The Free Press, Mankato, MN

Editorials

February 4, 2008

Our View — Public safety should keep public informed

A standoff in which a police officer was shot and a man took his life happened more than a year ago near Amboy.

Today, authorities still have released few details of the events.

Two college students were struck, and one killed, while walking on a street in Mankato following a sorority event in November.

Authorities have not released the name of the driver involved in the accident, have released few details, and only recently released the blood alcohol level of the victim after family members forced the issue by voicing their frustrations about the lack of information on a newspaper Web site.

A man was shot and killed by Mankato police in late December after a violent confrontation in an apartment.

Not until 10 days later did officials provide details of the events — including the news that the suspect had sexually assaulted a woman in the apartment. The release of information appeared driven mostly by accusations that police had acted improperly.

There is a growing sense among many law enforcement agencies, county attorney offices and the state attorney general’s office that information on high profile crimes and accidents belongs to those agencies, not the public.

That is a significant departure from the past in which it was understood that public agencies would release information to the public unless there were clear and compelling reasons not to.

Of course, there was sometimes disagreement over whether an agency had a compelling reason to withhold information, but there was a presumption that law enforcement and justice officials would err on the side of disclosing information the public had an interest in.

Too often, recently, that presumption has been turned on its head, with officials using any pretext and legal maneuver to keep information to themselves.

The argument that cases can’t be discussed until thoroughly investigated, with every minute detail provided for, is not a satisfactory defense. Most every case contains unknowns, incompatible evidence and facts that may change as more information comes out.

The free-flow of information in a democracy is, in fact, rarely a precise, unequivocal endeavor. It’s simply public officials doing the best they can to promptly tell the public what’s going on in their communities.

Officials in the Cottonwood County attorney’s office and sheriff’s department seem to well understand that. Take the complex, deadly case they handled in late November, following the discovery of a burned car and body in their county.

Within 24 hours officials there had given the public a detailed, step-by-step account of all they knew to that point — cars and guns stolen from Mankato, a dispute among the alleged thieves resulting in the murder, details on how they identified the suspects through a gas station surveillance tape, and the names of suspects, including two who were on the run.

The information provided the public the assurance it needed to feel safe and satisfied that their officials were handling the situation. It was a refreshing example of officials respecting the public they serve and providing details that would head off speculation.

No one would suggest law enforcement must provide every detail of every event or jeopardize ongoing investigations where secrecy is necessary to get justice.

But the unhealthy trend of government keeping secrets from those who employ and empower them only erodes the public’s trust in those institutions.

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Editorials