Letter to the Editor
Police reports
Published Thursday, March 27, 2008
March 18, 2008
To the editor:
OK — enough is enough!
I am writing to express my displeasure with the apparent current policy of the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner to print so much of the police reports in the “crime section” of your paper. I’m probably, at times, guilty too of opening the local section to see if I personally know anyone arrested the previous day in our city.
But I don’t need to know that:
“the subject dropped his pants and threatened to defecate on the jail floor” or
“the accused urinated onto $217 worth of sugar in Safeway and was found passed out” or
“the accused was found fondling his girlfriend’s breast as she slept” or
“this was the eighth time this month local police have been called to this address” or
“the accused was … etc.”
Your published police accounts may, or may not, be what actually happened in each incident. This is nothing more than sensationalism, not objective journalism. I’m sure it sells papers the same way the National Enquirer sells its rag publication — by appealing to the reader’s curiosity and fascination with their other fellow citizens’ errant behavior.
But the bigger issue seems to me to be that the News-Miner is basically conducting any following trial or judgment right there on your newspaper pages. By printing all the sordid details of each arrest you are certainly influencing the outcome of any trial to follow. How can a selected juror, or even a presiding judge, who reads your paper not be influenced after associating the accused with the newspaper report? Something like — “Oh, so this is the person who urinated in the sugar. He must have a problem with defying authority.”
I know police reports are a matter of public record, but save that for the trial — OK?
I am fine with the basic format of name, age, and charge: John Doe, 54, of Ester was arrested and charged with whatever — I don’t want, or need, to know all the sordid details of the alleged crime.
Aren’t people deemed innocent until trial? Apparently not in the News-Miner. As Jack Webb on “Dragnet” used to say —“Just the facts ma’am.”
Comments
The News-Miner is publishing what the police file in their report. The police report is an integral part of the trial. Jurors will be exposed to it at some point regardless of it being printed or not.
No one forces you to read it. Many of us enjoy (and take great humor in) the details.
Actually, police reports are considered hearsay and are largely inadmissible at trial.
Police reports are allowed at trial, as long as the officer testifies that what is written in the report is true, and they cannot testify to what other people told them. The newspaper reports are based on either the press releases put out by the various departments (usually available on their respective web sites) or on the affidavit submitted to the court when the person is charged with the crime. Since the judge has to read the affidavit to find if there is probable cause that the crime occured, reading the same (probably watered down) info in the newspaper the next day will do absolutley nothing to sway their opinion, since they have already read it by the time it hits the paper. Civics 101.
Same argument as when I don't like what's on the radio - I change the channel. I don't like romance novels, so I don't buy them. I skip over the advertisements in any magazine I may read because I don't like them. I tend to channel flip during commercials because again, I don't like them. Same principle applies here, in my opinion anyway.
I would very much like it if the NM could do follow-ups though on the more sensational stories (yes, yes, time and money, but if we're wishing for unicorns here...). It would be interesting to see guilty/innocent/no contests for the avid reader, and vindicating for those who don't like that they were in the paper to begin with.
Dana, we do occasionally post court judgments in the paper on a space-available basis. While we can't follow up on every story of interest, we do try to strike a compromise by publishing both the police reports and the judgments.
Mr. Maguire... I totally agree with you regarding those details we don't really need/want to know about in the first place. Dana... Do you have school-aged children? My child is at times required to search the newspaper for articles pertaining to certain subjects (Alaska news-Iditarod and politics mostly) for class reports. His choice??? It would be nice to have a tastefully written newspaper he can read through without having to be censured. James Brooks... So you "occasionally" post court judgements depending on space availability? Seems to me if you omit the garbage we don't want to read about then you just might find some more space. BTW, I've never read an innocent verdict in the "court judgement" page. What's up with that? Hmmm.... :)
Bob -
Thanks for the editorial - I, too, have thought this many times. I think it is sad that many people use the misfortune of others for their own personal amusement. I canceled my daily subscription a while back because of this and will not renew until this 'gossip' is taken from the pages.
Some of the articles, etc are truely funny....until your kid hits the papers - They should do the reports, if they must, AFTER guilt is established, not before. Everyone here that has been pulled over for 'an illegal turn' or 'you forgot your turn-signal' when driving after midnight (sober) knows that the police dont always quite get it right - even though they do an outstanding job...
I just wish for the days of a nice wholesome newspaper - alas, probably wont ever see it in my lifetime....Please do away with this section - it is truely written just for those who love misfortune and can't wait to see their neighbors and friends in the paper.
Oh -
and reviewing the comment from the New's Miner Staff...
Judgements are done on a 'Space Available Basis' - - but it sure does seem that they can't miss even one police report.
Sound as balanced as the gentleman says?
sensationalism sells-
always has, always will.
GOPKING...right on. I have seen numerous times where specific pieces of police reports have been either not allowed or presented at trials. Heresay is a huge factor in many police reports...especially if the investigating officer is relying on a witness and did not experience the act first-hand. Too much detail...lose it, please.
