Online Mugshot Websites and Lawsuits Explained

Over the past decade, online mugshot websites have turned public arrest photos into a profitable business model. These sites collect booking photographs from law enforcement agencies and publish them in searchable databases, often asking people to pay to remove or hide their images. This practice has triggered lawsuits, legislative reforms, and growing public debate over privacy, extortion, and reputational harm.

From Public Records to Predatory Business Models

Mugshots are typically created during the booking process when someone is arrested by law enforcement. In many U.S. jurisdictions, arrest information and booking photos are considered public records that can be requested under open records or freedom of information laws. Websites have capitalized on this by scraping data from sheriff and police department portals and reposting it for profit.

While the underlying data is public, the way these sites use it magnifies harm:

• Searchable by name, making it easy for employers, landlords, or neighbors to find arrest photos.
• Outdated or incomplete records that may not show that charges were dismissed, expunged, or reduced.
• Pay-for-removal schemes, where site operators charge fees to delete or bury mugshots.
• Long-term reputational damage, even when people were never convicted of a crime.

As a result, people who appear in these databases frequently report difficulty finding jobs, housing, or maintaining personal relationships due to the stigma of an arrest that may no longer be relevant or may have been legally cleared.

The Ohio Case: A Settlement That Signaled Change

One prominent federal case involved three Ohio residents whose mugshots appeared on two well-known sites, BustedMugshots.com and MugshotsOnline.com. The plaintiffs alleged that the sites were exploiting their arrest photos and sought relief in federal court, culminating in a settlement approved by a judge in late December.

The settlement reportedly required Citizens Information Associates LLC, which owned the sites, to:

• Pay a total of $7,500 to resolve the claims related to the three mugshots.
• Remove the plaintiffs’ mugshots at no cost to them.
• Confirm that the websites had agreed to stop charging individuals to take down photographs.

The dollar amount in this case was modest relative to many large class actions, but it was significant in two ways:

• It showed that individuals could obtain both removal of their photos and some monetary compensation without paying website fees.
• It coincided with broader legal and policy shifts targeting pay-for-removal practices in Ohio and other states.

Connection to Ohio’s “Misuse of Criminal Record Information” Law

Ohio enacted a statute specifically addressing misuse of criminal record information, including mugshots. Among other rules, the law:

• Prohibits any person who publishes or disseminates criminal record information from soliciting or accepting payment in exchange for removing, correcting, or modifying that information.
• Creates the offense of misuse of criminal record information as a first-degree misdemeanor, with each payment accepted constituting a separate violation.
• Allows civil lawsuits by injured individuals, with potential recovery of the greater of $10,000 or actual and punitive damages, plus attorney’s fees and court costs.
• Explicitly recognizes humiliation or embarrassment as sufficient harm, meaning victims do not need to prove physical manifestations of emotional distress.

This statutory framework makes it far riskier for mugshot websites operating in or targeting Ohio residents to charge removal fees, and it provides a clearer path for victims to bring civil claims based on reputational damage and emotional harm.

Class Actions and Publicity Rights: Mugshots.com and Beyond

Outside Ohio, other lawsuits have attacked mugshot sites under different legal theories, including violation of publicity rights and unfair business practices. A notable case in federal court allowed a class of arrestees to pursue claims against Mugshots.com.

In that case, a federal judge in Illinois ruled that individuals could proceed as a class on the argument that Mugshots.com and a related site were using their booking photos for commercial purposes, not simply public information. The court noted that:

• Mugshots.com not only published arrested persons’ photos but also advertised associated services.
• A sister site generated revenue by charging fees to remove or suppress those arrest photos.
• Because of these monetization practices, the website’s use of images fit within the scope of Illinois’s right of publicity law, which restricts commercial use of an individual’s identity without consent.

Similar complaints have been filed elsewhere. In California, a class action accused JustMugShots.com of publishing arrest data and then charging around $199 per removal, characterizing the practice as extortion and embezzlement under state law. Plaintiffs argued that the site exploited public fear and reputational harm to sell removal services rather than serving any legitimate public interest.

Key Legal Theories Used Against Mugshot Sites

How Pay-for-Removal Schemes Work

Many mugshot websites have historically earned money by charging individuals to delete their images, promising reputational relief in exchange for payment. Lawsuits and investigative reporting describe common patterns:

• The website posts arrest information with little or no context about case outcomes, making the person appear permanently linked to criminal behavior.
• The site or a related service then offers to remove, suppress, or bury the mugshot for a fee, sometimes hundreds of dollars per image.
• Some operators allegedly post incomplete records specifically so that the sister removal site can contact arrestees and solicit payments.

Because the harm being addressed—public embarrassment and reputational damage—is created by the website itself, lawmakers and courts have questioned whether these schemes resemble a form of digital extortion.

New Laws and Policy Responses

In addition to Ohio’s statute, several states and local jurisdictions have taken steps to curb abusive mugshot practices. Responses include:

• Restricting law enforcement releases of mugshots, especially for minor offenses or where charges have not yet been filed.
• Limiting commercial reuse of booking photos or requiring removal when a case is dismissed or expunged.
• Prohibiting pay-for-removal and similar monetization schemes based on criminal record information.
• Enhancing civil remedies, allowing victims to recover statutory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees.

These legal changes aim to balance the public’s interest in transparent criminal justice information with individual rights to privacy, reputation, and fair treatment after an arrest, particularly when no conviction follows.

Practical Steps to Remove Your Mugshot

Even without filing a lawsuit, individuals can take several steps to remove or reduce the visibility of online mugshots. Experiences shared by practitioners and affected individuals reveal a common pattern for successful takedowns.

