EXTRA CONTENT: Whitley officials illegally denied man’s request for 911 recordings

Read the complete opinion of the Attorney General by clicking here.

Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway has ruled that Whitley County 911 officials violated the state’s open records laws when they refused to give a local man copies of 911 recordings stemming from a July incident.

"Whitley County 911 Dispatch violated both the procedural and substantive requirements of the Open Records Act in denying the request for 911 calls relating to a specific incident on the basis that ‘911 recordings are exempt from the Kentucky Open Records Act,’" according to the ruling from the Attorney General’s Office.

The ruling stems from a July 10 request that local resident Clarence T. Hurst made for copies of 911 recordings stemming from a July 7 incident on Mossy Gap on Ky. 92E where he stopped to assist a woman involved in a domestic dispute.

Hurst made two 911 calls concerning the incident and had requested copies of those calls and any other calls regarding the incident.

Whitley County 911 Director Angie Matney issued a response dated Aug. 12, advising Hurst that "911 recordings are exempt from the Kentucky Open Records Act and therefore may only be obtained by a subpoena."

"Ms. Matney cited no legal authority in support of this position, nor did she elaborate in any manner, and Whitley County elected not to respond to this office’s notification of receipt of Mr. Hurst’s appeal," the ruling stated.

"That response was deficient insofar as it did not ‘include a statement of the specific exception authorizing the withholding of the record and a brief explanation of how the exception applies to the record withheld.’"

The ruling noted that the 911 center also violated the open records act when it failed to respond to Hurst’s request in writing within three business days.

"Upon receipt of this office’s notification of Mr. Hurst’s appeal, Whitley County did not avail itself of the opportunity to "provide the Attorney General with a written response to the issues raised in the complaint,’" the ruling also noted.

Hurst said that he requested the tapes because he was concerned about threats the woman’s companion made that day, which he believed would have been picked up on the 911 recordings from his call.

"When I stopped to help that girl that day, the guy threatened me and I got kind of worried about it," Hurst said. "I wanted to find out what all was said because it was kind of hectic that day. I was kind of worried he would come back and act on his threats and I kind of wanted to have the information."

Hurst said that he wasn’t surprised when the county initially denied his request.

"Most people don’t know their rights," he said. "When they are told they can’t have something, they just go away. I knew the open records act, and have actually filed some requests before in other places. I’ve been turned down there too. I was pretty much expecting it."

Hurst said that the attorney general’s ruling didn’t surprise him since there is nothing in the open record’s act generally exempting such information.

When contacted by the News Journal Tuesday morning, Matney said that she was in the process of making a tape of the requested information for Hurst.

Matney said that the 911 center had always required a subpoena for any recordings that are released from the office.

Matney said although she hadn’t sent the formal reply back to Hurst denying his request for at least one month that she had spoken with him several times on the phone in regards to the request.

She said she was under the impression that he had an attorney, who was going to subpoena the records, which would have made the open record request a moot point since he would have gotten the records that way.

"He had told me once that he was going to get his attorney to issue a subpoena, which is actually what I was waiting on," Matney said. "I had called twice and got no response and then finally got in touch with him to tell him what we needed in order to do it and release the documents.

"He went down to the judge-executive’s office and I actually faxed the paperwork back to him. Then this is the next thing we got."

Matney said that she wasn’t aware of the appeal to the Attorney General until late last week.

Matney said that she found out about the appeal Friday, got a copy of the letter in her mailbox Monday, and was told to go ahead and release the requested records.

"I guess because of the statement of the Attorney General, the county attorney feels that it is OK to go ahead and release the documentation," Matney said.

Matney said now that she understands the open records law a little better, she plans to refer all future open records requests to the county attorney and let him handle the matter.