In an interesting twist, the Fourth District Court of Appeals issued Bent v. Sun-Sentinel (PDF), which held that an accused inmate’s phone conversations were not “public records” within the meaning of Florida’s public records law, and thus were not subject to being released to the media.
Far Reaching Implications
This ruling obviously has very far reaching implications, as in addition to her jail-house telephone calls and video visitation, its reasoning applies equally as well to Casey’s written letters, if obtained and copied by corrections. However, I do not think it applies to the jail’s visitor log, but as I explain below, I think they have a legitimate argument that it does.
No More Excuses?
What this obviously means for Casey Anthony is that she no longer has a legitimate excuse not to see or speak with her parents, as the ruling’s holding would apply to both video and audio recordings. Or would she?
What will remain to be seen is whether this ruling would prohibit the State Attorney’s Office, as opposed to the jail, from releasing the recordings in discovery.
The Practical Fall Out
The practical application of this ruling is that the ability of the State Attorney to release the information will depend on whether the recordings were turned over to the State and the State then decided that they might possibly use the recordings as evidence.
I believe that the State’s ability to release the tapes would depend on whether the recordings realistically held any evidentiary value. For example, if it is just Casey chatting with a friend who is uninvolved with the case, the recordings would not be subject to release.
On the other hand, if it was a recording of Casey talking to a witness in the case, say her mother or father, it might be subject to release if the recording held potential evidentiary use at trial. If the recording was of no evidentiary value, the recording would not be subject to release not withstanding that the person whom Casey was speaking to was a witness in the case.
A Big IF
More than likely what will happen is that Judge Perry would have to make a case-by-case decision on whether to release recordings the State obtained from the jail – IF Casey were to resume contact with her parents.
Expect a Renewed Argument
So expect the defense to file a Motion first thing next week to enforce the Bent v. Sun-Sentinel ruling in Casey’s case.
But also expect the defense to grasp on to the below underlined language from the Bent v. Sun-Sentinel case:
The expectation that a deputy or state attorney may listen to a call is very different from an expectation that anyone and everyone could listen to the calls. Sensitive or embarrassing information, or information that would otherwise be confidential, like financial information of the inmate or the person called, could be disclosed to the public. Treating the recordings as public records allows anyone to request the recorded calls. Moreover, an accused child should be able to consult with a parent without the communication becoming a public record.
Leave a Reply