Fighting for Transparency: Reinvestigation Workgroup's Bold Legal Challenge Against Coon Rapids Police

In a big step toward holding police accountable, the Reinvestigation Workgroup has filed a lawsuit against the Coon Rapids Police Department. They’re pushing for faster access to body-worn camera footage, so the public can see what really happens during use-of-force incidents.

"Our organization is a strong believer in truth, facts, and transparency. It’s why we work with families impacted by police violence to help them understand how their loved one died," the Reinvestigation Workgroup said in a statement. "We dig deeper to get the factual narrative of what happened, not just the narrative set by law enforcement and reported by media. We do this whenever there is a police shooting."

This legal move underscores the importance of transparency in policing—especially with so many recent events raising serious concerns about how law enforcement operates.

According to mappingpoliceviolence.org, killings by police in the US have risen every year since 2018. The call for police accountability gained significant traction, in the wake of tragedies like the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, which sparked nationwide protests and demands for systemic reform. Activists, community leaders, and legislators have increasingly recognized that transparency in police operations is essential for rebuilding trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve.

Advocating for Public Access

The decision to file a lawsuit against the Coon Rapids Police Department was motivated by an officer-involved death and the subsequent lack of timely access to body cam footage. This lawsuit challenges the ongoing investigation exception that often allows police departments to withhold critical footage from the public. 

In a letter brief to the judge overseeing the case, the Reinvestigation Workgroup's lawyer Paul Bosman said, "The behavior of the officers, whether proper or improper is not the point of the argument, the issue is the transparency of the conduct of the men and women who have a legal right to take our lives, as that transparency is encoded in the Minnesota Data Practices Act."

Under Minnesota law, body-worn camera  footage must be released within 14 days of a use-of-force incident resulting in death, unless a chief law enforcement officer asserts that its release would interfere with an ongoing investigation. The Reinvestigation Workgroup contends that when this exception is misused, it hinders accountability and transparency.

The lawsuit emphasizes the need for immediate public access to body-worn camera footage to facilitate accountability and informed community engagement. By challenging the Coon Rapids Police Department's practices, the organization aims to set a precedent that could reshape how police agencies handle data transparency in Minnesota and beyond.

The Importance of Public Scrutiny

One of the central arguments in the lawsuit is that the ongoing investigation exception should not be used as a blanket justification for withholding footage. The lawsuit asserts that transparency should take precedence, particularly when the actions of law enforcement are under scrutiny.

"Public scrutiny is a cornerstone of our democracy," the Reinvestigation Workgroup said. "This becomes especially important when a police officer uses deadly force and takes the life of an American citizen. The footage should be subject to public scrutiny. It is the only way for us all to do better." 

Data transparency is crucial for fostering accountability and trust in law enforcement. The Reinvestigation Workgroup’s efforts to secure public access to body-worn camera footage represent a broader movement to ensure that police practices are subject to oversight. When communities have access to information about police conduct, they can engage more effectively with local officials and demand accountability.