The target is wrong. Your mother (and the other people in the EU) should be targeting the newspapers and other places that actually have the information.
Not the search engine.
A newspaper would probably refuse to remove the story altogether, but they might be willing to add a note saying the charges were dropped.
There's a difference between removing false or misleading information (like in your case) and trying to hide your true history (like most of the EU cases I'm hearing about).
I don't disagree with you in principle but, in reality, it wouldn't matter. You can already find that the entire case was dismissed, but the newspapers won't print anything about that, and I doubt it would make much difference if they did. Many people associate charges with guilt, and I can't say I wouldn't be biased against an applicant who was charged with a felony.
I don't know what the right answer is. For me this is admittedly an emotional subject.
Unfortunately, if I'm trying to get an idea of the trustworthiness of a person, I'm probably just going to skim the search results and reject them as soon as I see something related to a crime. It's an imperfect filter, but dismissing someone who has done nothing wrong is less costly than trusting someone you shouldn't.
Not the search engine.
A newspaper would probably refuse to remove the story altogether, but they might be willing to add a note saying the charges were dropped.
There's a difference between removing false or misleading information (like in your case) and trying to hide your true history (like most of the EU cases I'm hearing about).