Opinion ID: 2317480
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Request for Future Absolution by the Court Respecting Inquiries as to the Arrests

Text: Two appellants request court permission to answer in the negative if ever asked on any employment or financial application whether they have been arrested. In light of what we have held herein, it is apparent that relief of this sort is a fortiori unavailable. We reject any notion that without specific statutory authority a court could, in perpetuity and under all circumstances, grant immunity from prosecution or afford an absolute defense in the event of prosecution for perjury or filing of a false statement in connection with government-related business protected by those sanctions. Such seems to be one major purpose for this prayer for relief. Another purpose  noncriminal in nature  appears to be aimed at obtaining a civil ex parte judgment in the nature of a declaratory judgment affecting future dealings with others. While it may be that the Superior Court has declaratory judgment jurisdiction [16] such authority could hardly be exercised in the context of this litigation and without adherence to the applicable statute and rules relating to notice and hearing. Moreover, such a judgment could not affect a subsequent and yet unknown employer or lender dealing with either of these appellants. Appellants cite no authority in support of their assertion of entitlement to such a decree. [17] That they have been forcibly restrained of their liberty as a result of the encounters in question is an historical fact. No system of law can, with integrity, lend or appear to lend its aid to an unreal denial of the events, particularly as such denials may affect the lawful judgment of other persons who may in the future deal with them. It is one thing to say that the system of law will legally ignore an acknowledged fact and perhaps, pursuant to specific legislation, indulge in a fiction that what was once a conviction or a criminal charge shall no longer be deemed such; but it is quite another to assist in rewriting history at the expense of truth, particularly where, as outlined above, the full truth if effectively recorded can preserve the integrity of the individual as well as the rule of law. [18] The order is vacated and the cases remanded for further proceedings.