THREE Letters to the Editor published re: Spy Files Controversy
Denver Post
Monday, December 30, 2002 -
 

1) Not about the past

by Mark Silverstein, Denver

Re: “Try spy case in court,” Dec. 24 editorial.

The Post made some serious factual errors in its
editorial about the ACLU’s spy files lawsuit. The
editorial accuses the ACLU of providing reporters with
only “selected information” about the lawsuit.

On the contrary, after a request from The New York
Times, then The Denver Post, and then the Rocky
Mountain News, the ACLU made available all portions of
the depositions that Denver’s lawyers have not
designated as “confidential.” The editorial was wrong
again when it stated that the ACLU’s lawsuit is about
the past and focuses on whether the plaintiffs have
sustained injuries that deserve compensation. The
lawsuit seeks no compensation. Instead, it focuses on
the future, asking the court to set limits that will
prevent police from compiling dossiers that detail how
law-abiding Denver residents exercise their First
Amendment rights.

The fact that a lawsuit is pending should not be cited
as an excuse for limiting public discussion of
important policy issues. Nor is it a valid reason to
stall an internal administrative investigation within
the police department. Contrary to The Post’s
editorial suggestion, public discussion about
political spying and the management of the police
department will not interfere with the federal court’s
ability to resolve the issues on the basis of the law
and the evidence.

* The writer is legal director of the American Civil
Liberties Union of Colorado.

***

2) Diverting the issue
by Mark Schneider, Denver

Thank goodness for Post writers Amy Herdy and Carol
Kreck exposing the spy files police scandal. And yet,
I was perplexed over why The Post’s editorial
attempted to divert the public from the real issue:
police and government violation of our constitutional
and human rights.

Claiming, as The Post editorial did, that these abuses
can be remedied by a single court case with only six
plaintiffs blinks at reality. Thousands of people and
hundreds of organizations have been affected by the
DPD’s flagrant abuse of power. I have a spy file, and
the nonviolent peace organization I’ve worked hard to
build, the Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace,
also has a spy file, as do two other nonviolent
organizations with which I work.

Our names have been slandered, and this “intelligence”
has been shared with untold numbers of other
law-enforcement agencies to unknown ends. Ordinary
people involved with CCMEP live in fear that
government will watch and slander them and worry how
this “intelligence” will be used against them and
legitimate causes they support.

The solution is simple and doesn’t require a prolonged
court battle costing Denver taxpayers tens of
thousands of dollars. All Denver officials who are
accomplices to this mass abuse of authority should
publicly apologize and step down from their positions.
If they won’t, they should be fired.

A fully funded Public Safety Review Commission should
be empowered to investigate and hold accountable
police officers who engage in misconduct. Finally, all
the files must be made public, a testament to the
history of local and national police and FBI abuse of
activists going back more than 100 years.


***

3) Tip of the iceberg

by Richard Myers, Thornton

The Denver Post says the spy files case should not be
“tried in the media.” Yet this is a political issue.
Policies governing police behavior are formulated by
elected officials, subject to the political process.

If information about police behavior is restricted to
one court, how will citizens be informed of their
responsibilities concerning such matters? Where is the
possibility of vital public discourse, if not through
the media?

I create posters for the anti-war movement, a
constitutionally protected free- speech endeavor. I
expect that a possible file on my activities might
directly affect my future in graphic design. But we
should all be concerned that police officers recorded
license-plate numbers of vehicles in the vicinity of
protests. Which of us may yet be turned down for jobs
due to erroneous Denver Police records?

In making the argument that media should not cover
this issue, The Post dutifully takes the side of
wrongdoers (or, more charitably, bunglers) in the
Denver Police Department. The Post would serve its
readership better by encouraging reporters to dig
deeper.



(Editor’s note: The Post editorial was in error in
saying a jury will decide the federal spy-files case.
The case will be tried to the court, with U.S.
District Judge Edward Nottingham presiding.)