Director upholds Orem City’s decision to withhold body‑cam footage, citing fair‑trial and investigatory risks

The Department of Government Records denied an appeal by the Salt Lake Tribune seeking body‑worn camera footage from Orem Police Department about the September shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University. Director Lonnie Pearson conducted an in‑camera review of representative videos and concluded the city’s decision to classify the footage as protected under GRAMA §3‑05‑10 was appropriate because disclosure could interfere with an active criminal investigation and the defendant’s right to a fair trial.

Salt Lake Tribune counsel said Orem City initially denied a request for all body‑cam footage on October 23 and later followed a notice from the Utah County Attorney’s Office asking law enforcement agencies to restrict related records. "The Tribune is left wondering how that classification decision actually got made," counsel said, asking the director to do a full in‑camera review or require production after the statutory time bar associated with the investigative exemption lapses.

Orem City described a broad search that identified just over 90 video records and, after narrowing to the Tribune’s scope, roughly 50 body‑cam files responsive to the request. The city said it consulted the Utah County prosecution team, which issued a notice asking agencies to classify related records as protected while criminal proceedings and discovery were ongoing. The prosecution and defense both told the director they had not yet received the files through the normal discovery pipeline (State Bureau of Investigation processing) and argued release to the public could prejudice the investigation and jury selection.

Pearson reviewed a representative sample of the footage and concluded the videos include graphic aftermath material, witness interviews, canvassing of neighborhoods and other content that could reveal medical or private information as well as evidentiary detail. He concluded the petitioner did not meet the burden to show public‑interest disclosure outweighed the interests favoring restriction and denied the appeal. Pearson also declined to keep the matter open for future staged release but said future GRAMA requests based on changed circumstances would not be deemed unreasonably duplicative.

The director will issue a written decision within seven business days; parties may appeal to district court within 30 calendar days.