By
Matthew Spina
In recent
weeks, a Buffalo police officer was suspended for allegedly slapping around a
defendant in handcuffs and then demanding an onlooker turn over cellphone video
on the incident.
Two more
officers were suspended without pay last week because they were present when a
bar patron suffered serious brain injury at the bar where they were employed as
security.
Police
internal affairs investigators are investigating both cases.
But if
internal discipline is ever meted out against those three officers, the public
probably will never know. Nor will the public know if the department ever
disciplined them in the past.
In short,
the disciplinary history of any police officer in New York is cloaked in
secrecy.
Unlike
most other types of public employees, a record of disciplinary actions taken
against a police officer cannot be unearthed by a request for records under the
state’s Freedom of Information Law.
Since the
mid-1970s, New York Civil Right Law has kept confidential the records used “to
evaluate performance toward continued employment or promotion” for police
officers. The law has even been expanded over the years to protect corrections
officers and professional firefighters.
Because
of Civil Rights Law Section 50-a, only a court order or the employees
themselves can unlock the records for public inspection.
“The
result of Section 50-a is that those government employees who have the most
power over our lives are the least accountable,” said Robert J. Freeman,
executive director of the New York Committee on Open Government.
Keeping
the disciplinary records secret was intended to protect officers from being
embarrassed or harassed when they testified in court about unrelated arrests.
But Freeman said that is a hollow argument because judges control the
courtroom, and a judge can tell a lawyer that such questions are out of bounds
if they are in fact out of bounds.
Freeman
contends that once an officer or corrections officer retires or resigns, their
personnel records can become public because the employee is no longer eligible
for “continued employment or promotion.” Some appeals court judges have agreed
with that argument in specific requests for records under the Freedom of
Information Law.
Since the
mid-1970s, New York Civil Right Law has kept confidential the records used “to
evaluate performance toward continued employment or promotion” for police
officers. The law has even been expanded over the years to protect corrections
officers and professional firefighters.
Because
of Civil Rights Law Section 50-a, only a court order or the employees
themselves can unlock the records for public inspection.
“The
result of Section 50-a is that those government employees who have the most
power over our lives are the least accountable,” said Robert J. Freeman,
executive director of the New York Committee on Open Government.
Keeping
the disciplinary records secret was intended to protect officers from being
embarrassed or harassed when they testified in court about unrelated arrests.
But Freeman said that is a hollow argument because judges control the
courtroom, and a judge can tell a lawyer that such questions are out of bounds
if they are in fact out of bounds.
Freeman
contends that once an officer or corrections officer retires or resigns, their
personnel records can become public because the employee is no longer eligible
for “continued employment or promotion.” Some appeals court judges have agreed
with that argument in specific requests for records under the Freedom of
Information Law.
