HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-17-2000 Articlesi
• •
Opi ion
Iowa City Press -Citizen
Page 13A
Thursday,
August 17,
2000
Public needs crime information
The police ask for public
The public, when it offers
better response to communi-
support and have pressed
information, expects to see a
ty needs and a special
the issue to have the public
response to what it has
"team" to respond to situa-
advise them of suspected
reported. It expects to see its
tions which have or may
crimes, problems, actions of
police department at work
become a problem as a
individuals. Be assured com-
The Iowa City Police
result of poor handling,
munity involvement of this
Citizens Review Board now
release of incomplete or
type will be reduced signifi-
feels the public should not
insufficient initial informa-
cantly if the police put a plan
be aware of area crimes that
Lion; improper reporting, etc.
into action to limit informa-
may make a public "stink."
Barbara Shepherd
tion.
Consider better training,
Iowa City
Page 9A
Opi n ion Monday,
August 14,
Iowa City Press -Citizen 2000
Our view
Keep the
public
informe d
Hard to figure.
Iowa City's Police
Citizens Review Board
wants to limit access to
public information.
Again.
Remember the history
of this organization. After
much hand -wringing, it
was established by the
City Council in response
to the killing of local artist
Eric Shaw. Police were
investigating an open
door at Shaw's studio late
in the night, and a jittery
officer shot him.
The board was to be an
oversight group, investi-
gating complaints against
police.
One of the fast things
the board and council did
was figure out how to
keep much of the work
secret. That became a pat-
tem.
Now, the board wants
to limit the amount of
information the public
has about crimes and
police investigations.
Let's say first that this
is beyond the purpose of
the board.
Let's say second that
this only benefits people
— police or board mem-
bers — who have some-
thing to hide. It certainly
doesn't benefit the public.
The board has suggest-
ed that Police Chief R.J.
Winkelhake assign just
one person — and only
one — to be a spokesman
during cases that are con-
troversial or likely to lead
to lawsuits.
We assume this person
would work 24 hours a
day, seven days a week
and be omniscient —
knowing in advance
which cases would be
controversial or litigious.
And, by the way, all
members of the depart-
ment should avoid offer-
ing their opinions.
A sort of "just the facts,
ma'am" approach.
As Winkelhake pointed
The issue:
■ Police review board
wants to limit crime infor-
mation going to the pub-
lic.
We suggest:
■ This is simply wrong.
The public needs more
information — more
access — not less.
out to the board, the
department already has a
spokesman. That person
is only scheduled to work
40 hours a week, so
Winkelhake is under-
standably reluctant to
restrict what other offi-
cers can say.
And, "Anything we do
could be one of those
(controversial) inci-
dents," he said. "We treat
them all the same."
That's as it should be.
When push comes to
shove, it seems the board
mostly might be worried
that officers could offer
opinions. Good golly,
what's wrong with that?
Those opinions often give
the public needed infor-
mation. Think of it:
Reporter. "Officer
Kmmpke, 12 people have
been murdered on this
one block in the last
week. Would you recom-
mend that residents lock
their doors?"
Officer Knunpke: "I'd
hate to offer an opinion."
It's hard to fathom
what the board is about.
We thought it was formed
to help shed light on the
police department and
rebuild confidence in
Iowa City law enforce-
ment.
Rather, it seems to
want to limit what the
public knows.
Whom this would
serve is anyone's guess.
But it certainly won't
serve the public.