Affidavits should be open

Kudos to Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville (in photo), for filing a bill Thursday to include probable-cause affidavits among public records. These documents, which list the police’s basic reasons for arresting someone, are open in most states, including Missouri, Texas and Oklahoma. Those states have had no problem releasing this information. Yet in Kansas, those who are arrested — including Roger Valadez, who had police bust down his door and point guns at him in an erroneous BTK arrest — can’t find out why they were targeted.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee

One Comment

  1. writerdog
    Posted January 22, 2006 at 7:55 am | Permalink

    I agree to this within reason, you do have the right to face your accuser in court. In a sense this would cut down on revenge allegations, I am upset with some minor thing someone has done so I accuse them of a minor crime. Which is bad enough, but it also happens in some cases of major crimes.

    The other side of that coin is, most people do not right or wrong want to get involved. Either because they fear reprisal or it would just be a bother. A number of crimes would never be reported if not for the thought of anonymity. Crime stopper works that way, often a officer will tell a reporting party that their name will not be used. But giving a generic listing of the reasons why a person has been suspect in a crime should be a right along with the right to face an accuser.

    This would accomplish two things, one it would be in a sense of real justice. You should be able to have a understanding of the what and why this is happening to you. In some cases it would help the state in their case. If the accused could see what brought the state to them as an accused, they may find it would be no use denying the charge. Second, this would drop a shield the authority has in that from beginning to end it is open. To be seen by all as to what was the cause and whether it was a fair and just case or just fruit from a poison tree. I.E. the building of a case when none was present.

    We live in a nation of laws, compliance with the law is voluntary in the sense that if the majority does not have faith in the law. Then all the cops, judges and courts in the world could not enforce any laws. So that faith must be reinforced by a sense of justice. The law can not stand without justice, though justice can stand without the law.