Liberal> Connie Schultz> Broadcasting 911 Calls Is Crucial Sometimes

	23 May 2012 Catholic Leaders Must Dial Down the Rhetoric As a non-Catholic, I wrestled with an internal conflict over the birth control battle of the bishops. Part of … Read More.
	16 May 2012 Dear Young Mothers: Ignore Time Magazine In February 1989, I ended a phone interview for a magazine story I was writing and looked up to find my 21-month-… Read More.
	9 May 2012 Finally, the President Says 'I Do' This was going to be a different kind of column. My friend Jackie, through a mutual contact, arranged for me … Read More.

Broadcasting 911 Calls Is Crucial -- Sometimes

Last month, Kihra Hankins' two frantic calls to 911 were made public, more than a year after she found the bloody bodies of her boyfriend, her brother and a family friend in her Albany, N.Y., home.

They are chilling recordings — and not just because of death's details. The 22-year-old's pleas for help dragged on for more than four minutes. She had to give her address three different times. She had to give her name three different times, too. Five times she described the horrifying scene. Repeatedly, she said the victims were motionless and bleeding from the head.

She hung up on the first dispatcher. Then she called back. When the second dispatcher asked whether they were breathing, she tried one more time to convey what she had found:

"I know nobody's breathing in there. Nobody's breathing. Nobody's breathing and blood everywhere! Please, my boyfriend! Oh, my God, this is a homicide! Oh, my God, my brother! Oh, my God, can you just please come, please!"

The recording and a transcript were posted online by the Albany Times Union (http://blogs.timesunion.com/crime/?p=906), but only after reporter Robert Gavin filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act for what should have been public record.

Those who listen to the call can draw their own conclusions. Some may think the dispatchers did their best with a hysterical young woman, while others may find both men patronizing. Some also may feel she had to struggle too hard with public employees who are paid to pay attention.

The debate is a healthy one — and one that comes about only when we can hear such exchanges. At the very least, publicizing this call could lead to additional training for dispatchers.

More than a dozen states have banned the broadcasting of 911 calls, and a similar bill is pending here in Ohio. The bill, sponsored by Republican state Sen. Tom Patton and supported by police organizations across the state, would levy a $10,000 fine against any news organization that broadcasts a 911 recording or posts one on a Web site. Patton is quick to point out that written transcripts of recordings may be published.

But nuances and inflections of conversation are sometimes difficult to convey without the real voices of real people. Especially in an emergency.

And broadcasting 911 calls is an issue of public safety and public accountability. The content of 911 calls reveals when dispatchers fail to perform their jobs and when they are heroic. The calls can back up legitimate complaints about police response and prove when such claims are false.

Sometimes, publicizing the calls helps the police do their jobs. As the Marietta Times recently noted, before police arrested a man for making bomb threats against public buildings, they made the calls public to see whether anyone recognized the voice.

The senator's chief argument for the bill is that many crimes go unreported because witnesses fear that their 911 calls will be made public.

"We have a first-grade teacher who is going to testify that her kids have already been taught not to trust the police," he said. "We're trying to save lives, and we think a lot of people are afraid to be identified as witnesses."

I don't doubt the senator's good intentions, but let's separate the issues here. It is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine anyone in the midst of an emergency thinking, "Oh, wait, I can't make this call to save a life because the general public may hear it later."

As for that first-grade teacher, the first thing I want to know is what neighborhood her students live in, which Patton couldn't immediately answer. Geography matters. In poor neighborhoods, it is not uncommon for residents to fear, rather than to trust, the police. This has nothing to do with queasiness over strangers' listening to their anguished cries for help.

To his credit, Patton acknowledged that his reliance on anecdotal evidence, rather than on empirical data, weakens his argument. After a lengthy conversation, he said he would slow down the bill and see whether a university or think tank might step up to do the research needed to quantify police officials' claims that publicizing 911 calls deters citizens from making them.

In the meantime, let's be clear: The responsibility runs both ways. Journalists must exercise sound judgment in choosing which 911 calls to air. Most do exercise sound judgment, but the few who don't cast a long shadow on the rest of us.

As journalists, our question always should be: What does the public need to know?

The public should be able to trust us with the answer, too.

Connie Schultz is a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for The Plain Dealer in Cleveland and the author of two books from Random House: "Life Happens" and "… and His Lovely Wife." To find out more about Connie Schultz (cschultz@plaind.com) and read her past columns, please visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.