Sandy Hook Shooting Report Due Today – But Police File Will Not Be Included

Nearly a year has passed since the Sandy Hook massacre, and very little information about the event has been made public.

A long-awaited report on the Sandy Hook shooting is planned for release today, but state officials described it as a summary of the police investigation rather than a full report.

What will be covered in the report remains to be seen, but there’s one thing we know won’t be included: most of the evidence.

The full evidence file of Connecticut State Police is believed to be thousands of pages, most of which will continue to be shrouded in secrecy, with no release date in sight.

State’s Attorney Stephen Sedensky III, the lead investigator, has consulted privately with victims’ families on what might be included in the report and resisted calls from Connecticut’s governor to divulge more information sooner.

Dan Klau is a Hartford attorney who specializes in First Amendment law.  He said the decision to release a summary report before the full evidence file is a reversal of standard practice and one of the most unusual elements of the investigation:

“What I found troubling about the approach of the state’s attorney is that from my perspective, he seems to have forgotten his job is to represent the state of Connecticut,” Klau said. “His conduct in many instances has seemed more akin to an attorney in private practice representing Sandy Hook families.”

Search warrants released in March detailed an arsenal of weapons found inside the Lanza home. Not much else has been shared with the public, including the timeline of the police response to the shooting, mental health records for Lanza (if any exist), and whether investigators found any clues to a possible motive.

911 recordings are typically released quickly after high-profile crimes, but Sedensky has gone to court to fight the release of the Sandy Hook 911 calls. In September, the state’s Freedom of Information Commission ordered him to release the recordings. Sedensky appealed, and a judge is expected to listen to the recordings himself today before making a ruling.

Sedensky cites concerns that if names of 911 callers are released, they could be harassed by conspiracy theorists accusing them of being “crisis actors.” When he argued his case before the commission, he said, “This is a case about crime victims and witnesses who shouldn’t have to worry that their calls for help, at their most vulnerable moments, will become fodder for the evening news.”

But couldn’t releasing the details of the 911 calls and the investigation help the community heal and provide closure?

Some experts say that no matter how painful the details about a crime are, releasing such information to the public can be reassuring:

“They are a clear record of government activity, and the public has the right to know what the government is doing to them and for them,” said Kenneth F. Bunting, executive director of the National Freedom of Information Coalition. “I understand the concern for having the survivors and loved ones reliving the horror of the incident, but those people are also entitled to know how their government responded at that time.”

The daughter of slain Sandy Hook principal Dawn Hochsprung said releasing the information could help her come to terms with what happened to her mother:

“The more information I have, the easier it is to wrap my brain around what happened,” Cristina Hassinger said, according to the Connecticut Post.

In response to the massacre, a law was passed in Connecticut this year that offers exemptions to the freedom-of-information law for the release of photographs, film, video and other images depicting a homicide victim if those records constitute “an unwarranted invasion” on the privacy of the surviving family members. Choosing to keep images of crime victims – especially those of children – hidden from the public is understandable.  But why keep the 911 calls, evidence, and details of the investigation from the public?