Madison Police Department had big increase in “no knock”/”high risk” warrants in 2019

At the end of June I asked for a list of “no knock” warrants for the past 5 years, Friday I got the request back.

THE REQUEST

6/26/20

I’d like a report of how many non-knock warrants have been sought and obtained in the past 5 years. I can see some of them in the police incident reports over the years, but I’d like a detailed list that includes address, date and reason for the warrant.  If you have information on who requested it or responded to it (SWAT, SET, Gang Unit etc) that would be great, but I understand that might not be in your report.  Ultimately, I’m going to want to know the race of the people that the warrant was served on, so if you have that information that would be great.

If for some reason you can’t produce a report on this, I would take the police reports and wade through them myself.”

THE RESPONSE – WHAT’S NOT IN IT

1. Race.  I asked for the race of the people the warrants were served on, and they redacted it?
2. The cases the courts turned down.

Here’s the response:

As you know, I have no obligation under the Wisconsin Public Records law to create a record: https://www.doj.state.wi.us/sites/default/files/office-open-government/Resources/PRL-GUIDE.pdf . I have spent considerable time working to locate a record held by the Madison Police Department that closely resembles what you have requested. We do NOT keep record of high risk warrants that are requested and not given. That information MIGHT live in the case file if the Detective chose to document that in a report. What numbered/specific reports that information might live in, I have no idea and would have no way to search without a case number, individual involved or exact date and time. MPD is a police institution and our records management system is created to serve the purpose of tracking police calls and case files for prosecution. We keep records by case number and can search by person, crime/offence, and address.

The only record I am able to locate for you in response to this request is record of high risk warrants since 2016. The exact address of these high risk warrants is personally identifiable information and I have removed/redacted these records to reflect exact address redaction while leaving the street since you requested location. I do not know from this list whether or not these cases are still open and active under investigation with MPD. I do not know from this list if these cases are pending in the courts or awaiting DA or US Attorney action. I do not know with this list whether or not these warrants/cases are under court ordered seal. Therefore, I have redacted as I feel appropriate given the circumstances. You may certainly follow up with a request for the case reports associated with these high risk warrants and I have given you the case number to provide you that opportunity more easily. However keep in mind: your current running list of public records, the qualifiers mentioned above that might affect ability to release reports upon further review, and the fact that I see many major crimes on this list which will have hundreds if not over one thousand pages. This request is closed with this reply.

Under the Wisconsin Public Records Laws, records custodians must carefully weigh the competing public interests involved when deciding to release any record in their possession.  Custodians begin with a presumption of complete public access to such records.  However, custodians must consider whether inspection of the record could result in harm to the public interest that would outweigh the benefits of such inspection.  When such harm substantially outweighs the benefits of public inspection, such records or portions thereof, must remain confidential. I have reached the above conclusions after weighing the reasons for nondisclosure against the public interest in disclosure and taking into consideration laws which either require or prohibit the release of certain records or information. For the reason(s) set forth above, I have concluded that the public interest in nondisclosure of the redacted information outweighs the public interest in disclosure. Pursuant to Sec. 19.35(4)(b) Wis. Stats., I advise you that this determination not to disclose the information described above  is subject to review by Mandamus under Sec. 19.37(1) Wis. Stats., or upon application to the Wisconsin Attorney General or the Dane County District Attorney. I have consulted with the City Attorney regarding the denial of access for a portion of this record per 3.70(6) MGO.

MAP

This is my first attempt at a google map like this . . . .the only data missing is the “multiple addresses” location.

THE INCREASE

The numbers kind of say it all.  I wonder what the increase is due to?  Grant?  Different Staff? Kinder Courts? Crime Spree? Law Changes?  Policy Changes?  I asked, there will need to be a follow up post on this at some point, so hopefully I get an answer worth posting.

• 2016 = 15
• 2017 = 17
• 2018 = 10
• 2019 = 37
• 2020 = 8 (data through August 13th)

THE DATA

I’m secretly hoping that some enterprising member of the press picks this story up from here and looks into it.  They will likely get their open records request answered much more quickly than I will!!!  If I don’t hear anyone else is following up – I will.