When my buddy and I used to live/work in Fort Yukon, we would anxiously await the mail plane so we could look at page 2 of the local section. We had a saying "if you aren't on page 2, you are having a good day" (not in the jail news/obituaries)!! I like reading it, and it lets us know if we need to console a friend when they get pinched. Keep the section!
Bob, I also have had the same feelings about the police blotter. I still check it everyday but agree that the embarassing details should be left out. It is already a punishing consequense to have your name and charge in the paper but the ridiculing details are unnecessary. This really boiled me over when I read a police blotter that actually made fun of a person reporting a crime!!! To sum it up it pretty much gave the reader the impression of, ok this person is obviously a drunk and the crime she reported is ridiculous. It was clearly put in to entertain. As a side note, Your not only ridiculing the accused but cause a lot of embarrasment for the parents/family as well.
Let's see if I understand...you all want a newspaper that only publishes pictures of kittens, oil company ads, credits the Republicans with everything that turns out OK, and has store coupons on Sundays. Wouldn't it be hard to read with your heads in the sand.
there are some places where people paying for sex are not only arrested but their photo is placed on the front page of their local newspaper. i have no opinion concerning the morals of prostitution one way or another, but it seems to me that for a penalty such exposure is a bit harsh. my point is, not only does something like that destroy the life of the offender but it could also destroy the lives of his family, especially his children. but then i guess he should have considered the hazards of engaging a hooker.
"Police reports are allowed at trial, as long as the officer testifies that what is written in the report is true, and they cannot testify to what other people told them."
This is not accurate. The definition of "hearsay" is "an out-of-court statement being offered for the truth of the matter asserted within that statement." If the prosecution or defense attempt to admit details from a police report for the purpose of establishing the truth of those details, it is hearsay and not admissible. It does not matter if it is the police officer's own observations or is something a witness told him that he put in his report. When police officers testify at trial, they must testify from his/her own recollection of eventss. He cannot testify from his police report. The only time he may reference his/her police report is to refresh his/her recollection of events. Even then, he/she does not read the report to the jurors.
Oh come you guys - I like reading the police report! If that's all I have time for, that's the only thing that I'll read. I totally agree with Yukonjohn it lets me know if I need to console a friend.
Also, I do it for the same reason I (occasionally) watch cops, CSI, L&O - to know the 'enemy' and learn all of their dirty tricks. The local blotter, as well as those shows, have taught me to ALWAYS drive in a legal vehicle, always signal your turns, etc... Because that seems to be how they get you - especially these days.
Funny thing, I actually started reading the police report religiously to see what my ex- had pulled next. Sometimes it was just a DUI, but then there was that happy day that she was busted for dealing coke and went to jail (that made the custody battle really really easy).
"Let's see if I understand...you all want a newspaper that only publishes pictures of kittens, oil company ads, credits the Republicans with everything that turns out OK, and has store coupons on Sundays. Wouldn't it be hard to read with your heads in the sand."
Starman - nobody here has said anything close to that and reading back through the comments I find it impossible to determine how you came to that conclusion.
I'm fine with the police blotter, but I don't think those that dislike the police blotter are by default kitten-hugging-oil-company-loving-Republican-worshipping coupon clippers.
Pee'ed on the sugar! Man you cant make this stuff up! Thats awesome!
I enjoy reading the crime reports. like many others I read to see if there is any one I know. And I appreciate when the NM reports follow ups to those crimes that they may believe to be worthy of thier time.
BUT I was very upset several years ago to see they had used a crime report for one of those 10 years ago , 20 years ago , 50 years ago things...
Unfortunately, my son as a teenager who had just turned 18 along with a 17 year old supposedly friend broke the law. My son learned his lesson and was never in trouble with the law after that. and guess what? 10 years later he is news again. He had become an adult having paid for his crime and had moved on to have a productive positive life. ( the other boy basically got off because he was a minor even tho he was the "leader")
But suddenly my son was "news " again.
not that he had paid for his crime, only that he had commited it.
the other boy also became a habitual criminal. but that is not reported.
I couldn't have said it better myself! The news miner totally disregards how this affects the victim(s) of certain crimes. They should be ashamed of themselves - NO one needs to hear all the details that by the way aren't always as they print, because sometimes the trooper reports aren't accurate. Take our case - the trooper got 2 cases mixed up and what was reported was not the truth, yet it was in the paper and the victim (who's name they didn't print - but was the only sibling of) was humiliated and picked on at school because of it!
My Daddy used to say,"If it work's,don't mess with it!!!"
There's an easy fix to all of this:
Don't commit a crime and you won't end up in the paper.
Plain and simple.
The police report is the best part of the news-miner!
The only thing I notice about the police report that it's reruns. The same people keep getting stopped and for the same thing. I have also found the people that yell the loudest about police reports or the police are the guilty ones. Keep up the good work newsminer. Oh by the way my name has been in police reports twice in the 20 years I've lived here. Both for vehicle accidents. The only thing depressing about that is they posted my age. So much for that secret.
