Is it lying to not report a charge that has been legally expunged and case sealed?

[comrade1789]

I know this isn’t a legal forum, and my question isn’t the legality of the issue, but the morality of it. Is it lying to not report a charge that has been legally expunged and case sealed? I ask because I work in a men’s homeless shelter and this poor fellow had a horrible charge that he plead not guilty to and for one reason or another the prosecution decided to not move forward so the case was never prosecuted. The attorny general had the sharges expunged from the public record and all records relateing to the case sealed over ten years ago. No background check ever shows he was ever charged, and if we assume that all the legal advice he is getting is correct, namely that it is kinda like an annulment, that since it is all non-conviction data, having it expunged and the rest of the case sealed that in a sense it is as if the charge never happened and that he does not have to disclose ever having been charged with the offense. He’s had plenty of jobs in the past that he always answered “no” to having ever been charged with a felony, and no background check has ever produced anything reflecting he ever had to go through that awful ordeal. However, he has had a major conversion of heart and doe not want to lie. So again, assuming that the legal advice is correct, that he is under no obligation to disclose having ever been charged, is he morally bound to disclose? Is it a lie for him to answer no, if the rules that the inquirer is playing by are the rules of law, and according to the rules of law, he doesn’t have to disclose that information?

Thanks for any insight you can provide. This guy just wants to do what’s right, but I don’t want him to be sabotaging himself unnecessarily either.

 

[Bookcat]

I would suggest calling Catholic Answers …directly…put the question to Jimmy Akin…he is very good at this sort of thing.

Not sure it would be “lying” since such is no longer the case (with the expunging etc)…but call and have them ask Jimmy…or call tonight on the show (if it will not get the guy in trouble or break confidentiality or something by you calling a radio show…listened to all over the place…from someone recognizing your voice…)

Jimmy is on the second hour:

catholic.com/radio/calendar.php

Times are CA times …

 

[Derwin_James]

First off, it should not affect any employment if he is charged with a crime. Being charged is not the same as being convicted. If, after being charged, the case is dropped, or a person is found not guilty, then the person should not be affected adversely by this happening. The man you are talking about was charged with a crime. Perhaps he could use his case to his advantage. Most job applications will ask for specifics when they ask about criminal history. If they ask if he has been charged, he could honestly say yes, and that he plead not guilty, and that all charges were dropped and record expunged. By being open with this, he shows that he has nothing to hide, and appears to the employer as an honest person. This would potentially improve his rapport with a potential employer, and help him avoid a morally tricky question.

 

[PatrickSebast]

Every job application I have ever read/filled out asked if I was convicted of a crime, not if I was charged with a crime. I am pretty sure that is the standard so he probably doesn’t even have to worry about. I can’t imagine any company really cares to know about non-convictions nor do they have a right to ask or know about them.

 

[ElizabethPH]

Don’t applications usually only ask if you were ever ‘convicted’ of a crime; and in some cases only a felony? I don’t recall them ever asking if you were ever charged with one. I don’t think he’s lying in this case. On the other hand if they ask if you were charged with a crime and you say no and you were well then that’s obviously lying about it…but I don’t think co. can ask that can they?

 

[Charlotte408]

No. He was never convicted. Simple as that. Not his crime.

 

[Barbkw]

The Application for Employment that I currently use, doesn’t have a line on it asking about felony convictions. It does have a line asking about visa and immigration status. Which is odd.

In the interview process, companies are allowed to ask about convictions and what information will come up on the prospective employee’s background check & records search.

Name searches using the internet will also reveal what doesn’t show up on background checks.

 

[comrade1789]

I would suggest calling Catholic Answers …directly…put the question to Jimmy Akin…he is very good at this sort of thing.

Not sure it would be “lying” since such is no longer the case (with the expunging etc)…but call and have them ask Jimmy…or call tonight on the show (if it will not get the guy in trouble or break confidentiality or something by you calling a radio show…listened to all over the place…from someone recognizing your voice…)

Jimmy is on the second hour:

catholic.com/radio/calendar.php

Times are CA times …

That would be a great move, Jimmy is a a wonderful resource. Unfortunately I am unable to call in at that time.

 

[comrade1789]

First off, it should not affect any employment if he is charged with a crime. Being charged is not the same as being convicted. If, after being charged, the case is dropped, or a person is found not guilty, then the person should not be affected adversely by this happening. The man you are talking about was charged with a crime. Perhaps he could use his case to his advantage. Most job applications will ask for specifics when they ask about criminal history. If they ask if he has been charged, he could honestly say yes, and that he plead not guilty, and that all charges were dropped and record expunged. By being open with this, he shows that he has nothing to hide, and appears to the employer as an honest person. This would potentially improve his rapport with a potential employer, and help him avoid a morally tricky question.

In some cases this has worked well for him. In other cases he didn’t even get the chance to fully explain, and having to fully explain seems to re-open old wounds. Fact is, lawful or not, some institutions denied services and opportunities when he has disclosed in good faith. A low-income person who doesn’t have the energy or fight left in him is a person who it is hard to ask them to file complaints and take action. From where I see him, it seems it would be better for him if he could just avoid the whole thing altogether. He explained that “it is like being victimized and dragged through the whole *$%#@& mess all over again!”

 

[comrade1789]

Every job application I have ever read/filled out asked if I was convicted of a crime, not if I was charged with a crime. I am pretty sure that is the standard so he probably doesn’t even have to worry about. I can’t imagine any company really cares to know about non-convictions nor do they have a right to ask or know about them.

