Troopers criticized over withholding
February 25, 2010 | Filed in: Pa. State
Police | Open
records | Government
transparency | Court
records
By Peter Jackson | Associated Press
HARRISBURG - A new Pennsylvania State Police policy requires troopers to withhold names and other information about victims and witnesses when they issue citations for certain minor crimes - drawing criticism from open-government advocates and raising concern among judges and defense lawyers.
According to lawyers and judges, the change makes extra work for district judges, who now must request victim and witness information from the state police; imposes a level of secrecy for the least serious offenses that far exceeds common practice for more serious crimes; and could impede the ability of those charged to defend themselves in court.
Melissa Melewsky, a lawyer with the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association, said the policy violates the constitutional guarantee of open courts.
The president of the Pennsylvania Special Court Judges Association, which speaks for the state's 550 district judges, said she was not aware of any problems resulting from the previously routine disclosure of such information.
She expressed concern that the new policy would further clog busy district courts if obtaining basic information about the allegations against them became more difficult for defendants.
"I'm surprised that it's been changed," said District Judge Donna Butler, who presides over Emmaus District Court in Lehigh County.
Less than three months old, the policy is under review, state police spokesman Jack Lewis said. The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts is working with the state police to sort out the agency's concerns, office spokesman Art Heinz said.
At issue are the paper citations that state police file in district courts when charging people with summary offenses, the least serious of crimes. Summary traffic citations are filed electronically and not affected by the policy change, officials said.
The new policy applies only to the state police and not local police departments. It stemmed from a review of AOPC revisions to the citation form. Among other things, the new form added a "public access copy," which excludes the defendant's Social Security number.
State police decided troopers should withhold information about victims and witnesses under an exception in the state Right-to-Know Law for criminal investigatory records, Lewis said. Lawyers were concerned that identifying alleged victims and witnesses might put them at risk, he said.
HARRISBURG - A new Pennsylvania State Police policy requires troopers to withhold names and other information about victims and witnesses when they issue citations for certain minor crimes - drawing criticism from open-government advocates and raising concern among judges and defense lawyers.
According to lawyers and judges, the change makes extra work for district judges, who now must request victim and witness information from the state police; imposes a level of secrecy for the least serious offenses that far exceeds common practice for more serious crimes; and could impede the ability of those charged to defend themselves in court.
Melissa Melewsky, a lawyer with the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association, said the policy violates the constitutional guarantee of open courts.
The president of the Pennsylvania Special Court Judges Association, which speaks for the state's 550 district judges, said she was not aware of any problems resulting from the previously routine disclosure of such information.
She expressed concern that the new policy would further clog busy district courts if obtaining basic information about the allegations against them became more difficult for defendants.
"I'm surprised that it's been changed," said District Judge Donna Butler, who presides over Emmaus District Court in Lehigh County.
Less than three months old, the policy is under review, state police spokesman Jack Lewis said. The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts is working with the state police to sort out the agency's concerns, office spokesman Art Heinz said.
At issue are the paper citations that state police file in district courts when charging people with summary offenses, the least serious of crimes. Summary traffic citations are filed electronically and not affected by the policy change, officials said.
The new policy applies only to the state police and not local police departments. It stemmed from a review of AOPC revisions to the citation form. Among other things, the new form added a "public access copy," which excludes the defendant's Social Security number.
State police decided troopers should withhold information about victims and witnesses under an exception in the state Right-to-Know Law for criminal investigatory records, Lewis said. Lawyers were concerned that identifying alleged victims and witnesses might put them at risk, he said.