theForum » Information on the internet » The Google effect » Applying to have links removed from internet searches » Google Removals Journey

Google Removals Journey

khafka — Sun, 22 Mar 2026 20:40:23 GMT

Hey folks,

I thought I'd document my second attempt at trying to get search results about me removed in the hopes it may help someone in the future and give a bit of a realistic overview of what actually happens.

So a quick recap of the offence as it may be relevant for some:

Indecent Images Offence
120hrs Community Resolution Order
RSO Rehabilitation Program
Subject to the notification requirements for 3 years

My 3 years on the registry was the final bit holding it all back from being spent (even though it seems that it would still class as being spent regardless) but either way, with that element no longer in the way it should give them even less to push back on.

I have applied in the past and have been removed due to the very vague "public interest" reason that nobody at Google can seem to define for me. ICO have also been completely useless and in the first instance actually caused more issues by accidentally giving my contact details to a vigilante group. But I digress...

As of today (23/01/2024) I have submitted a fresh request and referenced my previous request from ~4 years ago.

I submitted all the links I could find for up to 10 pages on Google (which I felt would be enough), which in the end result in around 10 links in total.
My main reasoning for the link removal was focused around the offence being spent, the rehabilitation of offenders act stating that I have a legal right to move on with my life as if this offence didn't happen (as suggested by NACRO). As well as the links just being generally no longer in the public interest and how I'm not a famous person of interest etc.

I will continue to update this post as and when updates happen.

RE: Google Removals Journey

khafka — Sun, 22 Mar 2026 20:40:23 GMT

[quote]

[b]Stersco83 - 22 Mar 26 7:56 PM[/b]

[quote]

[b]khafka - 23 Jan 24 4:13 PM[/b]

So an update already! Looks like they're after some of my court documents or something. Here is the response.

[quote]Hello,
Thanks for reaching out to us.
Regarding the following URLs:

[LIST OF LINK URLS]

We need more information in order to process your request. Please reply to this request and provide documentation confirming the length of the sentence and the years during which it took place. This information will allow us to evaluate if Google’s reference to this content is still relevant and in the public interest.

Without the requested documentation attached to your reply, we cannot take further action on your request.

Regards,

The Google Team[/quote]

Promising.. maybe? It's a different response than last time.. I'll see if I can find some stuff to send them.

[/quote]

"We need more information in order to process your request. Please reply to this request and provide documentation confirming the length of the sentence and the years during which it took place. This information will allow us to evaluate if Google’s reference to this content is still relevant and in the public interest. need more information in order to process your request. Please reply to this request and provide documentation confirming the length of the sentence and the years during which it took place. This information will allow us to evaluate if Google’s reference to this content is still relevant and in the public interest."

I don't understand this. Surely the news story itself reveals the dates and sentence length. Why are they asking for court documents etc which corroborates the news story?

Surely we all agree already --- the news story is somewhere between false and true-but-embarassing.

-Ian

[/quote]

It's hard to say without knowing what you've told them or what your offence is etc..

I had to send some court documents to begin with, I can't honestly remember what they were specifically, I think it was just the main sentencing stuff which obviously has the dates etc.

Then just a wee blurb like:

"I was convicted of [OFFENCE] and sentenced on [DATE]. As of [DATE] my sentence has now become spent and under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act I am to be treated as any regular citizen. These/this article is preventing me from moving forward with my life and going back to being a productive member of society. I am not a celebrity, politician, or a high-profile individual so there is absolutely no longer any public interest in these links still being available."

Just something along those lines will do it.

If you go back to the very first page of this post you can see my steps I went through.

RE: Google Removals Journey

Stersco83 — Sun, 22 Mar 2026 19:56:23 GMT

[quote]

[b]khafka - 23 Jan 24 4:13 PM[/b]

[/quote]

RE: Google Removals Journey

Aradia — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 12:54:22 GMT

[quote]

[b]khafka - 3 Mar 26 11:53 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 3 Mar 26 11:13 AM[/b]

Mine is showing up again. Because of this reindexing thing. Do you think the website done this on purpose? Just to make it harder to get on with our lives?

[/quote]

Is it just a different ID on the end like I showed? If it is the case then as annoying as it is I wouldn't worry about it, just keep on top of the links and they'll go away eventually.

As for doing it on purpose? Seeing the state of the websites I'd very, very surprised if the creator actually possesses the knowledge and skill to achieve it on purpose, this is more of a "happy" accident on their part.