1. Gather Documentation

• Collect official records showing the outcome of your case—dismissal, not-guilty verdict, expungement, or sealing.
• Obtain certified copies from the relevant court or law enforcement agency.
• Prepare digital scans to submit through online forms or email.

2. Use Site-Specific Removal Forms

Many mugshot sites provide online forms or email addresses for removal requests:

• Fill out the form completely, including case numbers, dates, and jurisdictions.
• Attach documentation proving dismissal, expungement, or other favorable outcomes.
• Retain screenshots and copies of all submissions for your own records.

According to user reports, some sites such as Mugshots.zone and BustedNewspaper.com will honor removal requests if the case was cleared, though they may take the maximum time allowed under their policies to respond.

3. Address Social Media and Search Engines

• If the mugshot is reposted on social platforms and includes your address or other sensitive personal information, you may be able to request removal under privacy or doxxing rules.
• Use platforms’ reporting tools to flag posts that disclose personal information or are clearly misleading due to case dismissal or expungement.
• Where a site refuses to remove content, you can sometimes request search engine delisting in limited circumstances—especially in jurisdictions with stronger data protection laws.

4. Consult an Attorney

If self-help steps fail, speaking with a lawyer experienced in privacy, defamation, or consumer protection law can be valuable.

• Attorneys can assess whether you have claims under state statutes, right-of-publicity laws, or defamation doctrines.
• They may send formal cease-and-desist letters or negotiate removals without filing a lawsuit.
• In serious cases, they can pursue litigation or help you join an existing class action against a specific mugshot operator.

When Lawsuits Make Sense

Not every situation calls for a lawsuit, and litigation can be time-consuming and costly. However, lawsuits may be appropriate when:

• A mugshot site refuses to remove clearly inaccurate or outdated information.
• The site demands large sums of money for removal, arguably violating state laws against pay-for-removal.
• You have suffered tangible harm, such as lost job opportunities, declined housing applications, or ongoing harassment.
• Your jurisdiction offers statutory damages or strong privacy protections, improving the odds that litigation will be worthwhile.

Many people choose to pay removal fees instead of litigating because court processes are slower and uncertain. Yet recent settlements and statutory reforms show that courts are increasingly receptive to arguments that these practices are abusive or unlawful.

Balancing Public Safety and Individual Rights

One reason mugshot websites have gained traction is the claim that they serve public safety, helping communities identify dangerous individuals. Yet the reality is more complex:

• Arrests do not equal convictions; many cases end in dismissal, diversion, or acquittal.
• Websites rarely provide full case histories, leading to misleading impressions.
• Monetization strategies focus more on selling removal services than on providing neutral public information.

Lawmakers and courts increasingly recognize that indiscriminate publication of arrest photos, combined with aggressive pay-for-removal schemes, can undermine rehabilitation, fairness, and privacy—especially for low-level offenses and first-time arrests.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Do mugshot websites have a legal right to publish arrest photos?

In many jurisdictions, arrest records and booking photos are public records, so websites can lawfully access and republish them. However, their business practices—such as charging for removals or using images for commercial advertising—may violate right-of-publicity laws, consumer protection statutes, or specific criminal record misuse provisions.

Is charging a fee to remove a mugshot always illegal?

No, it is not automatically illegal everywhere, but several states have enacted laws that explicitly prohibit soliciting or accepting payment to remove or modify criminal record information. In those jurisdictions, pay-for-removal schemes can expose operators to criminal charges and civil liability. Elsewhere, such practices may still face challenges under unfair business practice or extortion theories.

What kind of damages can victims recover?

Available damages vary by state and lawsuit type. Under Ohio’s misuse-of-criminal-record statute, individuals may recover the greater of $10,000 or their actual and punitive damages, as well as attorney’s fees and court costs. In other cases, plaintiffs may seek compensation for economic losses, emotional distress, and statutory damages under consumer or publicity-rights laws.

Can humiliation alone support a lawsuit?

Yes, in some jurisdictions. Ohio’s law explicitly states that humiliation or embarrassment is adequate to show damages in civil actions under its misuse-of-criminal-record provisions, without requiring physical symptoms. Other states apply different standards, so it is important to consult a local attorney.

What should I do if a site refuses to remove my mugshot?

Consider the following steps:

• Document all communication with the site, including requests and responses.
• Gather proof of case dismissal, expungement, or other favorable outcomes.
• Consult an attorney to evaluate legal options under your state’s laws.
• Explore reporting options with social platforms and search engines if the image is being broadly shared.

Key Takeaways

• Online mugshot websites use public arrest photos to build searchable databases that can severely affect reputations.
• Lawsuits and settlements, including the Ohio case, have pushed some operators to stop charging removal fees and highlighted abusive business models.
• States such as Ohio now criminalize pay-for-removal schemes and provide substantial civil remedies to victims.
• Individuals can often remove or reduce the visibility of mugshots through documentation, site-specific requests, and legal counsel.
• Courts continue to refine the balance between public access to arrest information and protection against privacy invasion and extortion.

Similar Articles

Your First Credit Card: How to Avoid Costly Fine‑Print Traps

Smart Student Borrowing: A Financial Literacy Guide

Brendlin v. California and the Fourth Amendment Passenger Rule

Miranda v. Arizona and the Birth of Modern Police Warnings

Bankruptcy Glossary: Plain-Language Guide To Common Terms Now

Understanding Bankruptcy Noticing in Federal Courts

Author

medha deb

 

Medha Deb is an editor with a master's degree in Applied Linguistics from the University of Hyderabad. She believes that her qualification has helped her develop a deep understanding of language and its application in various contexts.

Read full bio of medha deb