The saying goes that a picture is worth a thousand words. Sometimes they’re worth a few questions too — especially when the photo is a mugshot from the Douglas County Jail.

Apologies to those of you who tuned into Town Talk for the latest information on business happenings, development talk, City Hall scuttlebutt and other such topics. I’ll get back to those soon enough. But as some of you may know, my other role here at the newspaper is as managing editor. So, today I want to use the column to answer a question I get from readers somewhat frequently: Why does the Journal-World sometimes run a mugshot with a crime story and other times not?

The answer is pretty simple: Many times the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office won’t provide us with a mugshot, more formally known by law enforcement as a booking photo. I had Conrad Swanson, the J-W’s crime and courts reporter, check his records to determine how often this happens. Since December, he has requested booking photos 30 times. We’ve been denied access 16 times.

That seems like a lot to me, especially given that in many counties the booking photos are simply placed on a county website for anyone to see. Some area newspapers, for example, run a regular online feature that basically publishes the booking photos of everyone who is detained at their area jails.

I don’t have any desire to do that in Lawrence. I don’t think it would be a good use of our time, and I don’t want to be accused of running booking photos simply to satisfy some morbid curiosities. But I do believe there are good reasons to run booking photos with significant crime stories, and I’m disappointed when we are unable to do so.

The biggest benefit of a booking photo is it helps readers to identify the accused. Our crime stories generally name people accused of a crime. For some readers, a name is all they need to know. But many times a reader may know a person by sight but not by name. That’s where a booking photo can be useful. You may read a story about a person accused of battery and not know the person by name. But then you see his photo, and you realize that he is the babysitter’s boyfriend. To me, that falls into the valuable category of news-you-can-use.

Other times, some of the accused have pretty common names. A booking photo helps readers understand that is not the John Smith they know. (Or perhaps it is.)

There are other reasons we think booking photos are valuable pieces of information that the public is entitled to have, but I’ll stop with those two because I suspect at this point you are wondering why the sheriff’s office doesn’t release all booking photos.

The first thing to know on that front is that the sheriff’s office does not believe it is required to give us the photos under the law. They point to an old attorney general’s opinion to back up that belief. Maybe a court someday will find otherwise, or maybe the Kansas Legislature will pass a law making it clear that the photos do have to be released. The Legislature actually has increased access to some parts of the legal system, most notably arrest affidavits.

What is clear is that the sheriff’s office is allowed to release the photos, if it so chooses. When we are given a reason for why a mugshot is not released, it most often is that the matter is still under investigation, and thus the release of the photo could compromise that investigation. I’ve had good conversations about what that means, most notably with Douglas County District Attorney Charles Branson.

A spokeswoman with the sheriff’s office said most often it is the district attorney’s office that asks the sheriff’s office to not release a mugshot. Branson told me there is mainly just one reason his office makes that request: They’re afraid publishing the mugshot in the newspaper may lead to a false identification by a witness in a crime.

Despite what you see on television crime dramas, suspect lineups are pretty rare. More often, the first time a witness or victim is asked to identify the accused is in the courtroom. Branson said that if a mugshot is taken shortly after the crime has been committed, that can be problematic. Here’s an example: The person in the mugshot is wearing a blue KU shirt. The witness remembers that the person she saw was wearing a blue KU shirt, but may be less certain about the person’s facial features. The witness sees the mugshot in the paper, sees that it is the same shirt, and makes the identification based off the shirt instead of the actual person.

I agree that wouldn’t be good, although I note that the problem isn’t the publication of the mugshot but rather a witness failing to adhere to the fundamental rule that holds the entire justice system together: Tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. But still, this is a correctable situation. Many jurisdictions require people who are having a mugshot taken to wear a smock over their clothing. If you have ever seen a Johnson County mugshot, you’ll notice the smock. I asked the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office whether creating such a practice would cause a problem for it. A spokeswoman said it would not. I plan to write a formal letter to the sheriff asking for that procedure to be put in place. I’ll keep you updated on how that goes.

I’ve already been told that such a practice likely won’t eliminate every instance of a mugshot being denied. Indeed, a quick review of the recent denials raises questions about whether there are other reasons they are not released. I’m hoping to understand those better in the future, and we’ll do a better job on our end documenting what we ask for and the reasons for denial.

Some of you may think this is a lot of effort for a relatively minor issue. I don’t view it that way, though. The Journal-World is in the information business, and having access to information is critical to our success. But even more importantly, we’re in the watchdog business. Because the stakes can be so high, it is imperative that we play a watchdog role in the judicial system. Community members deserve to know that punishments fit the crime, that the accused are being treated equitably, that victims are being treated fairly and that the system works for all. Understanding who has been accused of a crime is a fundamental piece of information.

I have a lot of respect for the men and women who work in the Douglas County justice system. They work hard, and we don’t want to make their jobs more difficult. But jurisdictions across the country have figured out how to routinely release mugshots without creating significant problems in administering justice.

I’m confident we can figure out how to do so in Douglas County too.