BY DAVE CHOATE

Two of the four police department we surveyed in last week’s Right to Know study contest our conclusion that they were not following the law.

The Goffstown and Weare police departments did not fulfill our request for a log of arrests, while Dunbarton and New Boston both complied.

Goffstown Police Chief Michael French said the Right to Know experiment misrepresented his department.

We asked a woman in the records department for a list of the past week’s arrests and list of police activity and were told the department did not keep such a list. We were told that a reporter used to come in to the office and speak to the chief about specific incidents, but that Goffstown does not generate a police log.

“To say that we refused to provide information is, in my opinion, inaccurate,” said French. “When I see that my agency is accused of refusing something, I get a little anxious and, honestly, a little upset. We did not have information in the format we were asked for. We have always invited reporters into our building to go through the materials we have, and the Neighborhood News, because of staffing or what have you, has not done that in several years.”

“It wasn’t because of us. It was stopped by your organization,” he said.

French went on to say that the department does not maintain an arrest log because the computer system does not record that information as a separate report, but that he provides information on specific cases such as name and address, charges filed and court date.

“We can’t provide what we don’t have,” he said.

Weare police told our reporter he needed to file a written request for the arrest log. Chief Begin said that typically requests are granted within 72 hours after information such as juvenile names or dates of birth are redacted.

“We do try to be open and protect people’s privacy rights at the same time,” Begin said.

Begin said he maintains weekly activity logs on the department’s Web site, www.wearepolice.com. Those logs feature arrest numbers and information, but no names.

He said he hopes to generate a media log for serious arrests but wants to keep the names of people arrested off the Internet.

In New Boston, the information was granted.

“We get these kind of requests several times a year, but not too often. There have been a few situations where I had to research it and see if that was something we were able to give out. It comes down to education of what the law is,” said New Boston Police Chief Chris Krajenka.

Krajenka said the test confirmed what he already thought about his department; namely, that they are familiar with the Right to Know Law and know how to handle requests for information.

“I thought the test backed up what we believe – that we are providing the community with the information we should be. We hadn’t had a request like that in a while, so now knowing (you were) a reporter I understand,” he said.

In Dunbarton, the request was granted after a couple of days. Police Chief Christopher Connelly said the department rarely gets requests and that they tend to be about a specific arrest.

Connelly said his office administrator has been around for 20 years and that his department is generally well versed in the Right to Know Law.

“We try to our best to be quick and responsive about it, but there are certain things that by law we can’t give out. We have an open-door policy, but sometimes it does just take a little bit of time to process because we are such a small department,” he said.

Weare resident Bruce Fillmore said he thinks public information should be readily handed over.
“(The reporter) should have gotten whatever should be usually  available  to the public. The town hall is a little more aware about it, I  think,” Fillmore said.