Very interesting article about the independent report about the state of the police department in the globe today: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/08/12/major_shift_in_police_oversight_is_urged/
Here is what an active newspaper interested in journalism and freedom of the press would do: they would go to court and make the administration turn over those documents that the city paid for to the professor at Northeastern University. They would file a freedom on information act on the contract that was signed with the professor, find our how much he was scheduled to be paid, and if he has been paid the total agreed upon amount. They would then go into superior court and argue before the judge that the city is just trying to parse words by calling it a "draft" report.
My understanding is that ALL documents are subject to FOIA requests, including drafts. There is no provision in the law to allow this lawyerly trick to be used. But, the Boston Globe and other local media sources are too cowardly to actively pursue journalistic integrity against the man behind the green curtain, with the thin skin and vindictive history.
Funny how the phrase "needs to be ...transparent" keeps coming up with this administration. As John Connelly said that's Kevin's word!
As I've been doing research on the lawsuit to force the City of Boston to hire more cops and address public safety in a better manner, I've been struck how virtually every minority I talk to has a story of bad policing, or police misconduct. Of course, I haven't been able to verify any of it, but what is apparent is the huge divide, mistrust and misunderstanding between law enforcement and the community. The administration just burying their head in the sand and dismissing this problem is disappointing to say the least.