Let me begin by saying I rarely read the police blotter, and neither I nor any of my friends (to the best of my knowledge) have ever been in the police blotter. Having said that, I believe that the police blotter is just fine the way it is and serves two purposes. First, it acts as a deterrent, knowing that you might get your name in the paper for using excessively poor judgment. Second, it educates the public about what the police deal with on a regular basis. Without it, there would be even more people who believe that the only criminals are the ones that make the front page because of a heinous act. This way, they can see that day in and day out, there are criminals committing criminal acts, and maybe live their lives in a more defensive manner. And again, it's not like the paper is making this stuff up. They are only reporting what the police are putting in their press releases or in their affidavits to the court (not their police reports, which are not a matter of public record). Affidavits, by the way, are a matter of public record and anyone can go to the court and request to see those that have been recently filed.
I was once in a main article in the Newsminer, as well as on state wide news (got a call from several relatives that night). They said a lot of nonsense in both places. I'll forgo the details, but I will say that the troopers told me they had me on several air tight felonies. They then tried to intimidate me and tell be I'd loose my job (among other things) to try to get me to confess to stupid things.
Of course, I was never charged with anything.
And people wonder why I don't trust the police. *shakes head*
Good thing that my employers don't believe everything they read. It did affect my life in some ways - in fact I'm sure that there are some that still judge me by that article...
I'd love to think that I could sue the newsminer for something, but they were just reporting what the police report said...
alaskastoryteller,
Congratulations on not ever being in the police blotter, you get a gold star! I will give myself a gold star as well for never being on page 2 of B section! Yet, I still don't think it's right to divulge every embarassing moment so, the public can get a good laugh!
To WildAlaskan Just because your arrested does'nt mean you commited a crime. plain and simple. But I do enjoy reading the police reports, for the reasons already stated' to see if anyone I know is listed. Also to Bob I have been accused of defying authority a time or two. I wish how to use spellcheck
I once worked at a social service agency here in town; every morning it was a staff members job to go through the blotter and see if any of the names mentioned were in our data base. If they were, we'd scan it in to file. We never knew convictions or appeals or details, just what they were accused of committing. Most of these clients were inactive; when a client came to the agency to receive additional help the caseworker in charge would have a file on the client and these charges would be one of the first things read. We wouldn't mention this information to the client unless they brought up the issue; but don't you know it clouded our judgement.
I meant I wish I knew how to use spellcheck.
I do the police beat most days, and I'll be happy to answer any questions that our readers might have.
First I'd like to clarify that shortly after I took over the police beat, the News-Miner changed its policy about who the blotter actually reports on. In order to be listed, you have to actually be charged with a crime rather than arrested on charges of something.
As far as reporting on the details, there's nothing to sensationalize. In fact, in many cases things that my editors and myself believe might offend the general public are omitted or significantly rephrased from the original police report. What ends up getting in is just the facts of the alleged crimes as the authorities give them to us.
newreader,
Never thought I'd find myself in agreement with you but I am.
I don't always think to "review" the Police Blotter but when I do, my judgement of who did what to whom is certainly tempered by my knowledge of the person cited therein. I don't automatically "assume" the person cited is guilty, just that they've been listed on the blotter. Sometimes, when I actually know someone who is listed, I can't help but think to myself, "There must be more to it than is listed on the blotter..."
I once sat on a jury where the police officer who testified in the case was a friend of mine. We found the defendant "Not Guilty" inspite of the fact that my friend the police officer testified that the defendant had "admitted his guilt". We on the jury did not doubt the police officer's testimony so much as we felt there were extenuating circumstances. I'm convinced that some people do admit guilt under coersion or intimidation (when they shouldn't have made any admission); unfortunately, it's hard to "take it back" after you've said it.
"To WildAlaskan Just because your arrested does'nt mean you commited a crime. plain and simple."
So I guess the Troopers and FPD go around arresting people for the heck of it? Interesting....
"First I'd like to clarify that shortly after I took over the police beat, the News-Miner changed its policy about who the blotter actually reports on. In order to be listed, you have to actually be charged with a crime rather than arrested on charges of something."
That was my point exactly. Thanks Chris.
My .02: First, many charges are reduced or pleaded out. So a person who commits assault may plead out to a lesser charge. I like reading the original charge and find the News-Miner an easy source of information; if I want more info, I can always check other sources, and if I want verifiable info, I can always keep up-to-date with the court records or attend most trials.
Second, I think that people need to know what is really happening in our community. Many of us are not aware of the crimes committed because of drugs or alcohol and think that because we don't use or drink that it doesn't impact us. What about when our teenager is working in the store and has to clean up after after a drunk person? Then it impacts us at home. We shake our heads, say "tsk, tsk" and move on. But we are ignorant about the significant impact alcohol has on each of us, even indirectly.
Many of us don't realize the prevalence of domestic violence until we read about it over and over in the paper. Then we may begin to think about the impact is has on our community. And for those of us who know the person charged with the crime, but have never been impacted by domestic violence, we may simply accept a "justification" or believe that the accused was "framed" unless we know the extent of the violence and ask ourselves if we would personally tolerate that level of violence from the person we know.
