Defrosting Cold Cases

CNN reports that “recent court fights over the videotape of a killer whale attack at SeaWorld in Florida and a writer’s request for investigative photos of a slain Georgia hiker’s body are rekindling a familiar debate: where should the line be drawn between the public’s right to know and a crime victim’s family’s right to privacy?”

The article mentions Mrs. Larson whose daughter, Sonja, was murdered in 1990 by serial killer Danny Harold Rollings a.k.a. the Gainesville Ripper. Rollings left behind gruesome crime scenes. As part of his ritual, he left his female victims’ mutilated corpses in grotesque poses. Along with the families of the other victims, Larson fought in court to seal the autopsy and crime scene photos. Alachua County Judge Stan R. Morris ruled to allow the public and the media to view 700 grisly crime scene and autopsy photos, under the condition that no copies could be made. Morris found that allowing the public and media to privately inspect but not distribute the investigative photos posed no risk that the victim’s families would be exposed to them. “In 16 years, no one has ever challenged it,” the judge said.

Larson sees no need to release the video showing the death of SeaWorld trainer Dawn Brancheau. In March, Florida Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Kirkwood granted a temporary injunction against the release of the video and ordered mediation for all parties wanting access.

Florida media attorney Rachel Fugate, who specializes in First Amendment and public access cases, will be participating in the mediation on behalf of The Orlando Sentinel, The Tampa Tribune, The Lakeland Ledger, and WFLA-TV. “We are not advocating that the photographs be released or that they be published or broadcast in any manner,” she said. “We want the opportunity to inspect.” As Fugate sees it, the public is served by the independent verification the media can provide, especially in cases involving competing or inconsistent versions of events.

Jon Mills, the attorney for Brancheau’s family and media attorney Tom Julin worked on opposite sides during the Gainesville 1990 killings and the Dale Earnhardt case. Julin represented the University of Florida’s student-run newspaper, The Independent Florida Alligator.

Julin says the Earnhardt case was of particular importance because it proved first-hand the need for independent verification. After Earnhardt’s death during a race, NASCAR announced the results of an internal investigation. It had concluded that a faulty seat belt harness was to blame for his fatal head and neck fractures. Skeptical of these findings, media outlets attempted to obtain Earnhardt’s autopsy records and photos, but the family filed an injunction to seal these documents. After mediation, the media agreed to appoint an independent expert to review the autopsy documents and file a report. The report concluded that Earnhardt’s death was the result of inadequate restraints, not a broken seat belt harness. The findings led to several safety improvements in the race car industry.

There is something to say for both sides, obviously. Vidocq is highly in favour of independent experts (chosen not only for their knowledge but foremost for their integrity) having access to these files provided their reports do not contain any pictures and that the investigation served either the purpose of research and education or to settle a dispute that might lead to a miscarriage of justice if the files are not inspected one more time.

This reminds me of the Columbine files.

In April 2007, U.S. District Judge Lewis Babcock ruled that the depositions of the parents of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold will be kept under seal in the National Archives for 20 years. No one, including violence prevention experts, can see them until they are unsealed, Babcock ruled. The files will be kept permanently in the National Archives, where they are considered to be of historical value. “I am mindful that there is a legitimate public interest in these materials so that similar tragedies may hopefully be prevented in the future. I conclude, however, that the balance of interests still strikes in favor of maintaining strict confidentiality.” The federal judge said he was concerned that the release of detailed information about the events of April 20, 1999 would lead to copycat shootings. The depositions of the parents took place in 2003 in connection with a lawsuit filed by the families of five slain Columbine High School students.

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, who had argued that a nationally known violence prevention expert should examine the depositions, had mixed feelings about the ruling. “We are pleased they are going to be kept on file and not destroyed. At the same time, we are disappointed that the judge said it isn’t in the best interests to allow experts to look at the records and learn from them.”

So we have lawyers who argue that their experts need to study the files to gain knowledge about serial killers, to prevent further killer whale attacks, or to see whether a belt was indeed the cause of the injury. And we consider a panel of experts to have access to those files. But, in the case of Columbine, where further study could help keep entire buildings and campuses safer, we simple stash the boxes away until 2027 for the sake of strict confidentiality and ignore the fact that we have seen many examples of disturbed teens who still glorify Klebold and Harris’ actions.

Vidocq is in favour of making all the above mentioned files accessible to a group of experts of diverse disciplines. These experts must be chosen by their peers and their conduct must be monitored by a committee that also reviews the final reports before they are made public. I sincerely believe we can learn from the depositions in the Columbine files. I also see the need to study photographs and autopsy reports to determine the exact cause of injury especially if there is someone on trial in that case.

But I highly oppose the unrestricted public distribution of crime scene photographs and autopsy pictures. I agree with the victims families. Their loved ones were treated in the most heinous and dehumanizing manner. We owe them dignity and respect. What do you think?

Categories: Vidocq Unscripted

Tags: Autopsy Photographs, Columbine, Right to Privacy, The Public's Right to Know

4 Comments