Secret police: Disciplinary actions should remain public
This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2008, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Police officers are accorded vast powers - the power to detain and restrain, to use deadly force. And a great responsibility - upholding the law and maintaining order.

They serve as the judicial system's first judge and jury, deciding if a citation or charges are warranted, or if a suspect can go on his way. Power of this magnitude demands accountability. Police officers must be above reproach if they are to maintain the public trust from which their powers derive.

The public, if it is to have faith in the system, needs to know that when the people charged with enforcing society's rules break the rules, they, too, are held accountable. And the fact that police officers draw their pay from the pool of public tax dollars further buttresses the public's right to know when law enforcement officers go astray.

Utah Senate Bill 260 would severely weaken your right to know when police officers are disciplined for misconduct. It would erode that essential trust between the public and peace officers and make public law enforcement agencies less accountable.

Sponsored by Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan, the measure would close records of disciplinary actions against police officers to the public and its emissaries, the news media. Unless the officer appeals the sanction, or voluntarily agrees to disclosure, police misconduct records would be made confidential.

The issue has pitted the Utah Media Coalition (The Salt Lake Tribune is a member) and freedom of information advocates against police associations, the Utah League of Cities and Towns, and Salt Lake City officials, who support the bill.

Municipal officials believe they are protecting their employees by supporting the legislation, when in fact, the bill would cast a shadow over honest cops, and impede their ability to do their jobs. Police supervisors believe they are protecting all police officers, when in fact, they are only protecting the guilty.

Legislators who support the bill in an attempt to restrict defense attorneys' access to disciplinary records hinder the pursuit of justice. The courts should decide if an officer's past actions have any bearing on a case.

And those who support the bill because sheriff's deputies' disciplinary records are similarly secret should close that unconscionable loophole instead of extending it to municipal police agencies.

We need a window, not a wall, between the police and the public. We need complete transparency.

The vast majority of Utah's peace officers obey the law. We know this because their disciplinary records are open for public inspection. Closing them will only foster suspicion and corrode the public's trust.

Article Tools

Enter a search phrase.

Specify a Range

From  to

 

 
Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.