"So I guess the troopers and fpd go around arresting people for the heck of it?" I guess I forgot they are omnipotent they never make mistakes like us mere mortals. Interesting.
Hilarious "Reader 1"
I concure.
Take heed Hollywood, You can't even top OUR criminal ingenuity here in them thar hills of Squarebanks!
Pee'd on the sugar--now that is funny.
Doug_in_Salcha -
My number one rule when dealing with police - ADMIT NOTHING. You have to ignore the threats and intimidation and simply ADMIT NOTHING!!!
(Something I've definitely learned from my "research" into the techniques of our law enforcement officers).
After all, why should you do their job for them?
WildAlaskan -
I wish that I was as perfect as you seem to be. "Just never commit a crime..."
Have you been listening? I WAS in the paper and I was NEVER charged with a crime. How about McGarry's story of being framed for murder by our wonderful local officers?
aksmylee - Interesting that you bring up children in this conversation. I happen to have three, two are school aged. My take on parenting must be different than yours is - I don't WANT the NM editing the information presented here for my children's sake - that's MY job. I filter the information I want them to have, and info that they don't get from me, they usually ask me about it later. I'm mom and as a reasonably well-educated person who hasn't yet had her children removed from her care, I get the call. If you don't want your kiddo reading the NM, then don't let him or her. I rather like the idea of my son reading about stupid things other people get arrested for - it may discourage him from repeating them.
Incidentally, I think if your child is searching politics and Iditarod, it's doubtful that he or she will be pulling up the police blotter....
I'm not for censorship of information. Ideally, it's fair and balanced, but I'm a realist so I don't hold my breath.
Newsreader -
That's right...I forgot everyone in Fairbanks has been framed for various offenses, including murder.
Thanks for reminding me.
I read the blotter as part of my job too. I can say that I think often times there is too much info. I can say that most of the time I think the News Minus is extremely biased. But I can also say that there are times the information in there was useful- after checking the blotter against court records I was informed about DUI/DWI's belonging to parents of my childrens friends. My children are in no way allowed to get in the vehicle with those people. So while it has informed me of things I need to know, I agree with Bob (who is NOT a gop, kitten hugging, whatever you want to call him weirdo)that often there is more in there than we need to know.
I didn't say everyone. I simply point out that the police are not as infallible as you seem to think. This I know from personal experience.
Whether or not you believe other's stories or mine is your choice I suppose. However, I know for a FACT what happened to me and you will never convince me that it did not.
It's a matter of making mistakes and hubris, in my (always-humble-never-biased) opinion. Police are fallible, but occasionally (once-in-awhile? not very often? often? regularly?) fail to admit when they do make mistakes. It probably comes from their own personal bias developed from dealing with lawbreakers and certain depravities that the rest of us often don't see, thus they treat us all as having stuff to hide and criminal behaviors - perhaps it's more expedient that way? I don't know as I'm just a stay-at-home-mom. It certainly isn't right and it's a shame that otherwise-good people have to suffer from these biases, leading to a distrust of the people that we are supposed to be able to call for help when we need it. I personally wouldn't hesitate to ask for help from the police, but I know there are those that would never go this route, for good reason. I think there's a danger to classifying all on the basis of the few here, but experience does teach a lot as well.
I still like the police blotter though - and I like it as is.
I like reading the Police Blotter! I have only been in it once, for a failure to submit, years ago. I did not have a funny story like peeing on the sugar, just a standard DUI that I pled to as a failure to submit. It is not a big deal to me, I drink some, I had drank too much and got caught. It has not and will not ever happen again, but I really don't care if other people know that I had one 20 yrs ago. Hey, if you do the crime, it is public knowledge....just get over it and do better next time.
Hmmmm - Three times in three weeks while driving home from work at night (after 2am) I was stopped by police...twice by troopers and once by a University Officer. When I asked each why, I was never given sufficient reason and each let me go once they realized I wasn't drunk.
Question...Has anyone ever seen a police officer in the blotter - or do they look the other way when its one of their own? Ever hear of one walking the line or taking a breathalyzer? Doubt it.
I got the luxury of doing both a while back...and lo and behold - I blew a 0.0 (after the police officer requested another backup cruiser or two). I would have loved to make the blotter for that!!! "Citizen pulled over for DUI blows 0.0 (after he wastes 45 minutes of his night entertaining police)" Maybe I could get credit for time served if I ever do get into trouble then...
I think there should be a police blotter that lists all the police 'mistakes' every week - that is one I would love to read and would really help to bring balance to this equation.
I realize there is a problem with drunk driving in this town - but does this justify stopping me for what amounted to nothing many times over? I think not. The police make mistakes and also overstep their authority. Do they think they are doing it for the right reasons - most certainly...does this make it right...most certainly not.
You all say we need visibility on crime?? How about some oversight on the police also. Then I would begin to trust them once again.
