WASHINGTON — Legislation to make police-misconduct investigations in Maryland more transparent is set for a vote next week.
On Wednesday, dozens spoke before Maryland lawmakers both in favor of and against state Sen. Joan Carter Conway’s bill, which would require police departments investigating a complaint of officer misconduct to make the records public.
“Transparency is needed to reflect equality and justice,” said Dorothy Copp Elliott, whose son was killed by police in 1993. Copp Elliott testified before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee that she has never seen the files documenting the investigation into her son’s shooting death. Officers said they were lost.
“Hiding behind ‘it’s a personnel matter’ is no longer acceptable,” she said.
Sen. Carter Conway, D-Baltimore, said, “Specifically, my interest in the bill is the transparency of those individuals mistreated by the police department. We want it investigated and I should have a right to know the outcome of that particular investigation.”
Committee chairman Sen. Bobby Zirkin, D-Baltimore, questioned how the proposed legislation differs from House Bill 1016, which became law last October and requires any complainant be given the disposition of what happened and any discipline given to the officer as a result.
“The bill doesn’t change any existing protections of personnel records. What it does is clarify [that] records of internal investigations are not personnel records, which are categorically barred from disclosure under the Maryland Public Information Act,” said ACLU Senior Legal Counsel David Rocah.
Opposition to the legislation revolves around concern for officer privacy and witness participation.
“Complainants and witnesses will be unwilling to aid our investigations because of our loss of privacy,” testified Prince George’s County Sheriff Melvin High. Rocah said that the bill allows for the redaction of witness names.
Despite that, Karen Kruger, with the Maryland Chiefs of Police Association, shared the concern for the exposure of officers’ information and its effect on future recruitment.
“There’s no justification for this bill. The transparency has been addressed. Notorious efforts could be used against police officers,” she said.
Kruger also had concerns about the lack of limitations in the bill on what can be done with the files, suggesting they could be shared online or with others outside the case.
Sheriff Troy Berry testified to internal reporting of police conduct and how the action of making the files open and accessible would likely cut down on colleagues reporting officer misconduct.
“I believe SB 362 would have a chilling effect to our staff members with the potential of staff members not wanting personal info released to public,” he said.
The bill goes up for vote next week.
