|
|
There are, however, several instances in the past when the Ithaca Times has been denied access to police reports. This week marks the third instance. The first two denials this year came with an alleged racial incident at the Dollar Store in Center Ithaca. The Ithaca Police Department (IPD) would not release the initial police report and then-Deputy Chief Lauren Signer would only answer "specific questions" regarding the case. With no basis of a report to go on it was difficult for the Times to be "specific" in its questioning.
The second denial followed the arrest of Alderman Gayraud Townsend (D-4th Ward). IPD claimed releasing the record would hinder the investigation. However, the Times was not seeking the investigation report. The Times was seeking the initial police report that was filed.
In the most recent denial of access to a public record, the Times is seeking the police reports from at least 17 incidents of the Collegetown Creeper. After being denied by IPD, the Times filed 17 individual Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request forms with the City of Ithaca - all of which were denied.
Prior to receiving an official response, an inquiry to Mayor Carolyn Peterson resulted in a reply from City Attorney Martin Luster. He said, "The law specifically exempts from disclosure those police records which, if disclosed, would: 1. interfere with law enforcement investigations or judicial proceedings; 2. deprive a person of a right to a fair trial; 3. identify a confidential source or disclose confidential information relating to a criminal investigation; or 4. reveal non-routine criminal investigation techniques and procedures."
But the fact remains that public record is public record and it should never have gotten to the point of the Times having to file FOIL requests. Mr. Luster's reasoning, quite simply, cannot be used in every single case that the IPD investigates. The media are not looking to hinder an investigation, but to offer factual information to the public.
Robert Freeman, of the Department of State Committee on Open Government, said that Mr. Luster's quotes of the law are correct, except that "portions of" the police reports may be withheld, not the reports in their entirety.
"Basic information particularly found in traditional police reports should still be made available," he said.
The Times understands that there may be some information that cannot be released as it could potentially hinder an ongoing investigation, but not all of the information in the initial reports can possibly be vital to the investigation.
This is a classic First versus Sixth amendment debate. The first helps to preserve the sixth (a person's right to a fair trial) by the glare of publicity to keep public officials - including the police department - in line. Though there is no trial, as the Creeper has not yet been caught, it follows the same principle. Mr. Luster would be wise to take note.
