Jennette Barnes v. New Bedford, City of - Police Department (SPR 20190367)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records February 27, 2019 SPR19/0367 Officer Annemarie P. Lefever Records Access Officer City of New Bedford-Police Department 871 Rockdale Avenue New Bedford, MA 02740 Dear Ms. Lefever: I have received the petition of Jennette Barnes appealing the response of the Bedford Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § lOA; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, on January 3, 2019, Ms. Barnes requested "a copy of the actual police report for simple assault on 5/21/17 around 1-2 p.m.?" After several communications between Ms. Barnes and the Department, the Department provided a response on January 7, 2019, which included responsive records in redacted form. Unsatisfied with the Department's response, Ms. Barnes petitioned this office and this appeal, SPRl 9/0367, was opened as a result. 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); 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 ah exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian must not only cite an exemption, but must also state why the exemption applies to the withheld or redacted portion of the responsive record. If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 1 O(b )(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. 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 Annemarie P. LeFever SPR19/0367 Page 2 February 27, 2019 The Department's January fh response In its January 7, 2019 response, the Department indicated that it redacted " ... the names and identifying information of the victim(s) and voluntary witnesses as well as witness statements pursuant to [Exemption (f)] ... " The Department explains that it" ... has redacted witness names, statements and details that if released would create a grave risk of directly or indirectly identifying the witnesses. The redaction of this information is designed to allow the Department's investigators to continue to provide assurance of confidentiality to private citizens so that they will speak openly about matters under investigation ...." The Department cites case law to support its position. Further, the Department states that it also redacted" ... names and identifying information, and highly personal information of specific individuals including social security numbers and personal phone numbers pursuant to [Exemption (c)]. .. " Subsequent to the opening of this appeal, I learned that on February 26, 2019, the Department provided Ms. Barnes with a supplemental response which included an updated version of the responsive records pertaining to this request. Conclusion Accordingly, whereas this appeal was opened because of the Department's initial provision of redacted records, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. Ms. Barnes may appeal the substantive nature of the Department's response within ninety calendar days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Jennette Barnes