I'm pretty sure expungment is an entirely separate process if I'm not mistaken.
If you've gone through the process of being charged and tried for a crime, even
if you were found innocent or exonerated or whatever the result, I believe it's
still a matter of public record forever and ever, unless as you say, it gets
expunged. Not even a Presidential pardon as I understand it is the equivalent
of an expungment if I'm not mistaken. I'm not an attorney, but I'm pretty
darned sure of that which I say on this subject. Any lawyers out there who wish
to offer a ruling on this? I can always be wrong. That's why I try never to
speak in absolutes. This level of the discussion is moot for me because I'm not
an attorney and any opinion I have on the subject emanates from an orifice from
which oratory is not worth the time it takes.
Tim
________________________________
From: JD Austin <
jd@twingeckos.com>
To: Main PLUG discussion list <
plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
Sent: Thu, September 16, 2010 3:03:40 PM
Subject: Re: OT - Explaining periods of unemployment on an application
I'm glad I don't work somewhere like that. If I was acquitted/exonerated of a
crime I wouldn't list it on an application either! I can't think of a reason
anyone would. If it was a crime I'd been convicted of that was later expunged I
would list it though; perhaps that is what you're referring to?
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 14:54, Tim Bogart <
timbogart@yahoo.com> wrote:
No. Maybe I didn't explain it clearly enough. No, they did not terminate
people for having a brush with the law and being found innocent or acquitted or
for whatever reason, were not convicted. They terminated those people for
FAILING TO DISCLOSE their brush with the law, and the accompanying details on
the application. Understandable in my mind.
>
>
>Tim...
>
>
>
________________________________
From: JD Austin <
jd@twingeckos.com>
>
>To: Main PLUG discussion list <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
>Sent: Thu, September 16, 2010 2:48:46 PM
>
>Subject: Re: OT - Explaining periods of unemployment on an application
>
>
>Hold on.. they fired people that were ACQUITTED of a crime? That seems a bit
>too far :(
>If a court can't find them guilty how can an employer?
>
>
>
>
>On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 14:38, Tim Bogart <timbogart@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I like your response. At a company with which I worked for many years, many
>years ago used to send me email on a daily basis listing folks who had been
>terminated. Of those, many were terminated because of falsehoods on their
>applications. And of those, not nearly, but ALL were due to information omitted
>regarding some crime that the individual had committed. And they ran the gambit
>from robbery to murder. Yes, murder, believe it or not. But in fairness, of
>those, they involved folks who had been tried for murder and had been exonerated
>by some means (found not guilty, thrown out due to mistrial or other reasons)
>but the point is that they had concealed the facts regarding criminal activities
>(I mean seriously, how can you forget to list something like that, or how can
>you think it somehow doesn't qualify as something a potential employer would not
>be interested?) that are easily checked.
>>
>>
>>Tim B.
>>
>>
>>I'm sticking with Grandpa Jones here...
>>"True is stranger than fact."
>>Hee-Haw
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)