# 911 calls released to public?



## minneola24 (Jul 7, 2009)

Do you guys think that 911 calls should be released to the public?

After listening to the Michael Jackson and Billy Mays 911 call I was a bit confused. If I were ever to call 911 I don't think I would want it put on the internet for everyone to hear. 

What do you guys think, should 911 calls remain in the dispatch center?


----------



## Sapphyre (Jul 7, 2009)

First, off, unless you're famous, your 911 call would never be released anyway.  But, no, 911 calls shouldn't be released.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 7, 2009)

Why?

They aren't public information, and the public has no reason to listen to them.


----------



## marineman (Jul 7, 2009)

Sapphyre said:


> First, off, unless you're famous, your 911 call would never be released anyway.  But, no, 911 calls shouldn't be released.



Local news releases 911 calls for any notable event in my area. Anything from calls about major accidents closing highways to shootings. I don't see a need for them to be released but I don't have a problem with it as long as it's done tastefully and with respect for the individuals involved.


----------



## minneola24 (Jul 7, 2009)

Sapphyre said:


> First, off, unless you're famous, your 911 call would never be released anyway.  But, no, 911 calls shouldn't be released.



I've heard 911 calls being played left and right on the news from non celebrity's. One that I remember vividly was the lady that was being attacked from the chimpanzee and her friend was crying for help.


----------



## Sapphyre (Jul 7, 2009)

minneola24 said:


> I've heard 911 calls being played left and right on the news from non celebrity's. One that I remember vividly was the lady that was being attacked from the chimpanzee and her friend was crying for help.



That's another example of when it would happen.  I believe they were contacted and gave consent prior to it being released....

Stupid calls get released all the time too (like the lady that wanted the cops to come out and take a report because a certain fast food place wouldn't make what she wanted, even though what she wanted was from a competitor)


----------



## usafmedic45 (Jul 7, 2009)

If autopsy reports are public record, which they are in many jurisdictions and the federal government (AFIP), I see no reason why a 911 call should be any different.  It's a government work product and there is no ruling that determines what someone says to a police/fire/EMS dispatcher is any way confidential (with a few exceptions, the big one I am aware of is HIV status).


----------



## minneola24 (Jul 7, 2009)

usafmedic45 said:


> If autopsy reports are public record, which they are in many jurisdictions and the federal government (AFIP), I see no reason why a 911 call should be any different.  It's a government work product and there is no ruling that determines what someone says to a police/fire/EMS dispatcher is any way confidential (with a few exceptions, the big one I am aware of is HIV status).



Apart from the legal side I think that if someone I knew was dying and my last hope was to call 911 I would be in a position that would be unexplainable and wouldn't want that to be recorded and put up on the net, that's just me however.


----------



## usafmedic45 (Jul 7, 2009)

***double post***


----------



## usafmedic45 (Jul 7, 2009)

minneola24 said:


> Apart from the legal side I think that if someone I knew was dying and my last hope was to call 911 I would be in a position that would be unexplainable and wouldn't want that to be recorded and put up on the net, that's just me however.


What do you mean the "legal side"?  It's not a protected communication in most jurisdictions.  

That said, I agree I think it is a touch ghoulish unless there is something to really be learned from a particular recording (or if the person is really deserving of being made fun of such as the lady with the fast food complaint).


----------



## minneola24 (Jul 7, 2009)

Well I said apart from the legal part because you said if an autopsy can be made public why not a 911 call.


----------



## karaya (Jul 7, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Why?
> 
> They aren't public information, and the public has no reason to listen to them.


 
Wrong.  In most states, 911 tapes are in fact public record; part of the state's open record laws including Texas.  However, many have safeguards in place to protect information such as the identification of a juvenile, identification of a person reporting a crime whereby they could be subject to retaliation, etc.

And thank goodness the public is allowed to listen to these tapes.  Remember that horrible Georgia 911 dispatcher a couple years ago?


----------



## firecoins (Jul 7, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Why?
> 
> They aren't public information, and the public has no reason to listen to them.



*police* calls are considered public.  So if you have a police dept dispatching you, guess what?  Those 911 tapes can be requested with FOIA.


----------



## firecoins (Jul 7, 2009)

karaya said:


> Remember that horrible Georgia 911 dispatcher a couple years ago?



remind me. It sounds familiar.


----------



## Hockey (Jul 7, 2009)

Public funds are used to create and run 911 (using taxpayer money to pay salary, equipment etc) therefore, it is considered public irregardless what you think.  Only time it can be _delayed  _is if it is needed for a court case.  

Do I think it should be public?  Yep.  I'm paying for it, if I want to listen to a call, then I have every right to do so.