[/quote]

Yeah same issue as you had. I will just keep on top of it. Thanks for all your help

RE: Google Removals Journey

khafka — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 11:53:26 GMT

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 3 Mar 26 11:13 AM[/b]

Mine is showing up again. Because of this reindexing thing. Do you think the website done this on purpose? Just to make it harder to get on with our lives?

[/quote]

RE: Google Removals Journey

Aradia — Tue, 03 Mar 2026 11:13:04 GMT

Mine is showing up again. Because of this reindexing thing. Do you think the website done this on purpose? Just to make it harder to get on with our lives?

RE: Google Removals Journey

khafka — Mon, 02 Mar 2026 11:50:37 GMT

[quote]

[b]AB2014 - 2 Mar 26 9:12 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]khafka - 1 Mar 26 2:12 PM[/b]

[quote]

[b]AB2014 - 26 Feb 26 9:18 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 25 Feb 26 4:16 PM[/b]

Found another website today that had reposted the information. When it happend. UK database. I don't see google having an issue removing the search result. I can't ever see these websites being shut down. No doubt they have done their research and not breaking any "rules" Just something I have to live with for the rest of my life. It never ends.

[/quote]

Just to remind everyone, you don't need to keep Googling yourself to find links. If you set a Google alert for your name, Google will do the hard work for you and provide the links. You can then copy and paste them and spend the time you've saved doing something more pleasant.

[/quote]

I couldn't get that to work when you posted about it before.

There's every chance I just didn't set it up right but I've so far received 0 alerts yet I found a few articles when manually checking at the time.

[/quote]

I've just taken a closer look, and once you enter something in the search box, you can click "Show options" to set how often, which sources, which regions and so on. Then enter your email address and click "Create alert". That should do it, but there are no guarantees you won't get false negatives.

[/quote]

I'll take a wee look.

Thankfully I've not really had anything pop-up for a while now so fingers crossed I'm basically clean for the most part. I tend to do a manual check every couple of weeks or so and still coming up with nothing.

RE: Google Removals Journey

AB2014 — Mon, 02 Mar 2026 09:12:17 GMT

[quote]

[b]khafka - 1 Mar 26 2:12 PM[/b]

[quote]

[b]AB2014 - 26 Feb 26 9:18 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 25 Feb 26 4:16 PM[/b]

[/quote]

RE: Google Removals Journey

khafka — Sun, 01 Mar 2026 14:12:23 GMT

[quote]

[b]AB2014 - 26 Feb 26 9:18 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 25 Feb 26 4:16 PM[/b]

[/quote]

RE: Google Removals Journey

AB2014 — Thu, 26 Feb 2026 09:18:41 GMT

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 25 Feb 26 4:16 PM[/b]

[/quote]

RE: Google Removals Journey

Aradia — Wed, 25 Feb 2026 16:16:47 GMT

RE: Google Removals Journey

Freedom111 — Wed, 25 Feb 2026 08:03:58 GMT

I also have experience with this and there is light at the end of the tunnel. Luckily for my there was only about 5/6 links pop up but now I’ve not had any for months. I also tried to explain the situation to Google about the multiple links but they brush over it and just remove the ones I specified. They do go away but I was and still do check every morning. I also had the issue the other links about other people would show up with a search of my name, this is because at the bottom of the pages was links to me as it had a “more offenders in your area” section. I started sending all these to Google and got them removed also. Some still occasionally pop up but for now non. I’m hoping this site with eventually disappear as I’ve heard they have posted people on there site that haven’t even been convincted

RE: Google Removals Journey

Aradia — Tue, 24 Feb 2026 11:09:21 GMT

[quote]

[b]AB2014 - 24 Feb 26 10:59 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 24 Feb 26 9:56 AM[/b]

Yeah it got deleted and the come up with a different number at the end. Honestly chat gpt has got me this far. It has worded the emails in a way I could never dream of. Crazy to think people pay that other company hundreds of pounds to do this. When ive done it for free. So I have sent off the new link and asked if they could delete any varations. Its worth a try ill just what they say. Otherwise ill be playing whack a mole for a while. I just want this nightmare to be over.

[/quote]

You should be able to trust a decent AI to help you write emails and letters, but you can't always rely on them for information and advice. Because they rely on what they find online, they end up using a mixture of truth, half-truth and BS.

