A rumor making the rounds in the Legislature holds that the Lakewood Police Department was “barraged” with public records requests seeking Social Security numbers of the children of four slain police officers.
There’s no truth to it, but it’s still being used to justify restrictions on public disclosure.
A second rumor holds that Lakewood officers were followed to their homes by relatives of Maurice Clemmons, the parolee who shot the officers. There is no public evidence to the support the claim.
Here’s a closer look at the rumors and their impact:
DATA ON CHILDREN
THE CLAIM: After the Nov. 29 shootings of four Lakewood police officers, the police department was “barraged” with public records requests for the birth dates and Social Security numbers of the officers’ children.
WHO SAID IT: Jamie Daniels, director of the Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs, during public testimony before state lawmakers Feb. 10 and Feb. 24.
REALITY: The department received no such requests.
BACKGROUND: Daniels was lobbying for passage of House Bill 1317, which would affect police officer personnel files. Photos and birth dates of officers would be exempt from public disclosure. Police advocates say the exemption is needed to protect officers from harassment and retaliation.
WHAT WAS SAID:
“What the public didn’t see were the public records requests, coming in on the children and the spouses and those families. Lakewood was barraged with requests for children’s Social Security numbers, dates of birth, addresses of the officers.” – Daniels on Feb. 10
“There were requests – and I don’t know if they were formal public records requests – but there were numerous requests for birth dates and Social Security numbers of the children of the families.” – Daniels on Feb. 24
HOW THE STORY STARTED:
Daniels told The News Tribune that she heard the stories of the records requests from Lakewood Police Chief Bret Farrar and officer Brian Wurts, president of the Lakewood Police Independent Guild.
Farrar told The News Tribune that he didn’t know what Daniels was talking about, and hadn’t told Daniels such a story. Wurts said the union received inquiries about the children, but he could not recall anyone asking for Social Security numbers, which are already exempt from public disclosure.
The union is not a government agency, and has no obligation to respond to records requests. It handled charitable fundraising for the families after the shooting. The police department referred inquiries about the families to the union’s Web site.
Wurts recalled receiving “around 100” e-mails asking about the children.
“I can’t tell you who they were coming from or who the messages came from,” he said. “They were people wanting to do stories.”
Spokeswoman Heidi Hoffman handles public records requests to the police department. She said the agency received no requests for Social Security numbers or birth dates of the children.
DOUBLE-CHECKING: Daniels, told of the statements from Lakewood police, said, “I’m repeating what I’ve been told,” and referred to meetings of the governor’s task force on the Lakewood shootings. Farrar and Wurts both attended those meetings.
FOLLOWING OFFICERS
THE CLAIM: After the shootings, Lakewood police officers were followed to their homes by relatives of Maurice Clemmons.
WHO SAID IT: Daniels, on Feb. 10 and Feb. 24.
WHAT WAS SAID:
“Officers in the Lakewood Police Department were followed to their homes and they were followed as they were conducting routine traffic stops. When the cars were traced, they ended up being members of Clemmons’ family.” – Daniels on Feb. 10
“There were officers followed, there were people circling their homes. We have specific cases of officers being followed by members of Clemmons’ family that our officers were able to intercept.” – Daniels on Feb. 24
HOW THE STORY STARTED: Daniels again said she heard the story from Farrar and Wurts.
DOUBLE-CHECKING: Hoffman, the Lakewood police spokeswoman, said she hadn’t heard the story. “When I asked the chief (Farrar) about it, he didn’t recall anything involving Lakewood officers,” she said.
Wurts said he had seen confidential police bulletins – exempt from public disclosure – that backed up the story of officers being followed, though they were not from Lakewood.
Hoffman said she found a bulletin dated Dec. 10 that linked a license plate tied to a Clemmons relative to a report from a police officer in King County. She said the report was confidential and declined to provide more detail.
PROPOSED LEGISLATION
WHAT the house bill DOES, AND WHERE IT STANDS: HB 1317 passed the House on Feb. 13 by a vote of 95-0. A revised version of the bill has reached the Senate. As of Thursday, it was awaiting action in the Rules Committee. The revised bill exempts photographs and the month and year of an officer’s birth from public disclosure. The bill includes an exception for media, which would still be able to access the information.
Sean Robinson: 253-597-8486
sean.robinson@thenewstribune.com
JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.