WASILLA -- The head of the Alaska State Troopers has apologized to the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman newspaper for the actions of a sergeant who seized a reporter's camera memory card during a traffic stop near Willow in September.
Division director Col. James Cockrell also pledged to give all troopers search and seizure training, the Frontiersman reported this week.
The incident involving troopers Sgt. Mike Ingram, a 12-year veteran, began after reporter Brian O'Connor took photos of troopers arresting an assault suspect. O'Connor drove away, only to be pulled over by Ingram a few miles south on the Parks Highway.
O'Connor said in an email in mid-September that Ingram mentioned only the photos -- not any kind of traffic or equipment violation -- when he pulled him over. The trooper asked for O'Connor's driver's license, but not his insurance or registration documents.
Ingram demanded the reporter's memory card and O'Connor gave it to him.
Though the card was returned the same day, the Frontiersman filed an official complaint with the Department of Public Safety over what it considered an unconstitutional seizure.
The resulting 4-month investigation by the Office of Professional Standards culminated in a 680-page report that was completed this month, the newspaper reported Wednesday.
The Frontiersman and Alaska Dispatch News requested copies of the final report. The state denied both requests, citing a state law that makes personnel records confidential.
Cockrell met with editorial staff Tuesday at the paper's offices outside Wasilla. Cockrell told the paper the report found Ingram had no legal right to seize the memory card.
"We dropped the ball," he told the group, according to the newspaper.
The colonel also said all state troopers will undergo a 4-hour "refresher course" this spring on search and seizure law and the Frontiersman incident is expected to come up during the trainings. He wouldn't tell the paper whether Ingram faced any disciplinary action but said he was still on active duty, the paper reported.
Cockrell told the paper Ingram thought he was "acting in the best interest of the department," and his supervisor authorized the seizure of the memory card.
Public safety officials have refused to answer questions about any specifics of the stop, including whether Ingram had any probable cause to pull O'Connor over in the first place. The state denied an ADN request for the transcript of any radio traffic between the trooper and emergency dispatchers during the stop.
A public safety spokesperson said Cockrell was unavailable for an interview Thursday.
Frontiersman publisher Mark Kelsey in an email Thursday called it "critical to a thriving democracy that journalists are able to report on public employees without obstruction" and said the constitutional issues at stake made the stop an issue of broad public importance.
"We are gratified that the troopers also recognized the gravity of the situation and took it seriously," Kelsey wrote.
"We are considering this matter behind us," he continued. "We would have preferred a speedier resolution, but the thoroughness and sincerity of the resolution is ultimately more important."
Kelsey praised the "level of accountability and personal responsibility" he said Cockrell has brought to the culture of the troopers.
Still, the seizure of the memory card raised alarms for several national journalism experts who read newspaper accounts when it happened.
They said Ingram's actions appeared to violate three constitutional protections: the First Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of speech and of the press; the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure; and the 14th Amendment, which prevents states from denying anyone "life, liberty or property, without due process of law."
The traffic stop alone, if made strictly to seize the memory card, constituted a Fourth Amendment violation, according to Kelly McBride, a vice president of academic programs at The Poynter Institute for Media Studies.
"If a trooper did not have probable cause, they're not allowed to do that," McBride said.
Mickey Osterreicher, a veteran photojournalist and general counsel for the National Press Photographers Association, conducts police trainings around the country on press freedom protections.
The only circumstance under which police officers can seize a camera is if they have probable cause that a serious crime was captured in the photos and there's an imminent threat the photos could be lost, and even then, they need a subpoena or warrant to view the pictures, Osterreicher said during an earlier interview.
Actions like Ingram's have a chilling effect on journalists, he said. "You can know your rights, but when you're faced with somebody with a badge and a gun, it gets very personal if you (don't) want to go to jail that day."