Alireza Seifi v. Dedham, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20190234)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor ofR ecords February 15, 2019 SPR19/234 Officer John Rinn Town of Dedham Police Department 600 High Street Dedham, MA 02026 Dear Officer Rinn: I have received the petition of Alireza Sei:fi appealing the response of the Town of Dedham-Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Mr. Seifi requested a copy ofrecord(s) pertaining to two identified individuals concerning an incident that occurred on December 12, 1996. The Department denied Mr. Seifi's request in its entirety pursuant to Exemption (a) and the Domestic Violence statute. As a result, Mr. Seifi petitioned the Supervisor of Records, and this appeal was opened. The Public Records Law The Public Records Law strongly favors disclosure by creating a presumption that all governmental records are public records. G. L. c. 66, § lOA(d); 950 C.M.R. 32.03(4). "Public records" is broadly defined to include all documentary materials or data, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by any officer or employee of any town of the Commonwealth, unless falling within a statutory exemption. G. L. c. 4, § 7(26). It is the burden of the records custodian to demonstrate the application of an exemption in order to withhold a requested record. G. L. c. 66, § lO(b)(iv) (written response must "identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based ... "); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3); see also Dist. Attorney for the Norfolk Dist. v. Flatley, 419 Mass. 507, 511 (1995) (custodian has the burden of establishing the applicability of an exemption). One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre• pre@sec.state.ma.us

Officer John Rinn SPR19/234 Page 2 February 15, 2019 In camera inspection At this time, I wish to inspect the responsive incident report in camera to verify whether any portion of the individual record may be released after redacting exempt material under the Department's Exemption (a) claim. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(6) (Supervisor may require an inspection of the requested record(s) in camera during any investigation or proceeding initiated pursuant to 950 C.M.R. 32.08). After I complete my review of the document, I will return the record to your custody and issue an opinion on the public or exempt nature of the document. My authority to require the submission of documents for an in camera inspection emanates from the Code of Massachusetts Regulations. 950 C.M.R. 32.08(6) (Supervisor may require an inspection of the requested record(s) in camera during any investigation or proceeding initiated pursuant to 950 C.M.R. 32.08); see also G. L.c. 66, § 1 (Supervisor statutorily empowered to adopt regulations to implement the provisions of the Public Records Law). This office interprets the in camera inspection process to be analogous to that utilized by the judicial system. See Rock v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, 384 Mass. 198,206 (1981) (administrative agency entitled deference in the interpretation of its own regulations). -----------~-~~-----~-~----------~-------~~--~------- Documents are not voluntarily submitted, but rather are submitted pursuant to an order by this office that an in camera inspection is necessary to make a proper finding. Documents are submitted for the limited purpose of inspection. This office is not the custodian of records examined in camera, therefore, any request made to this office for records being reviewed in camera will be denied. See 950 C.M.R. 32.03 (defining "custodian" as the government employee who in the normal course of his duties has access to or control over records). This office has a long history of cooperation with governmental agencies with respect to in camera inspection. Custodians submit a copy of the relevant documents to this office upon a promise of confidentiality. This office does not release documents reviewed in camera to anyone under any circumstances. Upon a determination of the public record status, documents reviewed in camera are promptly returned to the custodian. To operate in any other fashion would seriously impede our ability to function and would certainly affect our credibility within the legal community. The Department may provide this office with a further explanation of its position regarding the applicability of its exemption claims to accompany the responsive record. However, please be advised that, unlike the materials provided for in camera review, any such additional correspondence would be placed in the file for this appeal and would be subject to public disclosure as a public record. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive incident report for in camera inspection without delay. Failure to comply with

Officer John Rinn SPR19/234 Page 3 February 15, 2019 this order may result in a referral of this matter to the Office of the Attorney General for further action. G. L. c. 66, § lOA(b). Sincerely, ~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Alireza Seifi