{"id":35578,"date":"2013-05-23T18:02:48","date_gmt":"2013-05-23T17:02:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/breaking-news\/officials-draft-secret-bill-to-keep-sandy-hook-records-under-wraps\/35578\/"},"modified":"2013-05-23T18:02:48","modified_gmt":"2013-05-23T17:02:48","slug":"officials-draft-secret-bill-to-keep-sandy-hook-records-under-wraps","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/breaking-news\/officials-draft-secret-bill-to-keep-sandy-hook-records-under-wraps\/","title":{"rendered":"Officials Draft Secret Bill to Keep Sandy Hook Records Under Wraps"},"content":{"rendered":"

What are Connecticut officials trying to hide with regard to last year\u2019s shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School? That is the question raised by a Hartford Courant<\/em><\/a> story indicating that top officials in the executive and legislative branches are secretly collaborating to draft a bill that would \u201cwithhold records related to the police investigation into the Dec. 14 Newtown elementary school massacre \u2013 including victims\u2019 photos, tapes of 911 calls, and possibly more.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Courant<\/em> discovered the behind-the-scenes machinations Tuesday when it obtained a copy of an e-mail from Timothy J. Sugrue, a top assistant to Chief State\u2019s Attorney Kevin Kane. Sugrue \u201cdiscussed options considered so far\u201d in the e-mail, which was sent to \u201cKane, two other Kane subordinates and to Danbury State\u2019s Attorney Stephen Sedensky, who is directing the investigation of the killings,\u201d the paper reported.<\/p>\n

Sugrue wrote that he was in contact with Natalie Wagner, a member of Gov. Daniel Malloy\u2019s legal counsel staff, who expected the draft language to be \u201cforthcoming\u201d Tuesday \u2013 the bill was being worked on by leaders in both houses of the General Assembly \u2013 and would \u201csend [Sugrue] the draft in confidence when she receives it,\u201d upon which he would \u201cimmediately forward it.\u201d<\/p>\n

In other words, the bill, whose purpose is to keep many of the details of the Sandy Hook investigation secret, is itself being drawn up in secret. It \u201chas not been handled under routine legislative procedures \u2013 it hasn\u2019t gone through the committee process, which includes a public hearing, for example,\u201d the Courant<\/em> observed.<\/p>\n

The bill turned out not to be ready by the end of Tuesday, leaving those not privy to the secret negotiations to speculate on its contents.<\/p>\n

The newspaper reported that the original intention was to amend \u201cthe state\u2019s freedom of information law by adding a blanket exemption to disclosure of any \u2018criminal investigation photograph, film, videotape, other image or recording or report depicting or describing the victim or victims\u2019\u201d \u2013 an idea opposed by Freedom of Information Commission director Colleen Murphy.<\/p>\n

According to Sugrue\u2019s e-mail, however, the plan is now to pass the bill \u201cin the form of a special act\u201d rather than an amendment.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is complete agreement regarding photos etc., and audio tapes, although the act may allow the disclosure of audio transcripts,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n

Officials in the know claim the purpose of the legislation is solely to protect the privacy of crime victims and their families.<\/p>\n

\u201cA lot of people, including our office, have heard the concerns expressed by the families of Newtown victims, and are exploring ways to respect the families\u2019 right to privacy while also respecting the public\u2019s right to information,\u201d Mark Ojakian, Malloy\u2019s chief of staff, said in a statement.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe are seeking legislation to protect crime scene photographs protecting victims and certain 911 tapes,\u201d Kane told the Courant<\/em>. \u201cIt is something that I have been concerned about for years and years and the situation in Newtown brings it to a head. I don\u2019t want family members seeing pictures of their loved ones publicized in a manner in which these are subject to be published.\u201d<\/p>\n

Kane\u2019s comments suggest that the bill would apply not just to the Newtown case but also to other criminal cases now subject to public disclosure. He told the paper that he envisions a law that would apply to \u201ccrime scene photographs depicting injuries to victims and recordings, 911 recordings displaying the mental anguish of victims. Things like that, of that category. And it seems to me that the intrusion of the privacy of the individuals outweighs any public interest in seeing these.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Courant<\/em> pointed out that blocking the release of victims\u2019 photos would not represent \u201ca significant departure from normal procedures\u201d because \u201cas a matter of long practice, Connecticut police departments do not release grisly photos of victims. These only emerge in public when placed in evidence during criminal trials, and when they do they generally are not published in newspapers or on television.\u201d<\/p>\n

On the other hand, prohibiting the release of 911 tapes \u201cwould be a major departure,\u201d the paper wrote. \u201cAudio tapes of 911 tapes \u2026 are routinely released by police under [freedom of information] laws in Connecticut and across the country\u2026. Such tapes are often used by the news media or lawyers to evaluate the police response to emergencies.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, the Courant<\/em> reports that \u201claw enforcement officials have refused to release the 911 call tapes in the Newtown case so far.\u201d In fact, officials have been very tight-lipped about the entire investigation, telling the public they will just have to wait until a final report is issued this summer. \u201cMost investigative records have yet to be released concerning [alleged shooter Adam] Lanza, including any psychological reports,\u201d the broadsheet noted.<\/p>\n

At the same time, state police officers had no qualms about sharing details of the investigation with officers from other states at police conventions, prompting the Courant<\/em> to editorialize<\/a>: \u201cIf state police officers can leak details of the Newtown investigation at conventions, surely that information can be shared with the Connecticut public. It has more of a right to know than out-of-state police chiefs do\u2026. This isn\u2019t information to be hoarded and shared only at the state police water cooler.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Courant<\/em> views<\/a> the secret bill as just the latest in a long line of proposals \u201cthat would limit the public\u2019s right to know what its government is doing.\u201d<\/p>\n

The bill, it declared, \u201cis wrong at every level.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cDrafting bills in secret \u2013 without going through the committee and public hearing processes \u2013 is a terrible idea and not how democratic government is supposed to work. If keeping police records private is a good idea, why did the proposal\u2019s backers feel the need to act in secret?\u201d<\/p>\n

In addition, with the \u201cawesome power\u201d that police have, \u201cit is essential that the public be able to scrutinize police work, to keep police power in check,\u201d the newspaper maintained.<\/p>\n

Moreover, even if one believes that those pushing the legislation have only the interests of the Newtown victims\u2019 families at heart, this \u201cdoes not outweigh the public\u2019s need for this kind of information,\u201d averred the editors.<\/p>\n

Are Connecticut officials trying to cover something up? If this bill passes, the public may never find out. But as the Courant<\/em> observed in March, \u201cThe longer information is kept under wraps, the more questions there will be about why.\u201d<\/p>\n

This article originally appeared on: The New American<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

What are Connecticut officials trying to hide with regard to last year\u2019s shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School? That is the question raised by a Hartford Courant story indicating that top officials in the executive and legislative branches are secretly collaborating to draft a bill that would \u201cwithhold records related to the police investigation into […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[487],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-35578","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-breaking-news"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35578","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=35578"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35578\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35578"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35578"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35578"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}