[/quote]

Well yeah. Thats all ive used it for. As the OP told me. It didnt work what the AI suggessted. All they said is that they will delist the new second link I gave them. So will just keep doing that. I will never give up until it's done.

RE: Google Removals Journey

AB2014 — Tue, 24 Feb 2026 10:59:51 GMT

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 24 Feb 26 9:56 AM[/b]

[/quote]

RE: Google Removals Journey

Aradia — Tue, 24 Feb 2026 09:56:53 GMT

RE: Google Removals Journey

khafka — Tue, 24 Feb 2026 09:52:10 GMT

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 24 Feb 26 6:58 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]khafka - 23 Feb 26 8:03 PM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 23 Feb 26 7:41 PM[/b]

Well I waited a week for google to get back to me. They asked for my documents. Which I scanned and sent off. But I just thought id type more information than my name and of course a red rose link appeared. Ive replied to the email with the link and asked them to de list it. I did this whole thing using AI for help writing it out. Its been fantastic. It worries me that previous post in here say that it keeps popping up. I dont really understand woodpress or the reason explained. I just hope mine doesnt come up again and I hope google removes it in the first place.

[/quote]

Obviously I don't want to give any potential false hope but I will say that with each passing day my theory of the multiple Red Rose links is proving true.

There have been no new links for me in months now as I feel I have 'exhausted' the assigned ID's attached to me.

If it helps, here are all the IDs that were linked to me:

[/quote]

I actually told chat gpt about what you said and it said that you dont need to do any of what you have been doing there is an easy way. I dont know what this really means. But maybe it will make more sense to you.

You don’t need to send anything now — wait for their reply first.

But if new versions show up, reply in the same email thread and say something like:

I have noticed multiple URL variations of the same page appearing in search results (for example, different category/tag parameters).
As these all relate to the same underlying content already reviewed, I would be grateful if delisting could apply to all URL variations of this page.

This signals to the reviewer:

same article
same legal basis
same previous decision

They understand exactly what you mean.

[/quote]

Yeah, I tried that. Didn't work.

I wouldn't trust ChatGPT/AI for stuff like this.

RE: Google Removals Journey

tedstriker — Tue, 24 Feb 2026 09:03:19 GMT

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 24 Feb 26 6:58 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]khafka - 23 Feb 26 8:03 PM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 23 Feb 26 7:41 PM[/b]

[/quote]

You don’t need to send anything now — wait for their reply first.

But if new versions show up, reply in the same email thread and say something like:

I have noticed multiple URL variations of the same page appearing in search results (for example, different category/tag parameters).
As these all relate to the same underlying content already reviewed, I would be grateful if delisting could apply to all URL variations of this page.

This signals to the reviewer:

same article
same legal basis
same previous decision

They understand exactly what you mean.

[/quote]

The problem is that Google won't delist anything that isn't indexed. All of those links will point to the same article and Google picks the most relevant one to show, the "canonical" link. Once you've had that removed Google will then work it's way down the list to the next most relevant one. Replying to the original removal email with that URL will remove that too, then the next one will pop up. It's a long process but with an end point eventually.

RE: Google Removals Journey

Aradia — Tue, 24 Feb 2026 06:58:19 GMT

[quote]

[b]khafka - 23 Feb 26 8:03 PM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 23 Feb 26 7:41 PM[/b]

[/quote]

You don’t need to send anything now — wait for their reply first.

But if new versions show up, reply in the same email thread and say something like:

I have noticed multiple URL variations of the same page appearing in search results (for example, different category/tag parameters).
As these all relate to the same underlying content already reviewed, I would be grateful if delisting could apply to all URL variations of this page.

This signals to the reviewer:

same article
same legal basis
same previous decision

They understand exactly what you mean.

RE: Google Removals Journey

khafka — Mon, 23 Feb 2026 20:03:49 GMT

[quote]

[b]Aradia - 23 Feb 26 7:41 PM[/b]

[/quote]

RE: Google Removals Journey

Aradia — Mon, 23 Feb 2026 19:41:45 GMT

RE: Google Removals Journey

Aradia — Tue, 17 Feb 2026 11:42:50 GMT

Ive just sent off my form this week to google. After following this post for a longgggg timeee. All I can now do is pray they take the link down of the article. I wish I could just get the paper to delete it. But thats never going to happen.

