Most Popular

Most Popular sponsored by

Recent Articles

Recent Articles by Bruce Rushton

  • World of Hurt

    The St. Louis Police Department faces a taboo topic: Domestic violence within its ranks

  • Uneasy Street

    How many Metro employees does it take to screw in a streetlamp?

  • Cop Secret

    Good luck finding out what St. Louis cops get in exchange for public money

  • Cash Landing

    With bills coming due at Lambert, St. Louis considers drastic change

  • Where's Dora?

    Former St. Louis corrections chief Dora Schriro has moved on to a more high-profile controversy

National Features >

  • Houston Press

    The Passion of Victoria Osteen

    A flight attendant's smackdown with the wife of mega-preacher Joel Osteen inspires a whole new set of commandments.

    By Rich Connelly

  • City Pages

    Your Field Guide to the RNC

    Today Denver, tomorrow the Twin Cities.

    By Matt Snyders and Bradley Campbell

  • The Pitch

    Star Power

    A country musician rescues Waylon Jennings' tour bus from the scrap heap.

    By C.J. Janovy

  • Village Voice

    Serrano's Second Movement

    The provocateur who brought you "Piss Christ" pinches off a new concept.

    By Lynn Yaeger

Cop Secret

Continued from page 1

Published on March 03, 2004

The 30-year-old Sunshine Law also doesn't say that the government can charge for reviewing files that aren't removed from public offices. Section 109.180 of the Missouri Revised Statutes, passed by the Legislature in 1961, is even more explicit, stating that any citizen of Missouri has the right to inspect public records, and woe unto any public employee who denies access: "Any official who violates the provisions of this section shall be subject to removal or impeachment and in addition shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars, or by confinement in the county jail not exceeding ninety days, or by both the fine and the confinement."

In a February 27 letter to the paper, Shaw maintained that the statute requiring that citizens be allowed to inspect records doesn't apply to the Riverfront Times, though she didn't explain her reasoning.

Of course, it's tough to ask the police to arrest themselves. Indeed, even talking to department officials about anything is difficult. The department's media-relations division has stopped speaking to the RFT, referring all inquiries about public records to Shaw in the legal division. Shaw also refuses to speak directly to the newspaper. When the paper asked for an interview, the woman who answered the phone said the department has a new policy: All interactions between the media and the department's legal division must be in writing.

Life is apparently much easier for the city's daily newspaper. "With a reporter assigned to the St. Louis Police Department every day, we regularly obtain access to records on request at no charge," says Richard Weil, an assistant managing editor at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. "If it's something for which the department chooses to require a formally worded freedom-of-information request, we go through that process. In recent experience, we have paid as little as nothing or as much as $125 to compensate for copying costs."

« Previous Page   1   2

Riverfront Times Insiders

  • Local food, music and news blasts
  • Free Stuff
Backpage.com