A joint panel of state lawmakers heard differing views Thursday over when, and in some cases, if, the name of a person arrested should be released to the media.
Representatives from law enforcement and the media spoke in favor of disclosure at the time of arrest, while an attorney from Bennington countered that in some cases, especially for “low level” offenses, that was too soon.
“It seems to me the balance should be — at least in these minor matters — should be in favor of at least waiting until the prosecutor makes a decision of how to go forward with the case,” David Silver, a defense attorney in Bennington told the Joint Legislative Justice Oversight Committee.
Col. Matthew Birmingham, the director of the Vermont State Police, said while he understood Silver’s argument, he disagreed.
“We stand behind our policy,” Birmingham said. “An arrest of people for any crime should never be secret, ever.”
After listening to the competing views during a hearing Thursday, the Joint Legislative Justice Oversight Committee, which is made of members of both the Senate and the House, took no action.
Silver told the panel about the case of a man who had been arrested on a criminal charge involving speeding at more than 100 mph.
The criminal charge was eventually dismissed and the man, who Silver declined to name and described as a member of the business community in his 50s with no previous record, ended up paying a ticket — a civil process.
However, Silver said, that man’s name and arrest had been made public through a press release from Vermont State Police at the time of the man’s arrest.
Silver said many other people, particularly first-time offenders who are arrested on misdemeanors and have their cases dismissed or sent to a court diversion program, end up in the same position.
“If someone is going to get diversion, you don’t know that until after they are arrested,” Silver said. “If they do, then it becomes confidential, but if it’s all over the newspapers … the confidentiality portion of it is really undermined.”
Silver said information released by police at the time of an arrest are merely accusations.
“What good is being presumed innocent if everybody in the community hears the accusation and then it ends up being dismissed?” he sad.
Birmingham, of the state police, said his agency emails more than 5,000 press releases a year, including for arrests and criminal citations, to a media list.
The colonel said an arrest does not mean that someone is innocent or guilty.
“The arrest is a public event that’s taken place. It’s important for us to document that and make sure the public sees that arrest,” Birmingham said.
“The internet and social media captures it and we lose control of it at that point,” he said. “I understand that, but that doesn’t abdicate us from our responsibility to ensure that the public understands that we made an arrest.”
Birmingham said state police does not issue releases tracking each case through the court system.
“If it is dismissed I would suggest that the state’s attorney or the defense attorneys put out their own press release,” he said.
St. Albans Police Chief Gary Taylor, a member of the executive board of the Vermont Association of Chiefs of Police, echoed many of the points made by Birmingham. Though, he said, his department doesn’t have the resources to issue releases for each arrest.
For example, Taylor said, his department does not issue press releases for retail theft offenses.
However, he said, if someone called and asked about an arrest, “we would never withhold that information.”
Mike Donoghue, executive director of the Vermont Press Association, said the police should not be restricted from releasing information to the public.
“As much as it may be a pain for troopers, and for legislators, and for the governor, or other state employees to have the public looking over their shoulder, that is the government that we have,” he said. “It may not be perfect, but I haven’t seen one that’s even close to perfect.”
