The Bite Heard 'Round the World!

Ok... so maybe we got a little carried away with the title. It's hard to make anything grandiose out of a dog bite case. But in this case, it may have brought attention to a District Attorney's race where publicity has been sorely lacking.

Two years ago, District Attorney Brandenburg's cute and cuddly little K-9 bit one of her neighbors -Elaine Hazelrigg- on the face causing some bleeding and a chipped tooth. When Animal Control officers arrived they found that the DA's pooch was an illegal! Yep, Brandenburg's perp pet was unlicensed and found not to be current on their rabies.

Hazelrigg, who lives on a street of high-end homes, said she decided to sue Brandenburg after the DA denied fault for her injuries and refused to pay her medical and dental expenses.

"There was no remorse whatsoever. Zero," she said. "I wasn't in it for the money."

- Albuquerque Journal (Subscription)

As happens in many civil suits, the case was eventually settled and the two parties went on their way. So far, there's really nothing particularly remarkable about the case. In fact, the only thing that is remarkable about the case is that Brandenburg and her attorney asked that the case be sealed - and the court helpfully obliged.

Attorney James Johansen, who represented Brandenburg in the suit, said no. He said the case was sealed because of concerns by the DA that file documents revealed the location of her home.

"There has to be a balance here in protecting public officials and letting the public know what officials are doing in their private lives," Johansen said.

But Brandenburg's home address is easily and widely available from public sources. [emphasis added]

-Albuquerque Journal (Subscription)

That last bit is the problem. If Brandenburg's address is readily available then sealing the record is unnecessary and unwarranted.

...Don Kochersberger, a lawyer for Hazelrigg, said one document in the case file — a summons issued to Brandenburg — had previously been sealed because it disclosed the DA's home address.

-Albuquerque Journal (Subscription)

This wasn't a nasty divorce where very personal and embarrassing details about the sex lives and personal habits of the contestants find their way into the public record. Without doubt there are times when sealing a case is both appropriate and necessary.

(Sidebar)
You'll no doubt remember an infamous child custody case where the alleged sexual habits of a candidate for U.S. Senate were made public after the Chicago Tribune sued in California for the release of those sealed records. The improper release of those records resulted in Jack Ryan ex-husband of actress Jerri Ryan withdrawing from the race a mere 3 months before the election and Barrack Hussein Obama becoming the Junior Senator from Illinois.
(End Sidebar)

In the Brandenburg Bite case, it appears that the court had more options than to seal the entire case. Paperwork that included the DA's home address had already been sealed so the only real reason to seal the case would be to avoid public scrutiny.

Folks, most of the time the cover-up is what gets you into trouble. Is it important that DA Brandenburg was engaged in a civil contest with her neighbor? Was it important that the licensing and vaccination of her dog had lapsed? Generally speaking... No. There probably isn't a pet owner anywhere that hasn't missed sending their fees in or been a little late getting to the vet.

The elephant (or donkey if you prefer) in the room here is that DA Brandenburg received special treatment that worked to her political benefit by sealing a case that would normally have been of little consequence or public interest. It's the cover-up stupid! But the action taken by the DA to seal this case gives an indication of the DA's integrity and her willingness to hide even the smallest of embarrassments from the public. It's the bite heard 'round the world - or at least around town.

----- Update -----
A number of posters have complained about our take on this particular case. Let's be clear here... We don't have a problem with maintaining a certain amount of informational security where law enforcement officials are concerned. In this case - a minor civil suit - the DA chose to ask the court to place the entire case under seal when all that was truly necessary was to place documents that revealed her home address under seal.

When an elected official (even one in law enforcement) decides to extend the privilege of secrecy beyond the point where it's absolutely necessary, their actions invite suspicion. After all, civil court is a public proceeding and therefore rightfully a part of the public record. There were alternatives here and the DA chose a path that would protect not only her physical person but her political self - the latter of which has no right to the court's protection.