Seattle Pacific University wrong to fight shooting surveillance release

We’re closer to concluding a year-long fight over the release of surveillance footage from the shooting at Seattle Pacific University.

One student was killed, two injured. Aaron Ybarra is facing trial for the shooting.

After this went down last June, media outlets attempted to get copies of surveillance footage from the shooting on campus, but some students and witnesses, along with SPU, didn’t want to turn the footage over because it’s sensitive and could reopen some wounds for a lot of people.

Related:
State Rep. believes Washington universities are restricting free speech

But the courts have said the law is on the side of the media outlets. The Washington State Public Records Act requires the disclosure of the surveillance videos.

And an appeal court upheld an earlier court’s ruling that said the tapes should be released. The school and the students could ask the Supreme Court to get involved. If they do, those against releasing the footage will still lose. Law is clearly on the side of releasing the tapes.

Which is why some are making the moral argument.

Andrew Bell was an SPU student who started a petition last year asking media outlets to drop the requests. And in an online petition he wrote: “We the undersigned believe that a release of these tapes to the public would have immediate, severe, and lasting negative effects that far outweigh the press and public’s right to access said tapes.”

With respect, he’s wrong.

Now, I have no doubt that this could lead to continued trauma. It probably will. And I feel for all of the students and their family who experienced this. But continued trauma is not a reason to keep the media from this footage. Continued trauma is not reason to keep information private &#8211 the implications of a ruling like that would be catastrophic.

The most traumatic experience any of us have ever witnessed or experienced was 9/11 &#8211 at least for my generation. Other generations experienced Pearl Harbor, or the Holocaust. Yet we have plenty of footage, including the very traumatic experience of victims throwing themselves from the World Trade Center to avoid being burned alive.

The most traumatic experience many of our grandparents have experienced was around the Holocaust, and yet we still have images of what went on.

It’s important to know what happened and why.

Now, in those cases, they were certainly historic events for the nation and you can make that argument, but the SPU shooting was meaningful to the community. And let’s not forget, it was being used by some politicians to push politically driven policies.

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and others used what happened to change public policy.

We have every right as a community to get the full picture of exactly what happened and why. Part of that means gaining access to a better picture of how the events of June 5 went down, even if it causes discomfort. Discomfort is not a reason to halt access to events that help shape our communities and our public policies.

And with respect, it’s not for victims to decide what is relevant to the journalists. They should never decide. They have a conflict of interest; a clear bias that will always push them to err on the side of their own comfort and emotional well-being. That’s human nature. It’s the stance I would take if I were a victim.

And not to mention, who decides what mental anguish is reason enough to say “no” to realizing information? It’s subjective. The law, especially when it comes to free speech and a free press, cannot be subject to the personal feelings of a judge.