Vermont's highest court heard arguments Wednesday over whether Burlington Police can charge a fee to someone who wants to look at body camera footage.
In 2017, Burlington resident Reed Doyle .
Doyle asked to see the body camera footage. The department said it would need to redact portions of the video and they'd charge him
The city of Burlington argued that in order to redact the record, they have to make a copy which, by law, means they can charge a fee. Assistant City Attorney Justin St. James said that鈥檚 what they鈥檙e doing in this case.
鈥淧ublic agencies can't start redacting originals or else there would be problems. ... In our mind it is a new record the minute that redactions are applied, because just logically they can't be applied to an original,鈥� St. James said Wednesday.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont represents Doyle, and staff attorney Jay Diaz argued Wednesday at the Vermont Supreme Court that redacting a video is not the same as a creating a new record.
鈥淩edacting a record, redacting information, is actually just the blocking out or hiding of certain information that is in an existing public record,鈥� Diaz said.
Several agencies, including and New England First Amendment Coalition, filed briefs in support of the ACLU's position.
The court will now deliberate and issue a ruling, which could take a few months.
Burlington Police Chief Brandon del Pozo told VPR the department investigated the incident Doyle witnessed, but declined to give more information, saying it was a personnel matter. Del Pozo said then the officer still works for the Burlington Police.
