- Jan 11, 2013
- 18,115
- 11,770
Maryland Judiciary Defends Decision to Remove Police Officers' Names from Public Online Court Database
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...fficers-names-case-search-20180301-story.html
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...fficers-names-case-search-20180301-story.html
Maryland’s Judiciary on Friday defended a decision to remove the names of police officers and other law enforcement authorities from the state’s searchable public online court database, saying the change was made in response to “safety concerns raised by law enforcement.”
The change took effect Thursday, following a decision by a judicial rules committee last June. Officers’ names no longer appear on cases they were involved with, and searches using an officer’s name cannot be performed.
The judiciary did not answer questions about removing officers’ names but said in a statement that it reflected a balance of “the public’s interest in access to court information with our equally important obligation to protect personal identifying information about potential misuse.”
“The process for making these changes … were made transparently, through a process open to the public and press,” the unsigned statement said. “As always, the judiciary welcomes input from all stakeholders.”
Maryland State Police said they had not lobbied for such a change, and the city Police Department said they did not agree with it.
A spokesman for Gov. Larry Hogan said: “Public information should be public. End of story.”
The judiciary stressed that the information was only removed from remote access online and could still be accessed in person at courthouse kiosks. At Baltimore Circuit Court on Friday, no kiosk was available, and the archaic computer program in use at the kiosks does not have the same searchable features as the online database.
Agencies that use the information on a daily basis such as the Maryland Public Defender’s Office said they were not aware the change was occurring. Melissa Rothstein, a spokeswoman for the public defender’s office, said her agency was notified last week that there would be changes, “but we did not know the scope of those changes or that any publicly available information would be limited.”
“We are very concerned about the removal of officers’ names as witnesses from case search,” Rothstein said. “It will inhibit our ability to effectively represent our clients across the state, and, particularly in Baltimore City, it will impede the current efforts to improve transparency, which the federal [Gun Trace Task Force] convictions as well as the consent decree confirmed are urgently needed.”
The Maryland Judiciary Case Search database contains information about court cases, including information about defendants, the charges they face, the names of prosecutors and defense attorneys, and law enforcement officers who were involved in the arrest. It’s considered an integral tool for members of the public, lawyers and journalists.
Case Search has been particularly useful following the federal indictments and convictions of members of the Baltimore Police Gun Trace Task Force. It allowed the public and others to track cases involving the officers and search for links with other officers and cases. It helped track cases involving the officers that had upcoming hearings or that were poised to be overturned because of the officers’ involvement. The Baltimore state’s attorney’s office has not provided updates on such cases since early December.
The changes to case search were approved last June by the judiciary’s standing committee on rules of practice and procedure, which is comprised of various stakeholders in the legal community. That panel could consider changes to its decision, and is next scheduled to meet next on March 9.
The committee’s annual report from last year shows that the change was made by eliminating a clause in the section “Access to Judicial Records,” which said, “Unless shielded by a protective order, the name, office address, office telephone number and office e-mail address, if any, relating to law enforcement officers, other public officials or employees acting in their official capacity, and expert witnesses, may be remotely accessible.”
It was unclear whether the change was debated — the rules committee has not posted minutes of its meetings since April 2016.
Police in Anne Arundel County say they began lobbying for a change in how officers’ names were displayed in case search in 2015. Previously, they said, an officer’s first initial and last name appeared in arrests listed online. But something changed in the database to include an officer’s entire first name.
“We had officers coming to us saying, ‘Hey, why is our full name coming up in Case Search?’ We brought it to the attention of the clerk’s office,” said Cpl. O'Brien Atkinson, the union president. But, Atkinson said, “at no time did anybody with the [Fraternal Order of Police] or the department lobby or try to have officers’ full names removed.”
Atkinson said officers were worried that criminals might be able to use full names from Case Search as a clue to locate where an officer lives. That hasn’t happened during the past two years when the full names were listed, but he called the measure precautionary.
“Waiting until something happens would be terribly irresponsible,” Atkinson said. “What could happen could be pretty dire, and we have a responsibility to protect our protectors.”
Both Atkinson and Frashure, the department spokesman, said the last name of an arresting officer should be listed online. They say the database also should show an officers’ rank, but only an initial of the first name.