Charleston Police
Department: "Full of Love," lacks FOI knowledge
DOUG
PARDUE The (Charleston) Post
and Courier
CHARLESTON, S.C. - It seemed like a simple
assignment: Go to the Charleston Police Department, act as if you
are John Doe citizen and request a copy of a crime or accident
incident report to see how well the department abides by South
Carolina's Freedom of Information Act.
The assignment was part of a statewide review coordinated by The
Associated Press to see how well state and local agencies follow the
open records law.
Crime and accident incident reports are public information by
law. Anyone is supposed to be able to get a copy of one, no
questions asked, and the cost should be reasonable, typically the
cost of duplication.
For years, reporters with The Post and Courier and other news
organizations routinely have obtained copies of incident reports
from the Charleston Police Department for news stories. It appeared
that the department, one of the largest and most respected in the
state, was fully complying with the law and that it would pass the
test with by-the-book efficiency.
So, the newspaper sent a reporter who wouldn't be recognized by
police to the records department. The reporter was to present
himself as if he were just John Doe citizen and request an incident
report.
The reporter picked a recent robbery of a College of Charleston
student.
Initially, a clerk in the records room went to look for the
incident report but returned with a supervisor, who told the man,
"You can't have that."
John Doe protested, saying that the document is supposed to be
public information. The supervisor asked the man if he was involved
in the incident.
John Doe replied that he was not involved but was just interested
in more information than was in a newspaper article on the
robbery.
The supervisor said that only those involved in the incident
could have a copy of the report.
John Doe asked how the newspaper got a copy of the report since
it didn't appear that the paper or its reporters were involved in
the incident.
The supervisor said something to the effect that the newspaper
used a Freedom of Information request. She told John Doe he could
file such a request with a lieutenant and walked away.
John Doe called after her through the opening in the counter
window: "Excuse me, may I have your name?"
The supervisor turned and said what sounded like "I'm Ms.
Full-Of-Love."
"Yeah right, I believe that," John Doe responded before he left
empty-handed.
When Charles Francis, the police department's spokesman, was told
what happened, he replied that he didn't think "any John Doe off the
street" was entitled to copies of incident reports. "You don't know
who he is. ... He may attack someone," Francis said. He said the
police department would be blamed if "somebody gets killed" or
attacked.
He said he would call the city attorney to see whether incident
reports were public information.
A few minutes later, Francis called back. The attorney told him
the department is supposed to give incident reports to everyone.
So how long has the department been violating the Freedom of
Information law? "I have no idea, man," Francis replied. He said the
policy on not releasing copies of incident reports has been in
effect, at least, since 1991.
Interim Police Chief Ned Hethington didn't hesitate when asked
what the department will do. "We'll get it straightened out," he
said. "We'll follow the law."
When another reporter acting as a member of the public went by to
see whether anything had changed, he paid $5 and walked out with a
three-page incident report.
And what of Ms. Full-Of-Love? She was just following policy - and
she really is Fullilove, Chicquetta Fullilove. |