Super-Sealed Cases Shouldn't Be Secret

When the founding fathers laid the framework for our nation's legal system, they drew on the English common-law tradition, but sought to prevent the arbitrary judicial abuses which were typical at the time. Paramount to that goal was transparency - the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth amendments to the constitution are aimed at creating courts with clear public accountability. The founding fathers knew that secrecy breeds injustice. Unfortunately, over 200 years later this goal is not fully realized. The issue with accountability in our courts was highlighted about two weeks ago, when the Connecticut Justice Department released the names of those involved in civil lawsuits that had been granted so-called "super-sealed" status. This status meant that the cases were so sealed, the public was not even allowed to know of their existence.

There are many occasions on which complete public oversight of the judicial system is impractical, or may even threaten a fair verdict. For instance, a judge may reserve the right to issue a gag order to prevent parties to a case from discussing sensitive evidence, or might sequester a jury to avoid exposing them to prejudicial materials. While these actions have an undeniable impact on the transparency of a case, they're a necessary compromise to guarantee the rights of those involved in a case. There is a difference, however, between ensuring a fair trial and abridging the public's right to know. Clearly, Connecticut's super-sealed cases fall into the latter.

At the end of a trial, sequestered juries can go home, and formerly gagged attorneys are free to speak about the case. Yet the only reason the recently uncovered super-sealed cases have even seen the light of day is that one particular judge - Middletown Superior Judge Robert E. Beach - determined that they had been wrongly sealed. There was no built-in mechanism to declassify the cases. Of the approximately 40 cases he declared unsealed, it's still unclear why many of them had even been sealed in the first place. While court officials now say they've abolished the practice, it's possible some cases are still sealed. It's troubling that at one point these cases were removed altogether from the public eye.

Some of the cases which were given "Level 1," or super-sealed status, appear to have been sealed due to clerical errors. One recently unsealed case involves a divorce settled in 2002. The matter appears to have been resolved smoothly, with no custody or alimony disputes. Yet the case was declared off-limits to the general public. Another case, where the city of New Haven was sued for improperly securing an impounded vehicle, was also sealed, even though the New Haven Assistant Corporation Counsel said he couldn't recall anything in the file to indicate it had be classified as Level 1.

Many of the cases which were sealed were apparently shielded at the request of parties seeking privacy. In the case of a Manchester police officer who divorced his wife in 2000, the officer's children objected to the case being unsealed. This case, however, is a particularly strong example of why transparency in the legal system is so important. The officer had retired from the police force when allegations of him abusing his wife were revealed. If those allegations had been kept private, it's possible he might still be in a service position allowing him to potentially abuse others. These types of situations illustrate why it's important to allow for legal oversight. Discussing the case, Beach himself said "The private interest in confidentiality does not outweigh the public interest in openness."

There is already a sufficient amount of privacy built into our judicial system. Victims of certain sensitive crimes (such as sexual assault) are granted anonymity. Criminals whose transgressions are judged to be less severe often have their records expunged - for example, those who are young often can successfully remove cases from their permanent record. Super-sealing cases does no favors to the public interest, and serves only corrupt or inept officials. Let's hope any further Level 1 cases are exposed, and future officials leave the practice of super-sealing in the judicial trash bin.

Staff Columnist James White is a 6th-

semester English and journalism major.