The California Supreme Court ruled 6-1 that the public has the right to names of police officers involved in shootings while on duty. The Los Angeles Times filed a lawsuit in 2010 to obtain the names of Long Beach officers involved in a fatal shooting and the names of all city officers involved in on-duty shootings in the previous five years. The police officers association said it was essential to withhold the names as part of private personnel records and to protect the safety of officers. Writing for the majority, Justice Joyce Kennard rejected the notion that police departments can invoke a “blanket rule” against disclosure. Withholding the names could be justified by safety or other concerns under the California Public Record Act, section 6255, but that would require a particularized showing and a high threshold of evidence. (Los Angeles Times, May 29, 2014, by Maura Dolan)
The Court ruled that Long Beach had not produced testimony or evidence justifying nondisclosure. “Understandable are the general safety concerns of officers who fear retaliation from angry members of the community after an officer-involved shooting, especially when the shooting results in the death of an unarmed person. But the Legislature … has not gone so far as to protect the names of all officers involved in such shootings,” wrote Kennard. The First Amendment Coalition had filed an amicus brief in the case. (San Jose Mercury News, May 29, 2014, by Howard Mintz)