However, county officials say they owe no obligation to explain their investigation, other than to tell the public that they conducted one.

"This case is not about weighing and balancing the public's interest," said Valerie Wilde, attorney for Salt Lake County. Rather, "we are attempting to protect the process of the investigation."

Wilde argued that declaring the report public would set a precedent for other sexual harassment reports.

Justice Ronald Nehring asked whether the county would deny the request even now, after several years have passed, if the paper asked for the report.

Wilde said the county would deny the request today because the county is trying to protect its investigative process, which includes protecting the identity of the victim and witnesses.

The report also contains "private life" information about the perpetrator, which should be considered an unwarranted invasion of his privacy, Wilde said. Besides, the details of Floros' misconduct already had been made public.

Nehring, who said he had reviewed the report, indicated that not all of the misconduct had been disclosed.

Chief Justice Christine Durham said the issue seemed to be whether Floros' privacy outweighs the public's interest in reviewing that the investigation was free from political bias.

The justices took both arguments under advisement and will issue a written ruling in the coming months.

---

E-mail: gfattah@desnews.com