Similar
Stories
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Texas DAs fear public scrutiny - may make web discussions secret
Some in the District and County Attorney Association want to close their discussion board to the public, despite the fact that the discussions would be available with a simple open records request.
Reacting to this Grits post where I questioned DAs interpretation of confidential informant rules, some members of the District and County Attorney Association now want to make their discussion board closed to public web access, despite the fact that taxpayers pay their salaries and the discussions would be available anyway with a simple open records request. Prosecutor Greg Gilleland said the closed discussions were needed to keep DAs from being subjected to "derision and insults" - I think that's wrong and invite you to read it for yourself to see if I derided or insulted anyone.
Even so, not all prosecutors agreed this would be a good idea. One anonymous ADA whose webhandle is RTC wrote:
It seems to me that because this organization is supported by public tax dollars, whether through grants or membership fees (which are paid for by the county), that it would be terribly improper to not allow the public access or to set up some sort of "secret" forum.
That's certainly how I view it - there's no doubt in my mind these discussions are public records under current Attorney General interpretations. Prosecutors' desire to conceal such discussion only raises the question, "What do they have to hide?"
As always, you can count on Williamson County DA John Bradley to toss out the most specious, outlandish arguments to support an insupportable position: "Do you also think the public has a right to listen in on our phone conversations?" he spuriously asked RTC.
Allow me to answer on RTC's behalf: A phone call isn't a record under the public information act, so your question doesn't apply. What's more, when involved in phone calls or email conrrespondence involving a case, attorney work product and client privilege remain fully intact and such records are protected by law.
By contrast, when an attorney broadcasts information widely to other lawyers NOT involved in the case, any privilege he might have relied upon immediately goes away. If Bradley doesn't know that, he's not much of a lawyer - since he's actually a pretty smart guy, that makes me think instead he just wants to muddy the issue to justify an unjustifiable position.
Official web conversations between public employees including DAs will remain open records under the Public Information Act so long as current law and precedent stands. The question is DAs will choose to make it as difficult as possible for outsiders to access the information - a lot fewer people would file open records request than just click on the DA's website. It really does make you wonder what in the world Bradley & Co. think they have to hide?
Robert Guest, a former prosecutor who blogs at I Was the State, left a quote from Patrick Henry in Grits' comments recently that's entirely apropos to this discussion: "The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." I'm glad some prosecutors like RTC understand that, even if the more outspoken DA advocates like John Bradley don't concern themselves with such populist niceties.
Pegasus News content partner - Grits For Breakfast
Faved or commented on by...
Latest Contests
Latest comments...
S&D Oyster in Uptown Dallas is remodeling
my first job was to was dishes, and change the grease trap, but ole herb.....he made it to where I w
Creepy rendering of Big Tex shows he's almost ready for the State Fair
gosh some honest feed back finally, I thought I was in Detroit, with such appathy these past few mon
Album review: Cas Haley runs with rhythm and soul on La Si Dah
And as we all know, Germans love David Hasselhof.
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Sanders Kaufman, verified:
I can certainly see the DA's point. A lot of us post just to discuss interesting things with interested people.
But there's a SERIOUS problem in almost every discussion forum with web predators. Some just just want to disrupt discussions. But others, as is the case with the DA's board, are there to find people to target for harassment.
As the author points out - this is not a privacy issue and this is not a public records issue. Legitimate requests for transcripts can and will be answered.
This is about allowing DA's to discuss their work without being harassed by anonymous web predators.
Link to this comment | Suggest removal
What do you think?