Carmany: Why we released the Brady tapes now.

« Meet Mitch | Main | Isn't that special »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341cc33e53ef00d83530449c69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Timing:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Is it just me or does her explanation not satisfy questions of legality?
Posted by: Fec Stench | Feb 23, 2007 at 11:06 AM
More later, but it does seem to me as if Carmany's answer distills the release of information down to having the SBI's permission -- the logical conclusion being that once the SBI investigation is complete, there should be no further delay in releasing all of the RMA information.
Posted by: Roch101 | Feb 23, 2007 at 12:55 PM
The SBI is not a Court of law, nor the decider of how a statute is to be enforced or whether it should be enforced. They can give City council permission to publishi something all day long, but unless they can grant immunity, it won't stand up legally. They can't waive Brady's right to sue, only Brady can. The whole "SBI said we could" might explain why they felt better about releasing the information without compromising the SBI investigation, but does not address the legal issue at all.
Further, if Carmany's stand is to rely on Garrity, why not release all of the Garrity evidence obtained in the Wray matter because it can't be used in a criminal action either? I just can't follow the rationale that has been offered nor can I reconcile it with previous positions taken by the City with regard to the release of information.
Posted by: The CA | Feb 23, 2007 at 02:29 PM