Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Judge Will Hear Arguments on Whether the City Should Withhold Officer Names from the Public

Posted by on Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 2:34 PM

In a small victory for the city, this afternoon, King County Superior Court Judge Laura Inveen took the first step in overturning a recent arbitration decision that forced the city to begin redacting the names of Seattle police officers from all records requests—even records about internal misconduct investigations when those charges are sustained.

The Seattle Police Officer's Guild (SPOG) insists that labor contracts from 2008 require the names of officers be redacted from all records. An arbitrator agreed with their assessment. However, this afternoon assistant city attorney Paul Olsen argued that the arbitrator "misconstrued the city's contract" with the union. He says redacting police officers' names "violates an explicit, well defined public policy and forces the city to withhold information from the public when there’s no reasonable argument that it’s exempt from disclosure."

Olsen points out that both Washington state and the city of Seattle have "strongly worded mandates" for the broad disclosure of public records, and every redaction be justified by a specific statutory exemption. Furthermore: "The public has an interest in knowing the names of city employees engaged in misconduct," Olsen said.

In the end, Judge Inveen agreed. "We’re talking about a conflict of public policy and state law," she said. "It’s worthy of review. I’m prepared to sign the order."

The order she signed—a writ of certiorari—basically orders another King County Superior Court judge to review the entire case, hear arguments, and uphold or reverse the arbitrator's decision.

 

Comments (2) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Free Lunch 1
The conservative reaction to the invasive nature of the Patriot Act was, "So what? I don't have anything to hide."

Cops are almost universally conservative, so I can only conclude from their change of heart about privacy in this instance is that they have plenty they want to hide.
Posted by Free Lunch on July 13, 2011 at 6:27 PM · Report this
2
So they'll be redacting the names of people charged with crimes now too, right?

Because otherwise they're just a bunch of pussies hiding behind a badge.
Posted by suddenlyorcas on July 13, 2011 at 8:02 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy