Just Using Google Not Enough In County Search For Man Who Owed Taxes
from the don't-forget-the-other-ways dept
Two years ago we wrote about a case where a judge ruled that someone who was required to do a full search to reach someone should have known to try a Google search. In that case, the original person hadn't bothered to look online, and concluded that the other person was unfindable -- while a simple Google search proved that to be untrue. A new case, however, presents a slightly different situation: what if you only did a Google search? That's what folks from Northampton County did in trying to track down a guy who owed back taxes. They were unable to find him via Google, even though a phone book lookup would have found his correct phone number. A court has now ruled that just using Google isn't sufficient. So, for those of you keeping score (or being required by law to track down some missing people), this means that (a) you should use Google in your search, but (b) you shouldn't rely on only Google.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
... Gov employees?
meaning, they should have access to stuff better than Google?
whatever.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If they didn't: THOSE BASTARDS!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: ... Gov employees?
Not necessarily, because 1) Google is really good and 2) it's the government you're talking about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
But seriously now, I think that the "little girl" you were referring to was actually 18 years old (Teenager?) and she wasn't taken, Kelsey Smith was forced into her car.
http://www.FindKelsey.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Thanks for the URL that you posted there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mark Bowness
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The Internet?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Internet???
[ link to this | view in thread ]
government
meaning, they should have access to stuff better than Google?"
Maybe... but it would take 4 minutes per query and return 10% of the requested information... none of which would be useful.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Damned if you do - Damned if you don't.
Unless, of course, you're rich - like Paris Hilton, then it doesn't matter, as you can buy justice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The lawyer who subpoenaed me was extremey obnoxious when I called and asked why I was being called to testify and when he told me who his client was (it was the Logan Young bribery trial) I said I'd never heard of him and had no idea what I could possibly testify about. He threatened me with perjury and told me he would present the book I'd written into evidence. When I asked him what book he was talking about he said "Bragging Rights," a book about the Alabama-Auburn sports rivalry.
When I pointed out that I hadn't written the book (but am frequently angrily asked if I did) he got even more obnoxious until I told him that if he was trying to subpoena me he had my name wrong and I would refuse to appear because he had mis-identified me.
It turned out that the agency he used to serve subpoenas had just googled the author's name and I was the first hit they got and they assumed that I was the right guy. The next day I got a sheepish call from the process server who said "I've had thousands of people tell me I made a mistake when I served them, and you're the first time I actually did." I told him if he'd looked in the phone book he could have figured out I wasn't who he was looking for and saved himself a trip all the way out to my house.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Paris Hilton
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I can't imagine mistakes being made like this very often. County Sheriff's departments have a database with EVERY person that has ever resided in that county and their current residence, along with family information, court and public records, and just about anything you could want to know about a person that is in any way public.
They also have photographs that are updated frequently of every address in that county, so when they type in the address they can describe what the residence looks like to the responding officer.
This is the same system dispatchers for 911 use (So fire and medical have these capabilities too).
[ link to this | view in thread ]