Government Hiding Sandy Hook Details
The proposal is in a bill privately crafted by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's office, the state's top prosecutor and legislative leaders. It would allow authorities to withhold from the public photographs, videos, 911 call recordings and other records depicting the physical condition of any victim of the Dec. 14 shootings, unless the family gives written permission.
The legislation would bar the release of emergency responders' audio transmissions... The bill also would limit disclosure of the death certificates of the 20 first-graders and six educators killed in the attack... Media groups and advocates of public records laws worry... They also question the bill being drafted in secrecy and not being subjected to the public hearing process like other bills are... "If you hide away documents from the public, then the public has no way of knowing whether police have done their jobs correctly," said Sonny Albarado, city editor at the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and board president of the Society of Professional Journalists, a free press advocacy group based in Indianapolis.
"It sets a tone where it makes it easier to hide other things, and the public suffers, in my view," Albarado said. "Obviously, the mass murder of 26 people is a very horrific crime. But 26 people die regularly in most large towns within a few weeks or within a few months and we don't express the same kind of horror and we don't afford those victims or the perpetrators any kind of anonymity."
Malloy is defending the proposal, saying that the state wants to protect and respect the wishes of relatives of the Newtown victims and that the bill applies only to the Sandy Hook shootings..."I've seen a gradual sea change ... toward more people asking questions about why should the public have access to information instead of why shouldn't they," Murphy said. "We forget why we have these laws. Any record created by government belongs to the people."
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
The effort by Sandy Hook officials to hide evidence from the Sandy Hook massacre only accents the questions that were never answered about this stunning crime that led to calls for suppression of the Second Amendment.
It is good, in a perverse sort of way, that government is attacking the First Amendment rights of the press, because this wakes up the "news" media, who are otherwise surprisingly content to let government abuse pass unchallenged. Let the slightest infringement of their rights surface, and the outrage knows no bounds, a good outcome for freedom, even if it is a double standard and hypocritical.
Early reports indicated the murderer used four handguns, found at the murder scene, to perpetrate the atrocity. Later, the "news" was changed to blame so-called "assault rifles," which police originally said were found unused in the criminal's vehicle.
A news conference was convened outdoors for the chief medical examiner, surrounded by state police officers. Normally, such a news conference would be held at the hospital, with the doctor surrounded by other doctors. The doctor, who claimed with pride to have experience and seniority over all the other medical personnel, and who had performed examinations of the victims, could not or would not identify the caliber of the bullets used.
He stuttered and stalled in failing to reveal this simple and critical piece of information. All of the rounds, scores of them, if the "assault rifle" story was accurate, would have been easily recognizable .223 caliber rounds. No explanation was ever given for this disjoint in the handgun (initial report) and "assault weapon" (refreshed report) version of the story. "Assault weapons" were viciously attacked by the media and some members of Congress afterwards, using the crime for leverage.
If Connecticut is successful in suppressing this information, which is being done "to protect the children," one more layer of government transparency will be forever lost. The effort to suppress this information through legislation is being limited only to this crime. This is known as (fill in the blank, you may as well use your own adjectives and outrage.)