Judge Rules ‘Back Hall Tapes’ Must Be Released
Vince Leibowitz | Nov 28, 2006 | Comments 4
A state district judge in Travis County will order the Texas Department of Public Safety to release to the Texas Observer a Capitol security tape believed to show school voucher advocate James Leininger interacting with legislators in a corridor behind the Texas House chamber.
DPS has indicated it may appeal the decision.
State District Judge Stephen Yelenosky is expected to enter his final order in the matter soon, but told parties in the case last week that he could find nothing in the Texas Public Information Act to allow DPS to withhold the videotape.
The Texas Observer submitted a public information request to DPS seeking copies of footage of the second floor back hallway from May 23, 2005 when school voucher advocate James Leininger was in the Capitol during a debate on school vouchers.
The Observer said it wanted the tape to determine if Leininger was trying to persuade legislators in the hallway.
DPS, however, claimed the tape should not be released because of security concerns, citing, among other things, the Texas Homeland Security Act.
Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbott’s office had already ruled that the tapes should be released to the public. DPS filed a lawsuit to challenge Abbott’s ruling alleging the tapes should remain secret.
In an Open Records Letter Opinion last year, Abbott’s office dismissed DPS’s claims that the release of the tapes would undermine security at the capitol complex:
…having reviewed the department’s arguments, we conclude the department has not adequately shown how the submitted video taken from Capitol security cameras relates to the specifications, operating procedures, or location of a security system used to protect public property from an act of terrorism or criminal activity related to terrorism.
[...]
…after reviewing the submitted video and considering the department’s arguments, we conclude that the department has failed to demonstrate how release of the requested information would interfere with law enforcement. Accordingly, the submitted video is not excepted from public disclosure under section 552.108(b)(1) of the Government Code. The department must release the requested video.
The original letter of opinion may be found here.
![[Post to Twitter]](/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter.png){kind=icon}
![[Post to Ping.fm]](/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-ping.png){kind=icon}
Filed Under: Notable Court Decisions
OK. what is the importance of this? Is what leiningere did illegal?
Depends on what the tape shows. That’s what discovery is for.
If and when the tape is ever made available…assuming it isn’t “accidentally erased”…you need to look for more than the Good Doctor…. Who you are more likely to see is some of his and the Speaker’s favorite LOBBYISTS in the back corridor working the members…which is also against the Rules.
Leigh,
Yes, but I don’t think the Observer will get to see it as part of discovery as they aren’t party to the suit.
And, if they were, I’m not sure they’d be allowed to see it anyway. It has always been my understanding with PIA Litigation that, since the argument is about the statutes governing the confidentiality of the information more than the information itself, the non-governmental litigatnts don’t get to actually have access to the information at any point in the traditional discovery process.
Am I wrong on that?
I seem to remember cases where writs of mandamus have been filed against government bodies under the TPIA over the release of information and they don’t get to see it unless it is ordered released.