Anti-fascists say police post mugshots on Twitter to 'intimidate and silence'

Michelle Higgins was protesting a high-profile police killing in St Louis when the officers grabbed her.

The activist’s arrest for “failure to disperse” on 15 September 2017 wasn’t the only punishment she faced for marching. When she was released a day later, she learned that the police department had posted her name, age and address on Twitter, alongside 32 others arrested during the chaotic demonstrations sparked by the acquittal of an officer.

Most of the arrests did not result in charges, but the damage was done. It’s a law enforcement tactic that activists say has become increasingly common: police arrest protesters en masse, publicly shame them on social media, and then drop the cases.

The strategy can lead to intense online abuse for Black Lives Matter activists and other protesters. In the case of anti-fascist protesters, some critics argue that police are also boosting the agenda of neo-Nazis and white supremacists by exposing counter-protesters’ identities – and branding them violent offenders before they’ve gone to court.

“You criminalize folks who are trying to hold people accountable, then you dehumanize them by telling everyone where they live,” said Higgins, who was not prosecuted after her arrest. The St Louis police tweets, she said, posed an “active threat” to activists and sent a message that “these animals were out protesting when they should’ve been sitting at home”.

Although rightwing extremist groups have a documented record of violence and killings, the police response at far-right events in recent weeks has repeatedly targeted the leftwing resistance. Some of the news coverage has also focused on the alleged threats of “antifa”, or anti-fascists.

In Berkeley this month, police arrested 20 counter-protesters at an “alt-right” rally and posted many of their mugshots, names and alleged offenses on Twitter.

“The intention is to intimidate other protesters and silence political speech,” Blake Griffith, one of the activists taken into custody, said in an interview. “They needed to publicly show they were doing something.”

Griffith, who is active in the Democratic Socialists of America, was cited for misdemeanor vandalism. The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) of San Francisco, which is representing the activists, said it appeared that no one on the “alt-right” side was arrested.

Many of those arrested were cited for “possession of a banned weapon”, which police said included “anything” that could be used in a “riot”. Some had scarves and bandanas that police considered “masks”, according to Jay Kim, the executive director of the local NLG chapter.

Whether any of them will ultimately face charges remains to be seen. Five activists who were scheduled to be arraigned in court last week were not charged, the NLG said.

In St Louis, the circumstances surrounding the initial arrests were also questionable. Groups were taken into custody while police were “kettling” protesters, said the city counselor Julian Bush, referring to the practice of police surrounding protesters and then arresting them for failure to disperse.

Bush’s office reviewed many of the 33 cases and declined to file charges. Only four of the activists named on Twitter were charged in state court, but the charges were dropped for two of them due to “insufficient evidence”, a spokeswoman for the prosecutor said.

Blake Strode, executive director of ArchCity Defenders, a local civil rights group, said the mass arrests and social media posts may have been an effort to rationalize the police department’s intense spending and highly militarized operation: “The scare tactic of violent rioters and protesters is used to justify a police overreaction.”

Eddy Robinson, an Oakland-based activist, said he was on his way to a Berkeley protest event last fall carrying a tote bag filled with signs when police stopped him for having a “banned weapon”.

The signs, he said, had anti-fascist messages and small wooden handles. He thought he would simply have to return home with his bag, but instead police took him to jail.

‘There are real consequences’

Robinson was one of the first activists targeted on Berkeley’s Twitter feed last year, with his name and mugshot getting thousands of retweets and responses, which led to a flurry of news articles, hate mail, threats and abusive comments.

“Being arrested for having the wrong type of protest sign was treated as a reason to put it out on Twitter to a global audience,” he said, recounting prison rape threats and other violent remarks. “Once your mugshot is out there, you become a piece of public property.”

Griffith said he got calls from relatives who saw him named on Fox News. He said he also fears the outing on Twitter may have cost him a job last week.

In additional to national media attention, those targeted by the Berkeley police department have found their names on rightwing forums dedicated to harassing and “doxing” anti-fascists, referring to the practice of publishing people’s personal information in an attempt to invite abuse.

“BPD should already know that releasing photos and information of arrestees is putting them in danger,” said Kim. “There are real consequences.”

Caroline Sinders, a design researcher who has advocated for police to stop tweeting mugshots, said the tactic results in people having a “tarnished digital reputation” that can be impossible to fix.

Tweeted mugshots can enable a range of far-right tactics, including coordinated “smear campaigns” to spread online misinformation about a person or efforts to harass individuals’ employers, Sinder said.

The harassment can also lead to real-world problems, she said. “If the alt-right knows who to look for … they can track them down and they can target them in a public space.”

For some, mugshots and arrest records start appearing in top Google search results. When the cases are later dropped, police departments and news organizations almost never publish updates.

Robinson was arrested and shamed on Twitter at a second protest last September, accused of “participating in a riot” and “resisting arrest”. That one led to formal charges, but the case was ultimately dropped. At least 10 people arrested at protests and outed on Berkeley’s Twitter last year never faced charges.

Naming and shaming anti-fascists can also be a way for police to justify use of force, said Juan Chavez, an activist with the NLG in Portland, where a recent far-right rally also turned violent and led to arrests and publicly posted mugshots.

“It’s their first pass at trying to force a narrative about what happened,” said Chavez, who attended the demonstrations, adding that police press releases targeting leftwing protesters can embolden far-right groups to present themselves as victims: “It enables them to able to cry wolf anytime that they feel threatened or undermined by antifa.”

Law enforcement, who have also faced scrutiny for working directly with rightwing and neo-Nazi groups to build cases against anti-fascists, largely defended their tactics.

Spokespeople for police in St Louis, Berkeley and Portland, noted that arrests and mugshots are public records, with some citing legal obligations to release the information.

A Berkeley police spokesman sent a lengthy statement saying its tweets were “a matter of safety and transparency”, adding, “This is done not in an effort to shame, or to chill freedom of speech, but to deny lawbreakers anonymity.” He said the department does not have a policy of removing tweets after cases are dropped.

One Berkeley protester who was outed in the recent wave of tweets and requested anonymity noted that activists have few recourses when they face harassment after mugshots are posted.

Twitter advises users to contact local law enforcement if they are subject to violent threats. But in Berkeley, it feels like that’s not an option, the activist said: “They are the ones that doxed us.”