Transparency News 11/24/15
State and Local Stories
FOIA Council opinion on body camera videos, the noncriminal records exemption, the difference between local police and sheriff’s vs. state police and others with law enforcement authority, and the unclear duty to redact.
VCOG
A Portsmouth police officer who shot and killed a mentally ill man in his home earlier this year was involved in two other police shootings since 2009 resulting in three other deaths, The Virginian-Pilot has found. Prosecutors ruled all three shootings were justified but only publicly identified Lt. Todd Thursby last week in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Many officers can go their entire careers without being involved in one shooting, but a law enforcement expert said some officers draw high-risk assignments that increase the likelihood they will have to use their weapons.An exemption to Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act gives police departments the discretion to withhold the names of police officers who are involved in shootings. The Portsmouth department rarely reveals those names, making it difficult to know how many of its officers have been involved in multiple shootings. Portsmouth police also rarely give details of the incidents, which makes it difficult to get a clear picture of what role Thursby played in two of the three shootings.
Virginian-Pilot
A still photographer will be allowed to take pictures during the murder trial of former Fairfax County police officer Adam D. Torres next month, a Fairfax judge ruled Monday. Torres, 32, is charged in the August 2013 shooting death of John B. Geer, 46, in Springfield. At a hearing on Friday, The Washington Post asked Fairfax Circuit Court Judge Robert J. Smith to allow both video and still cameras in the trial, set for Dec. 14. Both the prosecution and the defense opposed any photography, saying that it could affect witness behavior on the stand or even convince witnesses not to testify. Smith wrote Monday that “there is sufficient merit in these arguments to warrant a prohibition on broadcast/video electronic coverage of the trial. However,” Smith continued, “the Court does not believe that still photography should also be prohibited.”
Washington Post
National Stories
The Internal Revenue Service must pay $239,400 in attorneys' fees after losing a lawsuit over access to digital records, a federal judge ruled Friday. Public.Resource.org, a nonprofit that makes government records accessible to the public, sued the IRS in June 2013 for failing to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request. Public.Resource asked for form 990s filed by nine tax-exempt charities in their original format, a modernized efile (MeF). The requested forms include details on the charities' missions, programs and finances. The IRS said it would cost $6,200 in training and new technology to fulfill the request, which would pose an "undue burden" on an agency operating under a "sequestration level" budget. But in January this year U.S. District Judge William Orrick ordered the IRS to disclose the files , finding that lack of funding does not excuse a government agency from complying with the FOIA.
Courthouse News Service
A political candidate sued to identify the author of an unusual comment on a newspaper’s website. After $35,000 in legal fees, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled Comcast had to give up its subscriber’s info and the name was finally made public.
The Verge
Editorials/Columns
In 2013, five Hampton Roads communities agreed to share telephone data collected in criminal investigations through a centralized database. The program, called the Hampton Roads Telephone Analysis Sharing Network, danced on the edge of legality, in that it did not appear to meet the thresholds set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court and the Virginia attorney general for collecting and compiling data. What's more, the participating communities entered into this agreement absent the type of robust public debate the matter deserved. It won approval in some cities after only a cursory mention — if it was mentioned at all. The program is now dead, having been terminated in favor of a federal information-sharing agreement. But we believe that legal questions about this data network deserve answers, in the fervent hope that our communities can learn from this experience and avoid repeating this folly.
Daily Press
The Internet can be ugly. Online commenters, especially those hiding behind anonymity, too often spew violence, racism and misogyny. We understand why some Mary Baldwin College students want to ban the mobile app Yik Yak from the campus network. Yik Yak allows anonymous commenting, and some of its content is brutally offensive. Used primarily by college students, it brims with gossip, confessions and jokes. Anonymous online commenters can be a nasty lot, to be sure. We do not condone racism. But it is not Mary Baldwin’s or any college’s job to shield adult students from real life, and it is downright dangerous for campuses to become places that curb freedom of speech. Higher education is about learning, not suppressing.
News Leader
