478
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The attorney hired by the city of Marion following the raids on a Kansas newsroom has blocked access to records that should be publicly available under state law.

The KSHB 41 News I-Team requested former police chief Gideon Cody's text messages, among other public officials in Marion.

In an email on Oct. 31, Jennifer Hill, an attorney hired by the city following the raids denied the request by writing: "The City has no custody over personal cell phones and KORA provides no enforcement mechanism to obtain text messages from personal cell phones. As such, obtaining text messages from the personal property of the listed individuals would place an unreasonable burden on the City and, to the extent any such records even exist, the City is under no obligation to produce such records."

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 114 points 1 year ago

Kari Newell, the business owner whose driving record Cody used as a premise to launch a raid on the newspaper and two homes, told the I-Team Cody directed her to delete text messages.

"He just said to me that he felt it would be beneficial if I deleted those text messages to just kind of remove the element of any connection between him and I that could be deemed inappropriate," Newell said.

yeah. that's not.... suspicious at all. nope. Fuck these guys, though.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago

As long as these sleazy fucks were using actual text messages, it's fully possible their phone carriers have them.

[-] Th4tGuyII@kbin.social 45 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And they wonder why people think the police are corrupt bastards ...

Go look at the police subs at that other place - they don't wonder. They don't give two shits.

They have decided anyone who doesn't like cops is at least one of these:

  • A child or young adult with no life experience nor critical thinking skills
  • Someone who doesn't like having rules enforced
  • A criminal

Their thinking goes no deeper.

[-] Fades@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

another day another corrupt pig pen trying to intimidate and control what they don’t like, which is usually the truth and corroborating facts

[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 39 points 1 year ago

Scum. And the chief openly tried to delete the evidence, and get the other person in the messages to delete theirs also.

One goose step closer to fascism.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Zeno's goose stepping: always getting closer to fascism, but never admitting we've arrived.

[-] Pips@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 1 year ago

Not surprised the attorney is making these moves, it'd be malpractice not to make the argument. The city's prosecutor (or county or state) should have opened a criminal investigation into everyone involved and obtained search warrants.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Yeah. If they want access to personal accounts, they'll need to show that official business was being conducted, and I don't see that the article actually says that it was. Going through the court is the appropriate action here.

[-] TurtleJoe@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I don't see what the city prosecutor has to do with it. This is similar to a FOIA request, just based on Kansas law, which is pretty clear:

The law states: "Public record" means any recorded informations, regardless of form, characteristics or locations, that is made, maintained or kept by or is in possession of: (A) Any public agency; or (B) any officer or employee of a public agency pursuant to the officer's or employee's official duties and that is related to the functions, activities, programs or operations of any public agency.

This guy's cell phone is clearly "kept in the possession of an officer or employee of a public agency." The city is arguing that asking for the cell phone is an "undue burden" efficiency is ridiculous on its face.

The reason that records acts like this are put in place is because the way you described it working would be a clear conflict of interest: the city prosecutor suing the city to turn over the records of an official, with an attorney hired by the city working to keep those records from being public.

[-] Pips@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

They're separate thoughts that are inconveniently in the same paragraph.

  1. There's nothing wrong with defense making this argument, any competent attorney would do the same.

  2. This case generally should be subject to prosecution because the raid is so blatantly corrupt.

City prosecutors can absolutely sue city officials though in cases like this, they normally get a special prosecutor or someone from another jurisdiction (like the county or state) to avoid the conflict like you said. This records act has nothing to do with criminal prosecution, it's about public disclosure. A prosecutor can just get a warrant. This is happening because the news organization is requesting the messages.

That law doesn't mean that every public officer's phone is an open book, it means that anything a public officer does in their public capacity on a private device is still subject to normal public records disclosures. You don't get the entire phone, you get the public records (the relevant messages).

My guess, though I don't know, is that the news organization has to somehow establish to some degree of confidence that there are public records on the personal phone, which I'm guessing they'll be able to do.

[-] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I’m not trying to reveal too much about myself here, but the mechanism in my area is the same as the mechanism for any government-owned devices.

The device is copied by a digital forensics expert. If the device is also the subject of a discovery request, it is retained until two years after litigation has completed.

The copied data is analyzed by a FOIA coordinator that gives all the relevant information to the person who initiated the FOIA request.

I advise people to never conduct work on personal devices because the policy we work under explicitly states that personal devices will be subject to legal holds and FOIA if used for official business.

Isn't this the city that spied on its students?

this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
478 points (99.6% liked)

News

23301 readers
1023 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS