FrostedGlass
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2017
- Messages
- 6,168
- Reaction score
- 29,891
This was the first step on my Path of Distrust. To this day I haven't decided why I think the prosecutor directed ISP to violate the Access to Public Records Act(APRA). Seemingly, ISP couldn't even claim ignorance of the act. I've looked for the "other opinions" as noted in 3. (below) but I haven't been able to find them.Well this was an interesting read. I had not seen it before (or at least I don't think I have) and I thought I had seen it all, just don't proclaim to know it all.
![]()
PAC: Prosecutor and ISP error in late records release to public - Carroll County Comet
A formal opinion issued by the State’s Public Access Counselor Luke Britt, who is an attorney and appointed by the Indiana Governor, indicates some actions by local law enforcement, specifically the County Prosecutor and the Indiana State Police, created an issue with public access to...www.carrollcountycomet.com
ISP confirmed that Wilkins was denied the information until October 31, 2022 when ISP held a press conference and issued a press release. ISP argues it was “under the direction” of the county prosecutor and that any court records were sealed.
...
This office previously addressed this issue in a case where ISP was also the respondent.
...
3. The role of the prosecutor and judiciary in documenting arrests
ISP also cites the local prosecutor and presiding judge as factors in the delay. While that matter is being addressed in other opinions, it is notable that APRA’s daily log requirement for law enforcement is not a judicial record.