Until that happens, I will always consider the blotter as bs and wish the NM would have the guts to limit it to the scope of the court judgments (which go into no detail whatsoever) or drop them entirely.
I also have had DUI its been almost 20 years ago I was guilty so I did the time and paid the fine. But I appreciate newsreaders comment admit nothing, as my lawyer said while reading the police report, what part of "you have the right to remain silent" don't you understand
Most people have never had to deal with our "justice" system in real life. Everytime I try to watch TV at night, it is nothing but shows about cops and lawyers which do not accuratly portray how it really is. So many people have come to believe that what they see on TV is true, that cops and DA's are always right and tell the truth. So now when someone is just charged with a crime, they are automatically guilty in most people's mind. There is usually way more to a story than the police report, most anything that would exonerate a person is left out and words are twisted... trust me I know first hand!
Just a word to people on grand jury... the DA won't tell you this, but you will be presented a case only from the prosecution's version. They will also not present or mention any witness that has facts that would show the person is not guilty. It is all about building and winning cases not about truth and justice. Just remember as a grand juror you can request to hear the other side of the story!! So, because I do believe in freedom of speech and the press, the dnm has the right to publish the police reports but please, remember this- Believe nothing you hear and half of what you see.
PS: I don't feel all cops and DA's are out to get people, I have known several who are looking for the truth and not trying to fit facts to their theory of what happened and I have much more respect for those people than the out to get people type.
Some of the police are as crooked as the people they arrest. They are only people just like the rest of us who have bias and hard feelings and are capable of holding a grudge against families and people. If you think they are any better or different then you they aren't. They twist their story to serve their own purpose. If they think you did something they will make a case against you weather it is there or not. To those of you who think if you just don't do anything wrong you will never be harassed think again. You are truly living in a sheltered world. The Newsminer IS biased and they are more often then not "informed" about their information in a crime story only by the police, no two sides to those stories. I am happy for you that live in this dream world. I wish I could have stayed living there.
Akguy offers yet another view into a police officer's mind - if you are on the road at 2AM you are almost certainly drunk.
Innocent until proven guilty? More like assumed guilty until proven otherwise.
My suggestion is to either get used to it, or get a different shift. Because the unwarranted harassment isn't going to stop. Personally, I don't go on the roads from about 1:30 - 3:30 AM, its just not worth the risk of the illegal pullovers that you'll receive.
Freedom of speech and press is one of the liberties this great country provides us. I guess it's the News Miner's call now. When someone commits a crime, shame on them. Publish every dirty little detail as far as I'm concerned.
I think everyone has made some really good, true, valid points. That being said, understand that most police officers are just doing their job, and trying to get through the shift alive. The nature of the job is that they are exposed to what is all to often, the worst side of human nature. Does this make them biased? I am sure it does. I have been pulled over late at night for nothing. Then let go. Also, I cant count the number of times i was speeding and had a passing police officer merely flash their high beams at me and carry on.
They have a tough job and are not perfect. As for me, the less contact I have with them, the better. I try to handle events on my own and rarely call "the man."
As a resident here, I want to know our DUI rate, I want to know areas where crime often happens. I then know where to stay away from. This stuff is happening in our town & I want to be aware. I like having the NM print the reports & would hope it might serve as a deterrent.
Just think if the newsminer actualy had an honest to god investigative reporter that could go out and investigate wether or not the police and da's might not be so perfect. I might of missed it but maybe a article on the Mr Delong situation with gvea. Or maybe why fred meyer will give you a ten cent discount on gas if you spend a hundred dollars or why you get a fifteen cent discount for using their reward mastercard why dont they just drop the price period. But i guess you need a real reporter to do something like that. So without some real reporting the police report is the only thing intresting in the newsminer.
The information published is public record, so it should stay.
One point that no one's mentioned -
Not too long ago I read of a burglary in my neighborhood and that AST was looking for info from the public. I happened to notice two strangers in the area on that day and passed their description to the troopers. Don't know if it helped, but the point is I never would have known about the incident if I hadn't read it in the Police Report. The incident also reinforced the "Don't forget to lock the doors." admonition that I usually give the kids before they leave the house.
I think we all need to realize that if you commit a crime, it will be published. And in some ways, this helps deter people from repeating offenses. Not always, of course, but there are those people who are less likely to break the law because they've had their name in the paper before. (and gotten comments from friends, coworkers, family, etc. causing embarassment.)
With this town's crime rate rising as fast as it is, and the law enforcement numbers falling continuously, any little bit helps. And I think just knowing that when you break the law the whole town ends up seeing what you did, you might think twice before doing something stupid. I do agree that some details can go unmentioned, but some of that information is incredibly important.
Basically... you don't have to read that section if it offends you. If you find humor out of it... go ahead. But in my opinion, if we went without publishing the crimes commited by our neighbors, there might be bigger fish to fry.
"I didn't say everyone. I simply point out that the police are not as infallible as you seem to think. This I know from personal experience."
