Shrouded in secrecy

From The Chronicle at Purdue:

An investigation by The Chronicle over the last three months has concluded the PUC University Police is in violation of multiple laws related to public access and police records.

The laws being violated include the Clery Act, which requires campus police to maintain an updated crime log available to anyone, and Indiana Code 5-14-3-5, which requires all police agencies to release the names of arrested individuals, along with the reason for arrest and the arresting officer in the incident.

The Chronicle has received five reports from students that the University Police denied them access to the public crime log, a record of crimes reported and responded to by police on campus.

The Chronicle has also received two reports from faculty members that University Police staff informed them the crime log is only available to faculty, staff and those with the news media.

Both break access to public records laws that require state-funded agencies to be open with their operations.

The Clery Act

The PUC University Police is primarily bound by the Clery Act.

Applying only to campus police departments, the Clery Act became law in 1990 to make students and parents aware of threats on campus. The law passed in reaction to the death of Jeanne Clery, a 19-year-old Lehigh University student who was raped and murdered in her dorm room in 1986. The university had failed to provide notification of 36 other violent crimes on campus the previous three years.

The Clery Act requires campus police to issue warnings of threats on campus, an annual crime report and a continuously updated, daily crime log available to the public.

Currently, the University Police is in violation of the third section by not allowing students to view the log and by not updating the log on a daily basis, according to Adam Goldstein, attorney advocate for the Student Press Law Center.

"If that's happening then that's easy enough to correct," PUC Chief Stephen Chaddock said. "It's probably just a lack of communication."

But denied inquiries for the crime log occurred over a three-month period, and four of the five students who were denied said multiple staff and police officers informed them they were not allowed to see it. Both students and staff who were denied said they were offered the annual crime statistics, but were not allowed to see any evidence of daily criminal activity on campus.

Maribel Lopez, a secretary for the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures, said she called the University Police last week to ask if she could see the crime log. She was told she could only view the annual crime statistics brochure and other general brochures.

"It's a little disheartening," Lopez said. "It's bad business practice for things like crime to be hush-hush."

Indiana Code 5-14-3-5

Another breach of open records laws by the University Police occurs under Indiana Code 5-14-3-5, which requires a police agency to release information about those arrested on campus.

Like municipal police departments, campus police must release an arrested individual's name, address and age, the reason for the arrest, where the individual is jailed and the officers involved in the arrest. The police department is also required to release the written information for inspection and copying.

The PUC University Police currently releases none of the information.

Both Chaddock and Wes Lukoshus, vice chancellor for university relations, said releasing this information often encroaches on students' rights under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act or FERPA.

But a 1992 amendment to FERPA made it clear that law enforcement records pertaining to arrests are not educational records.

"My bosses have decided, basically, we're going to provide what we currently provide," Chaddock said.

A difference in philosophies

While the Purdue University Police Department in West Lafayette handles all student, parent and media inquiries about crime directly, the PUC University Police divert all questions to Lukoshus.

"The university has taken a stand that it's going to coordinated and consistent with its communication," Lukoshus said.

In any situation on campus, Lukoshus said PUC administration has made the decision to handle all questions and requests through the Office of University Relations.

And that includes crime.

Captain Tim Potts of the PU Police Department said that philosophy differs greatly from the philosophy pertaining to open records at PU.

"For us giving out public information and working directly with the public and our news services has worked out very well," Potts said.

Potts said his department keeps the public crime log in the lobby of the police station and posts updates daily to its Web site.

"I'm not sure what it's like up there," Potts said. "But here we like to be as open as possible and sometimes it seems we're too open. But we've got nothing to hide," he said.

Minimum compliance

While the University Police is in violation of several sections of the Clery Act and Indiana Code 5-14-3-5, they post all necessary information in their crime log that is distributed weekly to The Chronicle.

But that information has shrunk in the last three years. A brief narrative of each incident often accompanied each crime entry in 2005 and 2006. Now the log exists at minimum compliance with one word explanations labeling each incident.

Chaddock said he is not sure why the University Police offered more extensive explanations in the past.

"I really don't know the answer," Chaddock said. "There was probably just a change in philosophy."

Lukoshus said his office often must find the balance between releasing too much information and not enough.

Tim Potts said at PU the balancing act exists, but the lines are known by most employees of the police department.

"There are quite a few regulations under FERPA," Potts said. "But we like to release as much information about each incident as possible."

While Lukoshus said PUC's philosophy on consistent communication is unlikely to change anytime soon, he said the administration would be willing to release more information for a compelling reason.

"I don't think the doors are closed on any of this," Lukoshus said.