----------



## WuLabsWuTecH (Jul 7, 2009)

Hockey said:


> Public funds are used to create and run 911 (using taxpayer money to pay salary, equipment etc) therefore, it is considered public irregardless what you think.  Only time it can be _delayed  _is if it is needed for a court case.
> 
> Do I think it should be public?  Yep.  I'm paying for it, if I want to listen to a call, then I have every right to do so.


Yes hockey, but I think the point some are trying to make is when should you draw the line?  Do you get to hear the whole thing?  With names and confidential medical information redacted?

You're paying for the military's phone lines too, but I doubt you would argue that everyone should get to listen to the pentagon and their communications with the ranking general on tomorrow's top secret plan to remove the nuclear missiles from a north korean silo.


----------



## karaya (Jul 7, 2009)

WuLabsWuTecH said:


> Yes hockey, but I think the point some are trying to make is when should you draw the line? Do you get to hear the whole thing? With names and confidential medical information redacted?
> 
> You're paying for the military's phone lines too, but I doubt you would argue that everyone should get to listen to the pentagon and their communications with the ranking general on tomorrow's top secret plan to remove the nuclear missiles from a north korean silo.


 
You all need to pay more attention to your state's open record laws.  As I stated in my earlier post, identifying information such as when someone is reporting a crime is removed in most states.  Other's omit juvenile information and some omit all caller identification entirely.


----------



## el Murpharino (Jul 7, 2009)

WuLabsWuTecH said:


> You're paying for the military's phone lines too, but I doubt you would argue that everyone should get to listen to the pentagon and their communications with the ranking general on tomorrow's top secret plan to remove the nuclear missiles from a north korean silo.



Are you that naive to compare 911 tapes to top secret military communications that could jeopardize national security?  A poor comparison, my friend.


----------



## rmellish (Jul 7, 2009)

Hockey said:


> Public funds are used to create and run 911 (using taxpayer money to pay salary, equipment etc) therefore, it is considered public irregardless what you think.  Only time it can be _delayed  _is if it is needed for a court case.
> 
> Do I think it should be public?  Yep.  I'm paying for it, if I want to listen to a call, then I have every right to do so.



Your tax dollars pay for medicare and medicaid as well. Do you want access to their health records? You want a list of patients treated every shift as well? I mean, your tax dollars partially supported the EMS provider.

When it comes to medical 911 calls, I'm erring on the side of privacy, for the patient's and family's sake.


----------



## minneola24 (Jul 7, 2009)

el Murpharino said:


> Are you that naive to compare 911 tapes to top secret military communications that could jeopardize national security?  A poor comparison, my friend.



I think he was just related the two responding to the post saying that whatever the public pays for we should be able to hear/listen/watch.


----------



## MendoEMT (Jul 7, 2009)

Having worked in county fire/medical dispatch I feel as though the 911 tapes and other communications that are recorded in dispatch are a matter of public record.  Making these tapes public is a way of assuring that there is a level of transparency in the dispatching process, a way for the public to know and understand how their crises are being handled on the dispatching side of it.  Also, because of HIPPA regulations any names and addresses are deleted before being made public, so unless the caller is wildly famous, generally there is a level of privacy or anonymity there.


----------



## HotelCo (Jul 7, 2009)

I don't see a problem with releasing them, as long as names and addresses are omitted.


----------



## EMTinNEPA (Jul 7, 2009)

rmellish said:


> Your tax dollars pay for medicare and medicaid as well. Do you want access to their health records? You want a list of patients treated every shift as well? I mean, your tax dollars partially supported the EMS provider.
> 
> When it comes to medical 911 calls, I'm erring on the side of privacy, for the patient's and family's sake.



In the same vein, then, by the logic here, the trip sheet for every call run by an FD-based EMS service should be public record, since our tax dollars pay for the FD.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jul 7, 2009)

EMTinNEPA said:


> In the same vein, then, by the logic here, the trip sheet for every call run by an FD-based EMS service should be public record, since our tax dollars pay for the FD.



Ironically, autopsies are a public record as well. One of the few medical records that is of public view. 

R/r 911


----------



## Seaglass (Jul 9, 2009)

I can see the argument for transparency, and don't think they should be made entirely private, but I think that there should be more legal protections. 

People are at their most vulnerable when they're calling 911. It's got to be awful for everyone you know to get to listen to you sobbing on the phone to dispatch. Or imagine that your kid or spouse just died in an incident that was called in, and now can't avoid listening to their last minutes because they're all over the news. 

Besides, some people are stupid. If some kid thinks a call will wind up public, he might be slower to make the call. 

I think that the caller and the victim (or family, if they're dead) should always have to give consent before the calls can be put on air. Failing that, I think identifying details and medical information should always be redacted. At the very least, I think the victim should have the right to request that a call not be made public.


----------

