Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Kentucky: He wanted info on Lexington's surveillance cameras. Now the city is suing him.
He wanted info on Lexington’s surveillance cameras. Now the city is suing him.
BY BETH MUSGRAVE
bmusgrave@herald-leader.com
OCTOBER 24, 2017 11:59 AM
The American Civil Liberties Union announced Tuesday that it will represent a community activist who is being sued by the city of Lexington to stop the release of documents about 29 surveillance cameras owned and operated by the Lexington Police Department.
Michael Maharrey, an activist who has started an organization called “We See You Watching Lexington”, asked for documents related to the city’s operation of 29 surveillance cameras as well as other surveillance equipment. The city of Lexington denied some of Maharrey’s July 17 request for information. The city disclosed the existence of 29 surveillance cameras it operated and said some of the information that Maharrey requested did not exist. ... The city also provided Maharrey more than 400 pages of documents including information about body cameras used by Lexington Police Department.
In addition, the city said some documents Maharrey requested could not be released because records regarding investigative reports and issues dealing with homeland security do not have to be made public under the state’s Open Records Act. ... Last month, Attorney General Andy Beshear issued an opinion saying the city wrongly denied Maharrey’s request and ordered the city to turn over all documents related to the 29 surveillance cameras.
The city sued Maharrey on Sept. 29 in Fayette Circuit Court to stop the release of the documents. In its lawsuit, the city said it had disclosed some information about the cameras after the Sept. 8 attorney general opinion but redacted some of it saying the release of the information would be “an officer safety issue and decrease in effectiveness of an investigation.” ... In its response, the ACLU wants the judge to make the city produce the documents and to rule the city has willfully withheld those records. In addition, the ACLU wants the city to pay all attorney fees and court costs.
BY BETH MUSGRAVE
bmusgrave@herald-leader.com
OCTOBER 24, 2017 11:59 AM
The American Civil Liberties Union announced Tuesday that it will represent a community activist who is being sued by the city of Lexington to stop the release of documents about 29 surveillance cameras owned and operated by the Lexington Police Department.
Michael Maharrey, an activist who has started an organization called “We See You Watching Lexington”, asked for documents related to the city’s operation of 29 surveillance cameras as well as other surveillance equipment. The city of Lexington denied some of Maharrey’s July 17 request for information. The city disclosed the existence of 29 surveillance cameras it operated and said some of the information that Maharrey requested did not exist. ... The city also provided Maharrey more than 400 pages of documents including information about body cameras used by Lexington Police Department.
In addition, the city said some documents Maharrey requested could not be released because records regarding investigative reports and issues dealing with homeland security do not have to be made public under the state’s Open Records Act. ... Last month, Attorney General Andy Beshear issued an opinion saying the city wrongly denied Maharrey’s request and ordered the city to turn over all documents related to the 29 surveillance cameras.
The city sued Maharrey on Sept. 29 in Fayette Circuit Court to stop the release of the documents. In its lawsuit, the city said it had disclosed some information about the cameras after the Sept. 8 attorney general opinion but redacted some of it saying the release of the information would be “an officer safety issue and decrease in effectiveness of an investigation.” ... In its response, the ACLU wants the judge to make the city produce the documents and to rule the city has willfully withheld those records. In addition, the ACLU wants the city to pay all attorney fees and court costs.
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
