An official request for Watertown Police body-worn camera footage related to the controversial January 17 arrest of Millie Smith has been formally denied, intensifying public interest and speculation surrounding the incident.
Watertown Post Breaking News
An official request for Watertown Police body-worn camera footage related to the controversial January 17 incident of Millie Smith has been formally denied, intensifying public interest and speculation surrounding the incident.
The request was submitted Feb. 5 by Donnie Lee Barrigar, who runs the widely followed North Country News Facebook page and is no stranger to civic proceedings and City Hall interactions. Barrigar sought the release of police video and all related documents from the night Smith was accused of miss handling a police officer at Pete’s Trattoria on Breen Avenue, following her involvement in helping a patron who was choking.
In a written response, city officials acknowledged the FOIL request but stated they must “respectfully deny access to the records at this time.” The denial cites New York Public Officers Law §87(2)(e)(i) — a provision that allows withholding law-enforcement records when disclosure could interfere with ongoing investigations or judicial actions.
According to the city’s letter, the requested body-cam footage and documents relate to an active case currently under investigation and subject to possible prosecution. City attorneys said releasing the materials now could affect law enforcement and court proceedings. The response also notes that Barrigar — or any requester — may appeal the denial in writing within 30 days, a standard part of FOIL appeals procedure.
A Charged Local Issue
The arrest of Smith, who witnesses say was trying to help someone in distress, has been one of the most discussed and debated topics in Watertown in recent weeks. The unusual circumstances — a civilian stepping in to assist a choking individual, followed by her arrest weeks later— sparked public conversation and widespread curiosity about exactly what happened.
Despite the legal basis for withholding records during an open investigation, many community members and commentators argue that releasing the footage now — even if edited or redacted for sensitive information — would go a long way toward dispelling rumors and clarifying the facts.
On social media forums and in comment threads across local platforms, a common refrain has taken shape: “Why let it drag on?” Residents contend that transparent disclosure, regardless of outcome, could reduce speculation, quell misinformation, and lend trust to the official narrative by showing exactly what unfolded.
Body-worn cameras were introduced to improve transparency and accountability in police-public interactions. In situations like this one, advocates for release argue that providing visual evidence sooner rather than later is consistent with that principle.
Legal Timing vs. Community Expectations
Under New York’s Freedom of Information Law, agencies are permitted — and often required — to withhold certain records while an investigation is open. However, the exemption that allows for delay is not permanent; once a case concludes, the legal presumption generally shifts toward disclosure, and departments are expected to release records unless another exemption applies.
For now, the city stands by its decision to withhold the footage based on the ongoing status of the case. The denial, however, has done little to dampen conversation, and the community remains eager for clarity.
As the situation evolves — including any appeals to the denial or changes in case status — the Watertown Post will continue to provide updates and context so residents can stay informed about developments in this highly discussed local matter.
About the Author
