it on my record even though I did nothing wrong.
How many more employers are going to look at that and go “Eww, better stay away from hiring that one”. Or not bother reading the sub-text “case dissmissed”.
An employer I worked for 6 years SIX YEARS!!! would do this to me…. Im all for personal freedom, but I believe freedom of information ends when it infringes on another persons freedom. Which is what happens with ccap when they list pending cases and continue listing them after acquittal.
ccap should be for convictions only. Period.
I was doing nothing wrong, some guy with road rage attacks me and I have a permanent public record… And you think thats how it should work?
IP hash: 163c0e66
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-law-courts-tribunals/12146669-1.html This article was written in 2008, and still isn’t happening. The other point is how can anyone in Wisconsin have a fair hearing in the courts when the Jury can see everything on CCAP?
IP hash: b0e7a073
ccap is really should be taken down. I had a speeding ticket last year and my ex found my new address. now have to move again.
IP hash: d4988af1
The main reason CCAP is online is because Attorneys need reliable information on clients past and current infractions so they are able to represent the client in the best possible way. As you can see from the site, no specific conditions of any infraction are specified. An in depth analysis is only given if the searcher can has an official bar identification number, signifying they are either an attorney, judge, or elected court official. All information showed on the site that does not require a bar ID is available to the general public at the courthouse of the county the crime was committed in. CCAP is just an online version of public records and having online access simply eases information retrieval. Jurors are allowed to view public records. Without the proper ID, jurors cannot see any descriptive information that they would not have been told in the first three minutes of the trial.
In my opinion, people who complain about their infractions being on CCAP should not have a say. They should have thought about this before they committed the crime. One of the main aspects to deliberative democracy is that people should equal and easy access to public records. In return, this enables society to become knowledgeable about the situations they may be presented with.