And THIS I KNOW from personal experience...our local law enforcement consist of fine, upstanding, individuals who do their thankless job every day regardless of what you seem to think or know.
WildAlaskan, yep - you're right. Obviously I'm deluded and my personal recollections are incorrect. It never happened, the police are perfect godlike beings who never succumb to any of the failings of us frail mortals. *rolls eyes*
(seven51 -> I am way off topic here - there's a spell-check tool built into the Firefox browser. Saves all of you from having to read long, misspelled posts from me.)
Nope, never said they were "godlike beings". I just have more respect for them than you do, apparently. Try being a law-abiding citizen more often and you too can live in "my perfect world".
WildAlaskan - newsreader said he wasn't charged with anything...so, obviously someone screwed up somewhere, and it doesn't appear that it was him. Where do you see that he's not a law-abiding citizen? I haven't gotten that from this thread at all.
WildAlaskan -
"I just have more respect for them than you do, apparently." Finally something we can definitely agree upon!
As far as, "Try being a law-abiding citizen more often and you too can live in "my perfect world"," try telling that to akguy - I feel he might disagree on that statement. Or, do you believe that everyone besides the police are lying to you?
I'm going out on a limb here and saying I actually find the details a little refreshing. I've spent 7 years in a metropolis in the lower 48 as a paramedic and have seen some horrible crimes that MY local paper reports few, if any details (or even fails to report the crime at all!).
I started reading the Newsminer police reports when I started researching areas that I'd like to live when we move in a few months (and areas I'd like to avoid).... and for the most part, I am hugely relieved to see that some of my biggest problems are going to be neighbors who "threaten to defecate on the floor" or neighbors who show up in the buff to express thier love.
Most of the time, I find the details amusing, AND it has the added benefit of letting me understand "crime" in a given area.
I would like to see the court reports listed more than the police reports. One is based on a charge/accusation made by someone whose minimum qualifications are either none or GED and 9 weeks of training. The other is based on decisions and recommendations made by a Judge (minimum qualification being that pesky little bar exam),two lawyers,and possibly a jury of "peers".....the police report kind of sucks if you ask me it's like reading the first half of a thriller novel over and over and over dui dui dui dui assault assault assault theft theft theft...give me the whole story..and spare the wrongly "charged"
Some of the above comments just go to show that some people think if a person was charged with a crime that they are automatically guilty.
I'm speaking about comments like "if you commit a crime it should be published". The police report are charges, not convictions and weather you think so or not we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty and many times that does not mean someone is guilty then. There are thousands of innocent people in prison! A good example is the Duke Lacross case, if those boys' families did not have money to fight a system that has unlimited resourses, they would be sitting in jail and everyone would believe they were guilty when they were not. In 20 years that charge will still be on public record, once charged, it never goes away.
If you think you will never get in trouble because you are a law abiding citizen, you have no clue about reality. It is extreamly easy to get accused of anything by anybody at anytime. I can't expect any of you to understand it unless you have been through it yourself or with a family member.
Who will protect us from our protectors?
I don't agree with the letter writer, I think it is fine that the news-miner includes what it does in the police report. It is a reflection of the community and if they didn't put it in - there would be charges of censorship!
I do feel, however, it is irresponsible on the part of the News-Miner not to consistently print judgements in the cases where names are used. Many newspapers have this as policy and it is weird that the News-Miner thinks it is OK to not follow this simple standard procedure. If there is not enough space or time to print both consistently, please don't use the name. It is simple.
thanks
I think this section of the paper is great. I dont live in the area right now, but I like to see which people I went to school with got DUIs or whatever. Count how many Coffeys got arrested. ect, ect.
Funny stuff.
Well, now I know the nature of the people posting comments if half of you read the police blotter to see if you have to console a friend.
I think the police and troopers are just revenuers,they pull people over for the smallest infrations.I took my wife to the airport so she could catch a plane{redeye}.So it was around two AM,I was driving back out to north pole,aproaching the badger exit I seen a car SPEEDING up behind me,proceeded to tailgate me (looking for a reaction?)Then the car swerved into the passing lane and sped off.and then I seen alaskas finest(AST).speed off on his way. If he had an emergency (excuse for speeding and tailgating reckless driving)then he wouln`t have had time to try to intimidate me into making a mistake or accident.If you dont give them a reason they make one up.I read in the paper the other day somone got a dui because they failed to use their turn signal exiting the roundabout in NP.I don`t know how to act.
Wierd. I am the sister of FOUR cops. I believe the police in our community have a very dangerous job to do, do a lot of good, and are mostly hardworking people who are trying to make Fbks a safe place, but I am not offended or feel hatred toward those of you who criticize FPD or AST. I recognize that there are experiences that make you wary of the police. I recognize that I'm still a good person and a good sister if I believe that the police are fallible. I hope that any policeman, trooper, deputy, etc. realizes that the actions of one do reflect upon all and hold themselves to the highest standards.
Oh yeah, if I peed on the sugar, reading about it in the paper would ensure that it would NEVER happen again.
