IRO report redacted

The Independent Review Officer has released part of the results of his investigation. He (they, someone?) has decided to keep some of it secret by means of redaction; names have been removed, link.

There are a number of good and ethical reasons to redact the public record. They are recognized and provided for in the law as exceptions to open meetings and public records disclosure laws.

It has been decided that an agreement between the Police Officers Union and the city, trumps state law. The law reads, surrender the entire record to public knowledge; Mayor Richard Berry's administration says the city and the union can ignore the law apparently, as long as they agree on it.

According the Journal, link,
"An attached letter from Interim City Attorney Robert Kidd said the full report would not be released. Most of the names were redacted from the summary because of the collective bargaining agreement between the city and police union, “constitutional privacy concerns” and because “the disciplinary process is not complete,” he said.

I am not a lawyer and I will bow to controverting facts but,
my reading and understanding of the law does not provide an exception just because the players agree on it. And, while the law does except public records that are part of an ongoing criminal investigation (but only to the extent that the release could damage the investigation), it doesn't allow them to redact on that basis alone. With respect the "constitutional privacy concerns, it is time to discuss, openly and honestly, the privacy rights of public servants within their public service. Does the Constitution really provide government a way to hide its own corruption and incompetence? If a private citizen were accused of any of these acts, their name would be released without hesitation.

It defies reason to allow politicians and public servants to suppress evidence of their corruption or incompetence by allowing them redact their own record. The appearance of a conflict of interest bone crushing.

It is exactly what the leadership of the APS is doing with the records of corruption in their Police Department; they just investigate themselves and continue to investigate, and hide records, until statutes of limitation have expired.

The entire reports, both the IRO's report and Robert Caswell's report, should be surrendered to impartial redaction according to the spirit of the law.




photo Mark Bralley