Records Requests Show Even More California Police Departments Started Destroying Records Before The Public Could Get Its Hands On Them
Furnished content.
More details are coming to light about California's opacity activists. Faced with impending transparency, a handful of law enforcement agencies decided to fire up the shredders rather than risk turning over police conduct records to the public under the new public records law.Inglewood's police department was given the go-ahead to shred years of responsive documents last December in a council meeting that produced no record of discussion on the matter or the council's determination.Public records requests filed after the new law went into effect in January uncovered moves made by the Fremont city council to help local police rid themselves of records the public might try to request. The city lowered the retention period for officer-involved shooting records from 25 years to ten and allowed the department to destroy 45 years of police misconduct records it had decided to hold onto until it became inconvenient for it to do so.Darwin BondGraham of The Appeal has discovered even more record destruction by California law enforcement agencies occurring ahead of the law's implementation.Union City, a suburb adjacent to Fremont, also destroyed a large number of police records in June 2018 while SB 1421 was moving through the legislature toward the governor’s desk for signature.Police shredded reviews of officer-involved shootings, vehicle collisions resulting from high-speed pursuits, and use of force reports from 1983 to 2015, according to documents obtained through a public records request. In addition to these records, Union City police memory-holed 12 records detailing incidents in which officers fired their service weapons, including two "unintentional" shootings.Meanwhile, over in Livermore, more police records were being purged, although city officials claim the destruction of records prior to the new law taking effect was just "routine" yearly destruction, rather than an attempt to rid the PD of documents it would rather not hand over to requesters. Routine document destruction is indeed part of most government agencies' practices, but some of what was done during this last purge seems anything but "routine."Livermore is in the process of destroying files for 27 complaints made to the police department’s internal affairs unit during 2012, according to documents obtained through a public records request. A list of files doesn’t reveal the allegations in these cases, whether they were sustained, or whether any officers were disciplined.Also on Livermore’s list of records to destroy are hundreds of use of force reports spanning 2008 to 2012, and six reviews of officer-involved shootings that occurred in 2009, 2011, and 2012. While it's true California law only mandates retaining these records for five years, the purges happening here (and elsewhere in the state) show police departments are holding onto these records for much longer than they're legally required to. These records must have some value to the agencies if they're willing to retain them this long. And if they have value to police departments, they certainly are of some value to the general public, which deserves to know how the police forces they pay for are behaving.Departments are willing to hold onto misconduct/shooting records for decades, but only start destroying them when it looks like they might have to share. Agencies can point to mandated retention periods all they want, but the argument doesn't wash if they're only sticklers about it when transparency is being forced on them.
Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
Read more here
posted at: 12:00am on 27-Apr-2019
path: /Policy | permalink | edit (requires password)
Minnesota May Be First State To Pass A Right To Repair Law
Furnished content.
Minnesota appears poised to be the first state to pass "right to repair" legislation taking aim at corporate efforts to monopolize repair. The grass-roots technology movement in support of these bills began in rural America, where the draconian DRM embedded in John Deere tractors made repairing them a costly nightmare for many farmers. The movement has also been prodded along thanks to efforts from companies like Sony, Microsoft, and Apple to effectively ban third-party repair of games consoles and phones; a move that not only restricts consumer freedom and drives up consumer costs, but creates additional unnecessary waste.California recently became the 20th state to eye such legislation, though Minnesota appears likely to be the first to actually pass such a law. Minnesota's law has passed through committee and awaits a vote in the Minnesota House, and if approved (which seems likely) would take effect in early 2020.Not too surprisingly, both John Deere and Apple lobbyists have descended upon Minnesota to prevent that from happening. For its part, John Deere doubled down on the primary (and false) argument most of these companies are making; namely that if you let consumers and authorized third-party shops repair consumer tech, you're putting consumers at risk:"A John Deere spokesperson said the parts, diagnostic and manuals are already available to its owners, and that customers can contact a dealer where trained technicians provide expertise and assistance with service issues in the shop or, in many cases, remotely in the field. It stands by the general opposition to release software to the masses, citing the software's purpose to make sure equipment runs safely, properly, and up to changing standards. Other companies also argue intellectual property should be protected." Granted that ignores that in many rural areas, there's no "authorized" repair option for hundreds of miles, meaning that farmers often have to pay to have the tractor shipped that distance (generating huge additional costs). In desperation, some tractor owners have turned to using pirated Ukrainian firmware, which obviously creates its own issues in terms of security and stability.Apple, Microsoft, Sony, and Verizon have all utilized similar arguments, all focused on the unsubstantiated claim that breaking down these repair monopolies will result in a steady parade of untold security and safety horribles. When a similar law was proposed in Nebraska, Apple lobbyists attempted to claim that passing such a law would turn the state into a "mecca for hackers" and various ne'er-do-wells. It's a pretty flimsy argument, one used specifically to obscure one goal: to pad revenues by banning repair shop competition.As such Apple can often be found harassing independent repair shops all around the world, while ignoring one central truth: as owners of these devices, they should be able to do whatever the hell they'd like to do with them as long as they're not harming themselves or others.
Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
Read more here
posted at: 12:00am on 27-Apr-2019
path: /Policy | permalink | edit (requires password)
|
|