Let the public prevail

In this issue you may have read a detailed story concerning tragic events that occurred Jan. 26th, the day a Charenton man named Eddie Lyons was shot and the trailer he took shelter in set afire, allegedly by a man who stayed on his property named Wilbert Thibodeaux.

After that, according to police, Thibodeaux went on to murder Sgt. Rick Riggenbach and wound two St. Mary Parish deputies, Matthew Strickland and Jason Javier. In this newspaper we have published extensive stories, which showed Thibodeaux as a hapless former mental patient who has over the past year fallen through every conceivable crack in the criminal justice system and in the mental health system.

Today’s story tackles a different subject, that of what is believed to have occurred at the shooting scene. The reporting was done because Riggenbach’s wife and daughter are in considerable distress, having been told by some officers they know that, once the St. Mary deputies retreated, the hero sergeant attempted to fend off Thibodeaux by himself.

Strickland, Javier and Riggenbach were on their own, and with the other two gone Riggenbach was alone, period. They have asked to see video from the scene, which is in the hands of law enforcement and prosecutors, but so far that has resulted only in lip service. No date has been set.

This newspaper attempted to do what it could to find out more. There were interviews, attempts at interviews, requests for records, and other tasks performed. There was a lot of driving over a lot of miles and who knows how many phone calls.

That the story in the paper today can be told at all is the result of trust built up with officials in several parishes, and the help of experts living nowhere near here. The final product perhaps raises more questions than it answers, but is the best we could do.

Questions the family has are valid for people living in Charenton as well. Without backup, Riggenbach and the deputies were certainly in danger, as the facts prove, as were the people of Flat Town Road, as were people in a nearby casino officials believe Thibodeaux was headed for.

To their credit, Louisiana State Police media officers worked with us to make sure we weren’t putting out false information, although they were limited in what they could actually supply to us.

But generally the answer department after department gave us as we tried to obtain records or accounts was that since the incident was under investigation, nothing could be provided.

When it comes to public records in Louisiana, the tail has been wagging the dog too long. The Louisiana Constitution provides that the business of the public belongs to the public.

The state’s public records law goes into some detail, noting that nothing in the law shall be construed to require disclosure of records or the information in them held by law enforcement and pertaining to “criminal litigation or any criminal litigation which can be reasonably anticipated.”

The law also does not require records “of the arrest of a person, other than the report of the officer or officers investigating a complaint” until adjudication of the case. Initial report information is unquestionably public, and should include “a narrative description of the alleged offense, including appropriate details thereof as determined by the law enforcement agency.”

Name and identification of each person charged, time and date of offense as well as location, the property and vehicles involved and names of investigating officers are all part of the initial report.

Among the records we would have preferred being able to see were videos from cameras of the nearby casino as well as those mounted to police vehicles. This was not satisfying prurient interests but to ascertain facts. Audio recordings of responding police vehicles would have answered questions as well. But all those resources and the information contained within them were blocked from disclosure.

Take the same fact pattern and apply it to the recent Boston Marathon bombing and the search for suspects that followed. The story might never have been told other than the scarcest details. The fact is that in many jurisdictions, while certain recordings or documents might well be part of the case, they are also in and of themselves public records that are to be accessed as demanded.

What these records all contain are facts, and that is all we ever wanted. There is a risk – although we did all we could to minimize it – of bad information getting out, simply because the anal manner with which Louisiana law enforcement and judicial agencies handle public records concerning investigations creates a truth vacuum.

There used to be more available under the law until law enforcement agencies and other entities that sometimes have things to hide buttonholed legislators into making changes in the law. Until just a few years ago the killer phrase regarding facts being released in a narrative whose parameters are decided by the law enforcement agencies themselves did not exist.

But it sure does now.

What the law still does not say – so far – is that agencies are outright barred from releasing information. It says they may restrict it, but that they are not required to. This is why videos and other evidence are sometimes released, when they serve law enforcement purposes.

But law enforcement agencies should not be allowed to decide what you see that is shot by cameras or inscribed by computers we pay for, particularly during a quest for the truth.

State legislators should take a hard look at amending the state’s public records law, to make it more consistent with Louisiana’s Constitution, and to compel agencies to reveal, rather than conceal, information that makes the difference between truth and a lie.

Hearings on the question of keeping already-public records public, in a way law enforcement can understand, should be held, if any legislator out there has the guts to bring the question up.

If video from the dash of a local police car is public today while officers are just eating donuts, it should be no less public once that car and the officers are engaged in a pursuit or a shoot-out. The law doesn’t say it’s not public. But the way the law is currently written allows law enforcement officials to twist things in away that makes it non-public.

If that video could actually jeopardize an investigation, the burden should be on the cops to go to court and say why it would, so that a judge can make the decision.

Until that occurs then we are not as free a society as we think we are, and as our founders believed we should be.