Hello,
I applied to Google to have links removed, and failed. By all accounts there is 'substantial public interest' in what has been written about me. I have many thoughts about the whole situation, and in a way I can see Google's point, however they do not take into account that my trial occurred on a slow news day resulting in substantial media interest in something that would have otherwise been minimally reported.

Without going into too much detail, I didn't do what I was convicted of (It has taken many years to get to a stage that I am not suicidal over that!). The reports published did not reflect my stance at all, and even contained many inaccuracies regarding what happened in the trial (lies in the prosecution exposed etc.). That is a big thing for me, because when I try to talk to people, they just come back and say 'but google doesn't say that'.

I also have an issue with how relevance works. Because of a slow news day, there are a few news stories floating about the internet. Because some are duplicated (1 reporter in court made a good deal of money out of me) and  some of the linking, my results get pushed up the rankings. So the reports don't drop as time passes, where as someone with a much more serious conviction than mine plummets down the results because only one or two stories exist.

There is another thing that angers me greatly. A popular website (I'm sure some of you know it :S) copied and pasted a very inaccurate story about my conviction. There are serious errors regarding what went on in court and I cant do anything  about it. I can't even contact them to get it changed because they have hidden their contact details. So ultimately they can publish what they want, push inaccurate stories to the top of search listings and they don't have to be held to account.

Anyway, moan over. I try to live my life in a good way. But I worry every time I hear a hushed conversation or my name mentioned that my conviction is 'out there' again. Sometimes it makes me so sick to my stomach and not want to leave the house.

Hi Square

Really sorry to hear that Google have refused to remove the links to you name. I'm often surprised at the stuff they consider to be 'in the public interest'.

We're currently working with a law firm, Carter Ruck who've agreed to work with us to advise people who are looking to get online links removed. I've attached a link to our Information Hub where you can find more information about this. 

Good luck.

Debs 

Need Unlocks advice? Visit our self-help information site or contact our helpline

I'm not so surprised by Google's attitude. They seem to see no difference between what is in the public interest and what members of the public would find interesting. Not surprisingly, the public don't seem to be interested in whether or not a story is true, although the current president of the US is quite clear on 'fake news'.

Moving on, though, the Unlock Hub also has some information about countering negative online search results. You can find it here.

As Debs said, good luck!

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

The definition of public interest also seems quite illogical when it comes to the decision whether or not to prosecute.

I'm sure many of us have seen the road-rage incident that's been on the news the last few days ("you're under a citizens' arrest, get ready to die!" "I want you dead", grabbing round the neck, threatening violence to a child, etc.). In my mind, there is more public interest in prosecuting this than in prosecuting certain other offences that regularly get prosecuted.

Compared to most European countries, the UK justice system is prehistoric when it comes to publicity/privacy. In most countries on the continent you are anonymous, even after conviction.

This sounds interesting. Care to elaborate?