I’ve seen the applications he has. They do state “charged” as well as “convicted.” The question itself seems unfair, but if a charge was expunged, that means you have the legal right to decline disclosing that your were charged. His issue is that he painfully knows for a fact that he was charged and all the hell it caused him, so he feels like he is lying when he answers “no.” Kinda like the saying, and I hate this one, but “honest to a fault.”

 

[comrade1789]

Don’t applications usually only ask if you were ever ‘convicted’ of a crime; and in some cases only a felony? I don’t recall them ever asking if you were ever charged with one. I don’t think he’s lying in this case. On the other hand if they ask if you were charged with a crime and you say no and you were well then that’s obviously lying about it…but I don’t think co. can ask that can they?

But is he lying if by the rights granted by the expunging process, a process that exists to protect people wrongfully or inappropriately accused of crimes and to give a way of restoring what the charge took away…if by the rights granted him by this process he declares “no” to having ever been charged with the felony? It seems the employers/institutions are asking a question based in law and by that same law a person is granted a type of “annulment” if you will, allowing him to say he was never charged. So is it a lie to excercise a legal right set up to protect the rights of the wrongfully accused?

 

[PatrickSebast]

I’ve seen the applications he has. They do state “charged” as well as “convicted.” The question itself seems unfair, but if a charge was expunged, that means you have the legal right to decline disclosing that your were charged. His issue is that he painfully knows for a fact that he was charged and all the hell it caused him, so he feels like he is lying when he answers “no.” Kinda like the saying, and I hate this one, but “honest to a fault.”

I would say call the business and ask about it then. Simply say explain the situation to the HR department verbally and see what they say. If they give him permission to omit it (which I think they will) he can’t be lying anymore since he still admitted it to HR.

 

[jmcrae]

It seems as if the charge was reversed, so he would not be lying if he said that he was not charged.

Just tell him not to answer any questions that nobody ever asks him, and to simply say “no” if he is asked whether he was ever charged with anything.

 

[ElizabethPH]

Is he not putting up unnecessary obstacles here? If he was charged for something he didn’t do and it was expunged (meaning erased/does not exist; except for a bad memory) then he needs to let it go so’s he can move forward. Find a company that doesn’t ask about being charged with a crime. Or just ignore the question. Afterall it’s all been expunged.

 

[otjm]

Expungement is the legal equivalent of erasing the fact from history. You are neither legally nor morally required to report it to anyone.

 

[comrade1789]

I would say call the business and ask about it then. Simply say explain the situation to the HR department verbally and see what they say. If they give him permission to omit it (which I think they will) he can’t be lying anymore since he still admitted it to HR.

Thank you for the advice. We went this route before submitting the application, we spoke directly to the HR, and they said that a charge, even if expunged, might still come up because many private background companies keep copies of all court documents/records as they are produced so that once a court expunges a public record, the private firm still has information that may be impossible for anyone doing a public record search to find. However, the woman at the HR dept said that so long as the charge was dismissed in court (which it was) that we have nothing to fear because we disclosed ahead of time, weren’t trying to cover up, and the record states dismissed, so we would get the green light.

 

[ElizabethPH]

In most states, and with some limited exceptions, after your records are sealed or expunged, you may truthfully say that you were never arrested, charged, or accused of a crime. In the eyes of the law, the entire incident never happened. In most respects, a sealing or expungement restores you to the status you occupied before being arrested or charged.

You should be aware that the federal government doesn’t have to honor the expungement, nor does an expungement of a conviction necessarily relieve a person from having to disclose it in an application for public office or on some professional license applications.

 

[faithfully]

I would say call the business and ask about it then. Simply say explain the situation to the HR department verbally and see what they say. If they give him permission to omit it (which I think they will) he can’t be lying anymore since he still admitted it to HR.

That’s BEGGING for a lawsuit. When you provide information that is NOT your business to provide… expect to be sued. Especially if you prevent someone from working.

And as an HR person. I WOULD NOT give permission to omit part of my LEGAL application. I would put your application in the does not follow directions pile if left blank and unanswered. And you would simply not get any futher…

 

[otjm]

Thank you for the advice. We went this route before submitting the application, we spoke directly to the HR, and they said that a charge, even if expunged, might still come up because many private background companies keep copies of all court documents/records as they are produced so that once a court expunges a public record, the private firm still has information that may be impossible for anyone doing a public record search to find. However, the woman at the HR dept said that so long as the charge was dismissed in court (which it was) that we have nothing to fear because we disclosed ahead of time, weren’t trying to cover up, and the record states dismissed, so we would get the green light.

However, any private company which revealed such information might expose themselves to an interesting lawsuit if the matter had been expunged and the records sealed. The purpose of expungement is that in certain and somewhat limited circumstances, the State has felt that it is in the best interest of the individual as well as the public that the incident be treated as if it had not happened. It is designed to give the individual a “clean record”.

 

[faithfully]

Thank you for the advice. We went this route before submitting the application, we spoke directly to the HR, and they said that a charge, even if expunged, might still come up because many private background companies keep copies of all court documents/records as they are produced so that once a court expunges a public record, the private firm still has information that may be impossible for anyone doing a public record search to find. However, the woman at the HR dept said that so long as the charge was dismissed in court (which it was) that we have nothing to fear because we disclosed ahead of time, weren’t trying to cover up, and the record states dismissed, so we would get the green light.

Totally different if you went to HR with HIM. Lieing gets people fired all the time.