Christian A. Williams v. Quincy, City of - Police Department (SPR 20200612)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records April 10, 2020 SPR20/0612 Lieutenant Terence McDonnell Quincy Police Department Inspector of Divisions 1 Sea Street Quincy, MA 02169 Dear Lt. McDonnell: I have received the petition of Attorney Christian Williams appealing the response of the Quincy Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Attorney Williams requested five categories of records for seven named officers, including timesheets, firearm discharge reports, force reports, internal affairs records, etc. The Department provided a response to Attorney Williams on March 30, 2020. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Attorney Williams petitioned this office and SPR20/0612 was opened as a result. The Department’s March 30th response In its March 30th response, the Department states “[g]iven your position as staff attorney at the Committee for Public Counsel, the Department respectfully maintains that if this request for records is being made in in your capacity as a defense attorney representing a client who has been charged and now being prosecuted, you have a unique right of access to these documents via Rule 17 of the Massachusetts Rules of Criminal Procedure. As you are able to request the documents in question via a motion for third party records (a unique right not available to the public), the Department maintains that the provisions of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1)(a) apply. If this request is not being made in your capacity as described above, please declare such and the Department will reconsider your request.” Pending litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.06(1)(g) provides in pertinent part: 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

Lieutenant Terence McDonnell SPR20/0612 Page 2 April 10, 2020 a request for records in which an individual, or representative of the individual has a unique right of access by statutory, regulatory, judicial or other applicable means, shall not be considered a request for public records 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: the Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: 1. the public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation. A staff attorney of the Public Records Division requested the Department provide more information to support its claim that Attorney Williams may have a unique right of access to the requested records. The Department provided supporting documentation to this office on April 9, 2020, regarding a pending case in Superior Court, and how the requested records directly related to Quincy Police Officers involved in this case. Further, the Department provided supporting documentation of correspondence with Quincy Police Prosecutor Tim Moran that it is likely that Attorney Williams may now be assigned to the case. The Department notes “[u]nfortunately, given Superior Court staffing limitations related to the ongoing health crisis, I am unable to contact the Court in an effort to confirm Mr. Williams' status regarding this case.” In his March 30, 2020, appeal, Attorney Williams states “The Quincy Police department denied my public records request. My request and their denial letter are attached in the same document. I would like to appeal this denial.” Based on the foregoing, in conjunction with the Department’s responses that contend Attorney Williams has a unique right of access to the requested records, and that the requested records are likely the subject of dispute in a Superior Court case, it is unclear what the basis of Attorney Williams’s appeal is. Specifically, it is unclear if Attorney Williams is disputing the Department’s claim that he has a unique right of access to the requested records. Attorney Williams is reminded that all petitions for appeal “shall specifically describe the nature of the requestor’s objections to the response or failure to timely respond.” 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1)(f). Conclusion Accordingly, Attorney Williams must describe his specific objections to the Department’s response.

Lieutenant Terence McDonnell SPR20/0612 Page 3 April 10, 2020 Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Christian Williams, Esq.