I like the police reports and think they should be kept the way they are, most of the stuff comes straight off the AST PIO site http://www.dps.state.ak.us/pio/dispatch so it's not like the NM goes out and searches through all the police reports for information, most of it just seems to be cut and paste with edits made here and there.
Average Joe, since the money raised from DUI fines, etc. goes directly into the state general fund, and money from citations goes to either the city or the state general fund depending on which law your are cited for breaking, and NOT to the departments themselves, it's kind of hard to say the cops are revenuers, isn't it? They don't get any direct monetary benefit at all from arresting people or writing tickets. It would be easier and safer for them to sit on their butts all shift and not stop anyone looking for impaired drivers, but then people would be screaming that they are lazy slobs. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Yeah, sounds like a fun job, where do I sign up?
Weird is spelled weird. Dana---How do I spell check with Explorer?
AKhusky - "Well, now I know the nature of the people posting comments if half of you read the police blotter to see if you have to console a friend."
If this is truly the case (as it seems to be), I think this speaks to a much greater problem than the police. Actually, it points to the root of the problem. The laws.
If 50% of the population are criminals or console criminals, then, to me, it seems that 50% of the population is being supressed by the other. Now, I'm not saying that muderers, rapist, thieves, dealers (of truly bad drugs), and their ilk shouldn't be surpressed. As a society, we have to do that. What I am saying is that those kind of people probably represent only a small percent of the population - certainly not half.
So, as a society we are surepressing a vast section of the population so that half can feel safe or, more probably, morally righteous.
That's pretty sad really.
A couple of the posts speculated about cops never getting busted. But I recall incidents, reported in the New Miner and elsewhere, of cops being arrested for dui and domestic violence. It happens, infrequently, and they certainly dont get a free pass. Just the opposite in fact. That is, unless there is a vast conspiracy, and they're all a bunch of drunks and retrobates and are successfully hiding it. Somehow I dont believe that that's the case.
I like the police blotter. Urinated on the sugar. Oh boy, that's priceless.
[I should have used spell check on that last one! Sorry.]
Oh cmon you guys lol he's the one who said he wanted to spellcheck i was offering a helpful suggestion!
I DO care about spelling, not making fun.
CHELLY,calling cops revenuers was the smallest part of my comment.I just don`t think people should be harassed.I`ve seen first hand how police can get out of line.
funny how when a cop pulls you over you are never given a "reward" for obeying the law,
Thank you Dana for the info, I still had to have my daughter show how to use the spellcheck. Imusuallyright- although the police do have a dangerous job they still don't fall into the 10 most dangerous jobs category.
Really? That surprises me. I'm sure it's still more dangerous than my two careers. What surpasses policework?
Juastasking-- I guess your reward is a good night's sleep in your own bed, a clean (sanitized?) criminal record, and a police report free of your name.
In order they are/loggers/pilots/fishermen/ironworkers/garbage collectors/farmers/roofers/electricians/drivers salesmen and truck drivers/taxi drivers. firemen used to be on the list 2 or 3 spots above policemen but all I could find listed were the top 10. Also the majority of policemen are killed in traffic accidents.
Wow. I need a more exciting job. Thanks for the information. Everyone, be careful at work tomorrow.
Ok let me clear this up for those of you that might have misconceptions about the police reports. Having had extensive experiences with the judicial system in Alaska I believe my self to be a bit of an expert. First of all police reports are a matter of public record whether you read it in the paper or go to the police station and read them. So what if they put them in the paper. It is a way to keep up on the things our police officers are dealing with on a daily basis. It also can give us an idea of just what kind of people we are living around. Also how many times have you seen a friend in the paper and found it amusing. It does not necessarily mean that a person has done exactly what was written about them. It is assumed that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
Now as far as what is brought into court, unless it goes to trial which rarely happens since most cases are plead out then a jury of peers is not present in the court room and cannot be biased by reading a police report. But if someone who was placed in the police report found themselves going to trial and facing a jury of peers then yes the police report would come into play in the court room and the jurors would hear the same things they read in the paper. the jurors would also more than likely hear more than what was in the paper also. Once again you are presumed innocent until proven guilty and so the police report is not the final word on a persons actions. Although you are not treated as though you are innocent once you enter the judicial system. It is not a perfect system and I have been a victim of it a time or two. I also have been guilty a time or two so it goes both ways. I would have no problems having my name printed in a police report. I am 100% confident it would have no bearing on the outcome of my case.
I did'nt read any of the comments, but I'd like too know what section of the paper he is reading. That could be better than watching TV.
I have never read anything so absurd.
Good conversation, folks. Sorry I'm late to chime in.
There seems to be one lingering bit of confusion about our printing judgments on a space-available basis.
The judgments list does include dismissals and it is an important follow-up to the police report. We also try to make sure that judgments listed include the same types of crimes that make it to the blotter -- so if charges listed in the blotter are dismissed chances are very high that the dismissals will be printed as well.