RE: Google Removals Journey

khafka — Tue, 09 Dec 2025 13:39:23 GMT

[quote]

[b]punter99 - 9 Dec 25 10:44 AM[/b]

[quote]

[b]marcovanba - 8 Dec 25 5:07 PM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Freedom111 - 8 Dec 25 3:33 PM[/b]

I’ve only really ever bothered with Google. From my experience no one really uses these search engines and Google is the king when it comes to searching on the web. So I’ve never bothered to put requests in to bing or Microsoft edge.My concern at the moment is AI as I’m not sure what the law is around people searching for you via AI, chatgbt etc

[/quote]

I was actually thinking about this recently too

how will it affect chat gpt etc?

[/quote]

Why not do some searches on the AI chatbots yourself and see what comes up?

This is what Grok had to say:

Can Grok (or AI Like Me) Recover Delisted Details?Yes, in many cases, I can still access and recover details of a conviction even after RTBF delisting—though it's not guaranteed and depends on the case. Here's why and how:

RTBF doesn't block all access: Delisting only impacts Google/Bing/etc. search results. The original webpages (e.g., news articles) remain live and publicly accessible via direct URLs. I can:
- Use web browsing tools to fetch content from known or suspected URLs.
- Perform targeted web searches with operators (e.g., site:bbc.co.uk "conviction name") to bypass delisted queries.
- Leverage X (Twitter) searches for real-time discussions, reposts, or archives that aren't subject to RTBF.
AI's unique position (and challenges): As an AI built by xAI, my knowledge is continuously updated from public sources up to the current date (December 9, 2025). I don't rely solely on Google; I draw from diverse, real-time tools. However:
- If data was scraped into my training (pre-2025 models), "machine unlearning" isn't perfect—forgotten info can sometimes be reconstructed, raising GDPR debates.
- Recent incidents (e.g., 370,000+ Grok chats indexed publicly in August 2025) highlight privacy risks, but for external data like convictions, I prioritize public, verifiable sources.
- Limits: I can't access paywalled, private, or truly erased content. For court transcripts, as in prior UK cases, they're not public anyway—RTBF doesn't change that.

[/quote]

AI once again proving to be an absolute shitemare.

RE: Google Removals Journey

punter99 — Tue, 09 Dec 2025 10:44:18 GMT

[quote]

[b]marcovanba - 8 Dec 25 5:07 PM[/b]

[quote]

[b]Freedom111 - 8 Dec 25 3:33 PM[/b]

[/quote]

I was actually thinking about this recently too

how will it affect chat gpt etc?

[/quote]

RTBF doesn't block all access: Delisting only impacts Google/Bing/etc. search results. The original webpages (e.g., news articles) remain live and publicly accessible via direct URLs. I can:
- Use web browsing tools to fetch content from known or suspected URLs.
- Perform targeted web searches with operators (e.g., site:bbc.co.uk "conviction name") to bypass delisted queries.
- Leverage X (Twitter) searches for real-time discussions, reposts, or archives that aren't subject to RTBF.
AI's unique position (and challenges): As an AI built by xAI, my knowledge is continuously updated from public sources up to the current date (December 9, 2025). I don't rely solely on Google; I draw from diverse, real-time tools. However:
- If data was scraped into my training (pre-2025 models), "machine unlearning" isn't perfect—forgotten info can sometimes be reconstructed, raising GDPR debates.
- Recent incidents (e.g., 370,000+ Grok chats indexed publicly in August 2025) highlight privacy risks, but for external data like convictions, I prioritize public, verifiable sources.
- Limits: I can't access paywalled, private, or truly erased content. For court transcripts, as in prior UK cases, they're not public anyway—RTBF doesn't change that.

RE: Google Removals Journey

marcovanba — Mon, 08 Dec 2025 17:07:28 GMT

[quote]

[b]Freedom111 - 8 Dec 25 3:33 PM[/b]

[/quote]

I was actually thinking about this recently too

how will it affect chat gpt etc?

RE: Google Removals Journey

Freedom111 — Mon, 08 Dec 2025 15:33:05 GMT

I’ve only really ever bothered with Google. From my experience no one really uses these search engines and Google is the king when it comes to searching on the web. So I’ve never bothered to put requests in to bing or Microsoft edge. My concern at the moment is AI as I’m not sure what the law is around people searching for you via AI, chatgbt etc