Decker's response to Vonderheide's complaint concurred, stating that the video records "would reveal the capabilities and scope of the county video surveillance system in the courthouse, and would jeopardize the ability of the sheriff's office to provide protection within the courthouse," according to the state ruling. But the state knocked down that argument, with Glinn ruling that "the release of video records that are obtained for security purposes does not automatically constitute a reasonable likelihood of risk or harm to security." The video, she wrote, is of areas open to the public, and just because a video record is used for security purposes doesn't automatically mean its release would jeopardize public safety.

Releasing the video would tend to give away info such as camera resolution and effect of lighting (can you see VPL on a black skirt, etc?), but in a tax-payer-subsidized public environment, you should expect to give it up to anyone with a legitimate cause of action ...