We do run judgments "space available" but that's shop-talk that only sounds like they don't run very often. We almost always have a lengthy list of judgments on hand (often about a full page of text worth) so rarely do we run the entire list at one time. We grab a piece and run the amount that we have space to run, thus "space available." They don't run every day, but most weeks we have enough space to print what has come in before we load up the files again.
Anyone with specific questions about the blotter or how we handled any story is welcome to contact me directly. I can answer questions via The Editor's Desk blog on this site.
Kelly Bostian
Managing editor
Hey!!!! If you want to keep our name out of the police report... Just work for a coal mine here in Alaska.... Get a DUI.... Wreck a company vehicle... and this was done by a convicted felon.... WITH past charges of sexual herassment complaints.... ahhhhhhh nothing like working for a mining company is there.........
newsreader:
"So, as a society we are surepressing a vast section of the population so that half can feel safe or, more probably, morally righteous."
I'm not sure I agree with you on this, but it's an interesting perspective. Maybe people just have to be more careful about choosing their frinds. Or maybe the Fairbanks community just has a high crime rate. My experiences with the police when I have been pulled over have never been those of harassment (but I'm not saying that those things don't happen).
The things that get people going in this town cracks me up sometimes! State budget:not much. Police blotter: plenty!
I could tell plenty of cop stories, but I'll spare us the book. (And I am a fine enough, upstanding enough citizen WildAlaskan!)
Reader1, I guess the Coffey clatch doesn't care about police blotters!
The cops need to learn some manners. Everyone should not be treated as the proverbial bad, errant stepchild.
They also need to learn how to investigate (AST). The tacticts they used in the burglaries of my home were a (not funny) joke. I would have done better with vigilanteism. The police reports of missing items were grossly innaccurate and never corrected. But, hey, at least I got them to come to my house to take a report! Seems that's all we should expect for actual investigation these days.
After all, if they aren't actually getting the revenue, (something I find hard to believe), we know they have a competition for DUI's per capita as reported in the FDNM last week.
corinne - your ignorance is disturbing. Investigations aren't as simple as "learn how to investigate (AST)." Your Alaska State Troopers are grossly understaffed and even if the 18 month Trooper wanted to "investigate" your crime he doesn't have time because he's responding to everyone else's crime too. It's purely numbers - 30 open investigations - no time.
Instead of bashing the ones that are actually trying to make a difference contact your elected governor and demand she fix the problem. The problem is man power. And man power is an issue because trained experienced individuals leave for other agencies at an alarming rate because they are tired of "doing more with less" and being viewed as inept by folks like Corrine - and so the cycle continues and gets worse. Low numbers get lower, those remaining have more, and you Corinne the citizen get worse service. Wake up people.
Your troopers - the few left - want to be heroes and solve everyone's problems from traffic violations to murder to property crimes but don't have the resources. There is only so much time in the day and they have lives and families too.
Corrine - next time - Don't Call - they have enough to do.
Stay the course Troopers - some of us like you.
akatving - If they are so understaffed, then why do so many of us encounter them so often? Why are so many of us pulled over repeatedly for nothing?
Maybe its not that they are understaffed, maybe it is that they are being made to enforce so many stupid laws?
Maybe it is that they have been trained to be incredibly aggressive on the supposed "war on (some) drugs" (which, btw, is fighting entirely the wrong people - the users, not the dealers).
If we are so understaffed, then why are we the "incarceration nation" - especially when you consider that only a small percentage of those harassed by the police actually end up being convicted?
Actually the most dangerous job in Alaska is commercial fishing. Then you also have the fire department. Mining isn't that safe either. And yes the police risk their lives too. Then we have our bush pilots.
Newsreader, because they have to have a certain minimum number of people on each shift, and it is neither practical nor productive to investigate a burglary at 2:00am, especially when it was reported at 2:00pm. All of the shifts are already at or below minimum levels, so it's not as easy as just taking people from the night shift and putting them on the day shift.
And newsreader, when you say "get pulled over for nothing," I'm assuming you mean for a headlight out, no front plate, failing to signal a lane change at oh dark thirty, or some other relatively innocuous offense. But what if a cop pulls someone over for that and finds a kilo of cocaine? Or someone wanted on a violent felony arrest warrant? Or a fugitive from the lower 48? Or a driver who is absolutely blitzed? Or a guy with a stolen gun? Or..... you get my point. The cops can't know who is in the car or IF they're up to no good unless they stop and check, and as long as they are stopping a car for a legally valid reason, no matter how innocuous, then they are legally in the right. Of course the easiest way to avoid this is to not draw attention to yourself by obeying the rules.
Chelly - maybe we should just all be searched on a daily basis, huh? We should all be treated like criminals all the time, that way we can catch the small percentage that actually are criminals? That sounds a lot like what you are saying, and it strikes me as rather Orwellian.
Is that really the best tool that we have at our disposal? Barely-legal stoppages of nearly all citizens on a regular basis? We are causing civil unrest and undermining the public's belief in our police with the current policies.
To me, that does not sound like freedom or a sensible approach to the problem. Sorry.