« Courts - "Enron Case A Grueling Trial for Its Lawyers" | Main | Ind. Law - Cases from Indiana and Kentucky of citizens suing to recoup gambling losses »

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Ind. Courts - More on "Court sits on porn records"

Yesterday the Evansville Courier& Press published the first of Bryan Corbin's two-part series on Warrick County court records - see ILB entry here.

Today is part two. Some quotes:

Warrick County's long delay in releasing public information about a Boonville, Ind., man accused in a child pornography case has been complicated by the unusual way the paperwork is filed in court, officials say.

In Indiana, when a person is criminally charged, county prosecutors file a public record called a probable-cause affidavit. Usually it's the investigating officer's sworn statement: a chronological description of what occurred, who was questioned and what was said - written in narrative form. A judge reviews that and decides whether to issue a new warrant or continue to detain a person already arrested.

But in Warrick County, Prosecutor Todd Corne said he inherited a different system when he was elected. Police officers and detectives write a brief narrative. To that cover sheet is attached witness statements, property records, chain-of-custody

A new legal requirement called Administrative Rule 9 means the prosecutor must omit certain confidential information, such as Social Security numbers and juvenile victims' names. Under the chronological narrative format most counties use, it's fairly simple to remove the confidential information and provide a second, public version of the affidavit.

But with Warrick County's unconventional system of attaching every document to a cover sheet and letting the judge review the entire stack, the process of releasing public records is time-consuming. In the case of a Boonville man, Shawn Kilgore, who was charged April 10 with child exploitation, possession of child pornography and voyeurism, the prosecutor said he had to go back and meticulously cleanse every page of the attachments. But after Kilgore's defense attorney had issues with it, the judge sent it back to the prosecutor on Friday, court staff said. The public document still has not been made public, two weeks after the media requested it. * * *

In other counties when prosecutors file charges, they typically do not file every document and piece of evidence for the judge to read. That information is provided later to defense attorneys in a document-exchange process called "discovery."

Instead, for the judge to find probable cause (legal basis for an arrest), the officer's chronological narrative usually suffices. An officer swears on his oath about the evidence he has gathered, and that document becomes a public record, accessible by anyone. * * *

With its unconventional system of attaching exhibits and witness statements to the charges, Warrick County ironically disclosed more information publicly prior to Administrative Rule 9 than did other counties, Corne said. "That has always worked really well for us, up until the time Administrative Rule 9 went into effect," Corne said.

But once Warrick County officials began treating the entire document as confidential under Rule 9, the access to public information was diminished.

While it would be simple to delete confidential information from an affidavit in a theft or drug-possession case, Corne said, the process is more complicated in the Kilgore case and that of Elaine Newton, the former chief deputy county treasurer accused of theft of public funds. One is a complex computer crimes case, one a financial crimes case. Both sets of records were extremely detailed. Both required prosecutors to meticulously comb through and remove confidential information before they can be made public, Corne said. The Kilgore affidavit alone is approximately 30 pages long. * * *

In light of concerns raised last week by the news media over delays in providing public information, Corne said, police officers and investigators in Warrick County likely will have to adapt to a new method of preparing probable-cause affidavits. They will have to write out a more detailed narrative summarizing the case thoroughly, rather than submitting attachments as legal basis for an arrest, he suggested.

"They will need to make some effort to make sure the case report thoroughly covers the investigation," the prosecutor said.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on May 30, 2006 07:31 AM
Posted to Indiana Courts