A Muzzle Award for a Rhode Island official who says arrest records aren’t public if there are no charges

Boston Globe reporter Amanda Milkovits, left, talks about her reporting with WPRI-TV (Channel 12) anchor Kayla Fish.

When police officers arrest someone and charge them with a crime, they are required to provide the public with information on that person’s name, address and the charges being brought. That’s a basic part of the public records law in Rhode Island and most other states.

Follow my Bluesky newsfeed for additional news and commentary. And please join my Patreon for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a supporters-only newsletter every Thursday.

But the Rhode Island attorney general’s office has come up with a mind-boggling exception: if someone is arrested and not charged, then the police are under no obligation to make that information public. According to Boston Globe reporter Amanda Milkovits, that’s the alleged loophole being invoked (sub. req.) in the case of James Barsoum, who was arrested by Pawtucket police last September in Central Falls. As Milkovits writes:

Last fall, Pawtucket police officers went into a neighboring city without alerting the local police, tackled a resident in his home, seized his dog, booked the man, and put him in a jail cell. He was released hours later without being charged with a crime — and without an explanation.

The official who has come up with this novel interpretation of the public records law is Special Assistant Attorney General Patrick Reynolds, who explained that he was rejecting the Globe’s request for records related to Barsoum’s arrest because even though “there is a public interest in what transpired here, and that the mistaken arrest of a member of the public is highly concerning,” that is outweighed by “privacy interests” guaranteed by a law sealing records when a person has not been charged with a crime.

So come on down, Patrick Reynolds, and claim your New England Muzzle Award. It is well-deserved.

As for Barsoum’s “privacy interests,” keep in mind that he’s been interviewed (sub. req.) about his ordeal, allowed himself to be photographed (with his dog, by the way) and filed a complaint about his arrest. Keep in mind, too, that Central Falls police complied with the Globe’s public-records request, including providing bodycam video. It’s only the Pawtucket police who are holding back, and the AG’s office is letting them get away with it.

“Police in this state can break into your house, wrongfully arrest you, and never have to explain themselves to the communities they serve,” Justin Silverman, the executive director of the New England First Amendment Coalition, told the Globe. “Think about that: So long as charges aren’t brought, arrests can occur in secrecy and the police reports can be permanently sealed or destroyed. It’s a situation ripe for abuse.”