Introduction

A police officer is caught driving more than 100 miles per hour on the streets of Milton, Conn. A Virginia woman accuses a police officer of raping her when he responded to her 911 call in 2009. A man is killed by the gun of a Maine state police officer. An officer is charged with multiple sexual assaults during traffic stops in Charlotte, N.C.

In the last several months, stories about these incidents — and many more — were written with the aid of records that were released to the public in response to open records requests. Some of these stories were also written without some of the critical information in police files, because officials denied access to the records and the paper couldn’t get the whole story.

Unfortunately, many stories pertaining to similar incidents are incomplete because reporters can’t gain access to the information, either because the police stonewalled or were not required to release records. State laws regarding access to police records are not uniform: Some states allow broad disclosure of records, while some allow little disclosure. Yet, openness in police departments is essential to keeping in check an arm of government that is entrusted with power and enormous responsibility.

Far too often the only stories about major crimes are those documenting a news organization’s request for records under state freedom of information acts and being denied access. As recently as Oct. 15, The Post and Courier, in South Carolina, was denied access to performance reviews of a Charleston public safety sergeant who was fired amid allegations of misconduct. The department denied access because the records were part of an ongoing criminal investigation. Jay Bender, an attorney for the South Carolina Press Association, disagreed and told the newspaper that, in denying access to the reports, the police were “mak[ing] up their own exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act.”

In Milford, Conn., police are being criticized after erasing video tapes that had been requested under the state’s Freedom of Information Law. Police insist the erasure was accidental. There, an attorney for a local teen who was killed in a collision with a police car sought the videos for a resulting lawsuit. Some of the missing 348 hours of video has been recovered — only 1/5 of the amount that was requested. The story, as documented by the Connecticut Post, has now become about obstruction and a valid information request.

Obstacles to gaining access to internal investigation records, arrest records and juvenile records are only part of the bigger picture of problems with access to police department records. Reporters must maneuver an evolving set of standards to get information, especially as states amend their laws, as Illinois and North Carolina have done in the last year. It appears there is a trend toward greater access, but police departments need to foster an atmosphere of compliance because, according to open government advocates, the cost to a citizen or newsroom to appeal a denial can be prohibitive.

Most states, like Alaska, California, Ohio, and Rhode Island, for example, have provisions that keep ongoing investigations into criminal conduct exempt,¹ which would include an ongoing internal investigation of a police officer. But even when an investigation into police misconduct is complete, records will not always be opened for inspection by the general public. Not every state will allow access to arrest records, either. And many states won’t allow access to juvenile records at all.