To the editor:

I am writing to express concern with the level of detail provided in the police blotter published in the paper.

I have always enjoyed reading small town police blotters – finding them both informative and often charming. But while I fully support freedom of information and the role the paper plays in sharing news of note and importance to the residents of Pelham, I have concerns with publishing street names in the blotter which, in a small town like Pelham, are often sufficient identifiers to eliminate any privacy for the callers.

Your recent issue, for example, referred to a suicide attempt by a minor and included the intersection where that child lives and included direct quotes from them when experiencing a very serious mental health issue. Publishing this kind of identifying information when a minor, in particular, is in a most vulnerable state has the potential to be damaging if not devastating. Similarly, publishing the details of a domestic dispute between two men and mentioning the street they live on would be, in many cases in Pelham, sufficient information to identify exactly who they are.

Pelham is a small town and it doesn’t take much to fuel gossip. While the information you share is important, so too is the knowledge that when people in Pelham call police for help when they most need it – they do not need to balance that need with whether it’s worth their potentially private or serious matters being broadcast for all the town to know. I encourage you to please reconsider publishing intersections that can lift any veil of privacy. The street details add little to the value of the information. A modest tweak to instead list neighborhoods (in Pelham Heights, in Chester Park, in Pelhamwood, etc.) would sacrifice little while going a long way to address this issue.

Thank you for your consideration.

Katie Butterfield