"Generally, citizens are aware that the policies of the police department are compatible with the public interest. However, controversies arise occasionally following a particular course of action taken by the police. If left to smolder, friction and distrust result."
—International Association of Chiefs of Police Reference Notebook, 1975
"Once the facts of the case come out, everyone will see that keeping this information secret was prudent ... a no-brainer."
This is North Las Vegas police flak Timothy Bedwell talking, and he's referring to the case of 44-year-old Cipriano Gerardo Lopez. We know that Lopez is dead, shot April 27 by a six-year police veteran who was executing a drug-related search warrant at an apartment near Bonanza Road and Maryland Parkway. But we don't know the name of the officer who shot him and why—department policy.
"Police typically release the names of officers involved in deadly-force incidents within 48 hours, but on occasion have withheld information so as to protect the officer and his family and not compromise the investigation," Bedwell says. "In this and other cases, there are special circumstances that warrant keeping the name secret."
The North Las Vegas Police Department has become a target of full-disclosure marksmen in recent years, with everyone from the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada to the Review-Journal editorial board to copwatch.com sniping over silent treatment in certain cases. Lopez is but the latest.
In 2003, the department withheld the identity of former officer Kevin B. Hugins, who was arrested on charges he exposed his genitals to a child. In 2002, NLVPD refused to release records of former North Las Vegas Police employee Geneva Kincaid, the wife of a North Las Vegas lieutenant. She was accused of stealing 2 ounces of seized cocaine from the police evidence vault; she later plead guilty and received probation. Controversy surrounded a fatal shooting involving former officer David Acosta. North Las Vegas City Council paid a $500,000 settlement on advice from City Attorney Sean McGowan, who thought a jury might find the March 10, 2000, shooting of 22-year-old Celso Paz Lozez unjustifiable. City officials didn't admit guilt and didn't release the results of an internal review, calling it a "personnel matter." Acosta absolved himself in an internal memo.
"If the police are going to maintain credibility with the public, then having things kept secret concerning an officer-involved shooting is a very bad idea," Allen Lichtenstein, ACLU of Nevada general counsel, recently told the R-J.
Many states stipulate a 48-hour window on withholding the identities of officers involved in lethal-force situations; some states have no laws on the subject. Nevada hews to the 48-hour standard. And state law stipulates that criminal records "must be disseminated by an agency of criminal justice upon request" to any reporter working in "his professional capacity for communication to the public."
But Bedwell says reporters might not understand the leeway given to police departments: "I got this nonsensical question from a reporter: Why don't we just forget about jeopardizing [an officer's] ongoing cases [and reveal the officer's identity]? The department wouldn't go to such lengths [to withhold information] if those investigations weren't important."
Most Nevada law-enforcement jurisdictions follow the 48-hour rule, an official with the Las Vegas city clerk's office says. The Nevada Highway Patrol policy adds one caveat: permission from the chief.
"All of this is done to allow time to get officer counseling and stress-management help ... to prepare him for what could happen ... calls from press or other folks," Lt. Paul Hinen of the Nevada Department of Public Safety says. "We're not going to release any information that might compromise an investigation. If there are officer safety issues, we've got to look at all of those things, too. We don't want to put an officer in danger."
Whether released or leaked, once information gets out, there's no retraction. A few years ago, a North Las Vegas cop involved in a fatal shooting received threats from gang members.
"People showed up at the officer's house," Bedwell says. "Once that happened, there was no reason to protect the name anymore."
"If the release of the information doesn't violate law or the jeopardize investigation," Bedwell says, "we'll release it."
Otherwise, all bets are off. Even up to and after a coroner's inquest—when the officer's name is released for public consumption—Bedwell says police may choose to keep mum.
An expert in security consulting and training and a private investigator 10 years, Joe Chernicoff wonders if police departments truly weigh the good of the department against the good of the public. Once controversy hits, he says self-preservation often becomes their preferred mode of governance. "And when they hold off too long on releasing information, it might appear to be obfuscation," says Chernicoff, who concedes that police have "a job and a half on their hands."
"I disagree [with Bedwell]. Once the inquest is over, that name should be released because an appropriate period of time has gone by."
As for the Lopez case, Bedwell's sure North Las Vegas police will be vindicated in the court of public opinion.
"There's no shadow over this killing ... like we did something obscure. We looked at objectively and this is a no-brainer. We never want to cast a shadow, and we knew that some people would print some things negative in the press."
Bedwell, who says withholding information give police a chance to contact the families involved and hopefully lessen the trauma, says the department's credibility is not based on the same parameters as the ACLU's.
"After the inquest, if the ACLU thinks we're wrong, then they can say that. But now I think they're rushing to judgment in the same way they don't want us to rush to judgment in arrests," he says. "The North Las Vegas Police Department has good credibility with the public and we wouldn't jeopardize that by appearing to be frivolously hiding someone."
Lopez' inquest is slated for May 28.