Todd Wallack v. Executive Office of Public Safety and Security - Department of State Police (SPR 20160777)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Shawn A. Williams Supervisor ofR ecords October 18, 2016 SPR16/777 Law Department Department of State Police Office of the Chief Legal Counsel 4 70 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01 702 I have received the petition of Todd. Wallack of The Boston Globe appealing the Department of State Police's (Department) response to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66 § lO(b); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2). Specifically, Mr. Wallack requested "a copy of the electronic log/list of cases referred to the internal review section of the agency's Division of Standards and Training, including public columns available in the log." Previous response and determination This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPRl 6/004 Determinations of the Supervisor of Records (January 29, 2016; April 21, 2016; May 17, 2016; June 23, 2016; September 2, 2016). In my January 29 determination, I found the Department met its burden of specificity to withhold the complaint classification, ID number, trooper name, and the disposition for cases that remain ongoing pursuant to Exemption (f) of the Public Records Law. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(f). I declined to reverse this finding in my determinations dated April 21, May 17, June 23, and September 2, 2016. Subsequent to my September 2 determination, Mr. Wallack informed this office that he seeks clarification of certain issues regarding this matter. This appeal (SPRl 6/777) was opened as a result. Troop/Division number Based on the Department's response, I indicated in my previous determinations that the Department provided responsive records that contained information from the log including the received date, troop/division number, classification, ID number, last name, first name, middle initial and disposition for cases that have been completed. However, the Department omitted portions of the responsive record associated with open and ongoing investigations. OneAshburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 · (617) 727-2832 ·Fax (617) 727-5914 www.sec.state.ma. us/pre

Mr. Glenn M. Rooney, Esq. SPR16/777 Page2 October 18, 2016 In Mr. Wallack' s correspondence to this office dated September 16, 2016, he states that with respect to the "troop/division number," "the State Police withheld that data without citing any exemptions." Instead, he indicates he received "case numbers." I find the Department must clarify whether it is, in fact, withholding the "troop/division number" for closed or open investigations. Applicability of Exemption (/) Mr. Wallack also seeks clarification regarding the applicability of Exemption (f) to the responsive records. In his September 16 correspondence he indicates his belief that "some of the internal affairs investigations are not actually confidential and there is no evidence that releasing the names of troopers who are subjects of the investigations would pose any harm." Mr. Wallack provides an example of a particular state trooper to support this position. Exemption (f) permits the withholding of: investigatory materials necessarily compiled out of the public view by law enforcement or other investigatory officials the disclosure of which materials would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest G. L. c. 4, §7 (26)(f) A custodian of records generally must demonstrate a prejudice to investigative efforts in order to withhold requested records. Information relating to an ongoing investigation may be withheld if disclosure could alert suspects to the activities of investigative officials. Confidential investigative techniques may also be withheld indefinitely if disclosure is deemed to be prejudicial to future law enforcement activities. Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass 59, 62 (1976). An investigative agency is not required to demonstrate prejudice to withhold the identities of voluntary witnesses, informants, or complainants. Reinstein v. Police Commissioner of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 290 n.18 (1979). In light of the information provided in Mr. Wallack's September 16 correspondence, I find the Department must clarify whether disclosure of the entirety of the withheld records, including those related to investigations already made public, "would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest" as required by Exemption (f). I understand an attorney on my staff contacted you about this appeal and will provide a copy of Mr. Wallack' s September 16 correspondence. I understand the Department will provide a supplemental response that addresses the issues described above.

Mr. Glenn M. Rooney, Esq. SPR16/777 Page 3 October 18, 2016 Order Accordingly, the Department is hereby ordered to provide Mr. Wallack with a response to the request, prepared in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations. A copy of any such response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of this response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. cc: Mr. Todd Wallack