Request for police video denied
Suspected of stalking a young woman, an offender refused to
answer any questions in a video interview with a police officer in April 2001.
After a subsequent court proceeding, the offender wound up with a restraint
order applied to him.
But he came to request both audio and video copies of the
interview. He scored a copy of the audiotape but was offered only a viewing of
the video.
Using the Freedom of Information Act, however, he continued to
petition SAPOL for the videotape; and the investigating officer was asked to
comply with his request.
Herself a young woman, and clearly visible on the tape, she
harboured great concern about the offender’s motives. And why
wouldn’t she?
Applicants are not compelled to outline any reasons for their
requests under the Freedom of Information Act.
The investigating officer, a PASA member, contacted the
association with her concerns.
We understood the purpose of videotaped interviews: to
provide courts with the most accurate record of police interaction with
offenders. Such recordings also lessen the scope for offenders to concoct false
allegations of improper police conduct during interviews.
But few ever expected videos to be released to offenders,
especially when defence solicitors could be accommodated with viewings at any
convenient time.
In a bid to bring change to the relevant legislation, PASA
wrote to Attorney-General Michael Atkinson. And the association assisted the
officer in this case to write to Commissioner Mal Hyde and the Freedom of
Information Act review officer. She requested clarification on the issue and
the institution of a general policy.
The association received a reply to the letter last May. It
explained that legal and information management representatives, and
Commissioner Hyde, had approved a videotape release process.
The practice now – when offenders are supplied with
videotaped interviews under the Freedom of Information Act – is to obscure
officers’ identifying features.
The actions of the investigating officer in this case were
commendable. Only her diligence brought the issue to light.
