Law Enforcement Records, Interrogation Reports, and Public Access
Q: My nephew (18) was arrested in a stabbing at his high school. He was not on campus at the time of the attack, and 4 adults, 2 parents, and 2 other students immediately notified the police department that he was at their home working on a project when the attack occurred on the campus. One of the parents is involved in law enforcement. Nonetheless, he was interrogated for hours, pressured to confess to a crime he had nothing to do with, and then jailed overnight until his parents could arrange bail. The actual perpetrator (17) walked into the police dept and confessed 2 weeks later, and also led the police to the weapon he used, which he’d ditched by the school. We now want all information involving my nephew’s arrest. We’ve gotten some police reports, but the names of adult, as well as juvenile witnesses are blacked out. We also want interrogation tapes from my (now vindicated) nephew’s interrogation session. We were told we would need to petition a judge for the tapes. It would seem that anything having to do with my nephew’s arrest should no longer be part of any ongoing investigation. Shouldn’t we be able to get reports with names of ADULT witnesses, and also the interrogation tapes at this point?
A: Unfortunately, the California Supreme Court has taken a broad view of what documents law enforcement can withhold from the public with respect to police investigations. The Court has held that the exemption from public disclosure of investigatory files goes on forever, even after the investigation is closed.
With respect to the tapes of your nephew’s interrogation, it may be that the only option is to go to court. The suggestion that you petition the judge for a copy probably refers to the fact that the actual perpetrator is a juvenile, and therefore the records of the investigation may be covered by laws concerning the confidentiality of juvenile records. Under Welfare & Institutions Code section 827, any interested person can petition the juvenile court to release records of a case involving a minor if the court agrees that the person seeking the records is entitled to a copy (which, in the case of your nephew’s request for the tapes of his own interrogation, would seem to be a pretty clear cut case).
With respect to the adult witnesses, under Government Code section 6254(f), the victim of the stabbing would definitely be entitled to that information notwithstanding the exemption for investigatory files (unless its disclosure would endanger the safety of any individual or the successful completion of the investigation, neither of which seems likely here since the perpetrator has confessed and presumably is in custody). Other members of the public are entitled to know the general facts and circumstances concerning the crime under section 6254(f)(1) & (f)(2), but the statute is ambiguous as to whether that includes names of witnesses. The department may argue that since 6254(f) specifically
says that victims get this information and 6254(f)(1)-(2) does not specifically say other members of the public get it, that only the victim is entitled to the names of the witnesses.