San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott admitted Friday there was a "lack of due diligence" in the raid of a freelance journalist's home and office to obtain information on a confidential source who leaked a police report to him.
He also apologized to the journalist and to the peaople of San Francisco, promising "an independent, impartial investigation by a separate investigatory body" in a statement released Friday evening.
"I am specifically concerned by a lack of due diligence by department investigators in seeking search warrants and appropriately addressing Mr. Carmody’s status as a member of the news media," Scott said. "This has raised important questions about our handling of this case and whether the California shield law was violated."
Adding, "We have serious concerns that we may have violated the shield law, absolutely. "We have to dig into everything that has to be investigated as well."
U.S. & World
The day's top national and international news.
Scott said that in addition to an outside agency, the Department of Police Accountability will investigate the execution of the search warrant on Carmody’s home as well as continue their own investigation into the unauthorized release of the police report.
SFPD, under the oversight of the Police Commission, will also review it, Scott said in the statement.
Carmody's attorneys, Ben Berkowitz of Keker Van Nest and Peters LLP, and Tom Burke of Davis Wright & Tremaine LLP, made a statement on Twitter:
"There needs to be real reform in the department to ensure that the SFPD respects the First Amendment and the independence of a free press.”
Scott said that he had completed an in-depth investigation of the circumstances surrounding the raid in the last 48 hours.
"SFPD’s Statement of Values specifies that 'policing strategies must preserve and advance democratic values.' In this area, we must do a better job. Journalists and everyone in our City deserve a police department that will maintain the constitutional rights of all." Scott said.
He added that he was committed to leading a transparent department.
Media law experts have criticized a claim by San Francisco's police chief that journalist Bryan Cramody allegedly conspired to steal a police report, saying that it is not a crime to disclose a public record.
San Francisco attorney Duffy Carolan, who represents several media organizations siding with the independent reporter, said the public has constitutional rights to public records.
"The impact of trying to criminalize disclosure of public records, whether or not it violated internal policy or practice, will have a profound effect on public employees' willingness to disclose public records," she said. "It would have a chilling effect."
A battle between the press and police is playing out in politically liberal San Francisco after police raided the home and office of Bryan Carmody earlier this month in an effort to uncover the source of a leaked police report into the unexpected death of the city's former elected public defender.
A journalist who actively and meaningfully participated in unlawfully acquiring information could be successfully prosecuted for a crime, said David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition. Hypothetical examples include a reporter providing passwords or hacking instructions to allow someone on the inside to unlawfully access a database.
But Snyder emphasized that a police report is "not a confidential, legally protected document" and its disclosure and publication is lawful.
San Francisco Sgt. Michael Andraychak said Wednesday that the report was not a public record and that state law protects crime reports when "disclosure would endanger the successful completion of the investigation or a related investigation."
But media experts said although the law allows police to keep reports secret, it does not require police to do so and it is perfectly lawful to release the information. Police also did not raid the office of a reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle who obtained the same report independently of Carmody. The newspaper has said it did not pay for the report.
Police used a sledgehammer to try to get into Carmody's home and office and cuffed him for hours as they searched and subsequently removed dozens of cameras, cellphones, computers and other equipment used to gather news.
Police Chief William Scott acknowledged at a press conference Tuesday that the raids looked bad. It was his first full remarks more than week after the May 10 raids.
"We believe that that contact and that interaction went across the line," Scott said Tuesday, referring to Carmody's efforts to acquire the report. "It went past just doing your job as a journalist."
Reporters and other First Amendment organizations are asking a San Francisco judge to revoke search warrants that authorized the raids and to unseal the materials submitted in support of them. Because the warrants are under seal, it's not known what information police provided to support the search warrants, or whether they disclosed to the judges that Carmody is a journalist.
Carmody said he passively received the report from a source and that he did not pay for the report — though doing so would not have been a crime, the experts said. Still, Scott said the journalist "crossed the line," motivated by profit or animosity toward the late public defender, Jeff Adachi. An autopsy found Adachi died Feb. 22 of a mixture of cocaine and alcohol, compromising an already bad heart.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that journalists are free to report on newsworthy information contained in stolen documents or illegally intercepted telephone communications obtained from a third party who violated the law, said Carolan, the attorney.
The court may have ruled differently had the journalists encouraged or aided in the unlawful interception of the call, she said. But that has nothing to do with a reporter who encourages a public official or public employee to provide a public record.
"That is what reporters do every day," Carolan said.
Snyder, of the First Amendment Coalition, said the police chief's comments suggest the police employee may have accessed an unauthorized system to obtain the report.
"Would an offer by the journalist to pay the source to break the law be enough? Maybe. It would depend on the circumstances," he said.
"I don't think it matters what Carmody's motivations were. The question is: Was his conduct protected by the First Amendment? And all the facts I've seen thus far show it was," he said.
Scott has not provided details of the investigation other than to say that Carmody was an active participant in acquiring a police record, which the reporter then sold to three television news outlets as part of a news package that included information obtained from interviews and video footage from the scene of Adachi's death.
Carmody has not responded to requests for comment, although he posted on Twitter on Wednesday the hashtag #journalismisnotacrime. A GoFundMe campaign has raised more than $15,000 for the veteran reporter to replace his equipment.
California's shield law specifically protects journalists from search warrants. The Associated Press is among dozens of news organizations siding with Carmody and seeking to submit a friend-of-the-court brief.
NBC Bay Area has a long-time relationship with Bryan Carmody. We bought video from him that included the police report