Granted: People magazine request for Wyomissing police reports
July 20, 2009 Filed in: Granted
| Wyomissing
| Law
enforcement | Media
request | Incident
reports | Requester
status
Granted: A request to the
Wyomissing Police Department for copies of calls
to service and police reports written for
complaints made by a certain resident.
From
the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information
Coalition
Granted: A request to the Wyomissing Police Department for copies of calls to service and police reports written for complaints made by a certain resident.
The borough denied the request -- made by a reporter from People magazine -- on the basis that its police blotter information was for the community only, and there was the potential for privacy infringement of current residents of the address in question.
The Office of Open Records took the borough to task for failing to legally defend its decision not to release the records requested.
"A record cannot be denied for arbitrary or capricious reasons and the borough is required to establish a factual and legal basis for denial, which it has not done," the OOR wrote. "There is no proven viable threat to the privacy of the current owners and, as the news reporter points out, anything pertaining to them could be redacted. Residency is not a valid reason for denial pursuant to ... the RTKL which defines 'requester' as a 'person that is a legal resident of the United States.'
"The record, normally available to residents of the community, was apparently denied to the news reporter because of concerns associated with publicity, privacy and residency, none of which are valid in accordance with the RTKL unless an exemption applies."
The borough was directed to supply the records requested.
Grossman vs. Wyomissing Police Department -- AP 2009-0525
Granted: A request to the Wyomissing Police Department for copies of calls to service and police reports written for complaints made by a certain resident.
The borough denied the request -- made by a reporter from People magazine -- on the basis that its police blotter information was for the community only, and there was the potential for privacy infringement of current residents of the address in question.
The Office of Open Records took the borough to task for failing to legally defend its decision not to release the records requested.
"A record cannot be denied for arbitrary or capricious reasons and the borough is required to establish a factual and legal basis for denial, which it has not done," the OOR wrote. "There is no proven viable threat to the privacy of the current owners and, as the news reporter points out, anything pertaining to them could be redacted. Residency is not a valid reason for denial pursuant to ... the RTKL which defines 'requester' as a 'person that is a legal resident of the United States.'
"The record, normally available to residents of the community, was apparently denied to the news reporter because of concerns associated with publicity, privacy and residency, none of which are valid in accordance with the RTKL unless an exemption applies."
The borough was directed to supply the records requested.
Grossman vs. Wyomissing Police Department -- AP 2009-0525