MA Public Records Search
← Back to Search

Rayla Campbell v. Fall River, City of - Police Department (SPR 20211955)

Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 08-02-2021

ClosedAppealPetitioner Won

SPR 20211955 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Rayla Campbell concerning records held by Fall River, City of - Police Department, opened 08-02-2021. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.

Case Details

Case Number
20211955
Case Type
Appeal
Case Subtype
Initial
Status
Closed
Requester
Rayla Campbell
Custodian
Fall River, City of - Police Department
Date Opened
08-02-2021
Date Closed
08-12-2021
Date Request Submitted
07-16-2021
Response Provided Date
07-21-2021
Petitions Regarding Fees
No
Time to Comply
3 Business Days
Went to Court
No

PDF Document

Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records August 12, 2021 SPR21/1955 Cynthia M. Page Records Access Officer City of Fall River Police Department 685 Pleasant Street Fall River, MA 02722 Dear Ms. Page: I have received the petition of Rayla Campbell appealing the response of the City of Fall River Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Specifically, Ms. Campbell requested: “[a]ll request report for [an identified address in] Fall River.” In its July 19, 2021 response, the Department cited Exemption (c) due to personal privacy. In its July 21, 2021 response, the Department explained that it has no arrest records for the identified address; however, the only report it does have cannot be released due to privacy issues under Exemption (c). As a result, Ms. Campbell petitioned the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor), 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, § 10A(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, § 10(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

Cynthia M. Page SPR21/1955 Page 2 August 12, 2021 If there are any fees associated with a response a written, good faith estimate must be provided. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2). Once fees are paid, a records custodian must provide the responsive records. Exemption (c) Exemption (c) applies to: personnel and medical files or information and any other materials or data relating to a specifically named individual, the disclosure of which may constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy; provided, however, that this subclause shall not apply to records related to a law enforcement misconduct investigation G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(c). Analysis under Exemption (c) is subjective in nature and requires a balancing of the public's right to know against the relevant privacy interests at stake. Torres v. Attorney Gen., 391 Mass. 1, 9 (1984); Attorney Gen. v. Assistant Comm'r of Real Property Dep’t., 380 Mass. 623, 625 (1980). Therefore, determinations must be made on a case by case basis. This clause does not protect all data relating to specifically named individuals. Rather, there are factors to consider when assessing the weight of the privacy interest at stake: (1) whether disclosure would result in personal embarrassment to an individual of normal sensibilities; (2) whether the materials sought contain intimate details of a highly personal nature; and (3) whether the same information is available from other sources. See People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) v. Dep't of Agric. Res., 477 Mass. 280, 292 (2017). This exemption requires a balancing test which provides that where the public interest in obtaining the requested information substantially outweighs the seriousness of any invasion of privacy, the private interest in preventing disclosure must yield. PETA, 477 Mass. at 291. The public has a recognized interest in knowing whether public servants are carrying out their duties in a law abiding and efficient manner. Id. at 292. Based upon the Department’s July 21st response, I find that the Department has not met its burden in responding and withholding the record, in its entirety, under Exemption (c) due to privacy. Burden of specificity; duty to segregate Under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be upon the custodian to prove with specificity the exemption which applies. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv); see also Globe Newspaper Co. -------------------- v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511. The Department claimed the record cannot be disclosed due to privacy under Exemption (c). However, the Department did not meet its burden of demonstrating how the responsive record, in its entirety, is

Cynthia M. Page SPR21/1955 Page 3 August 12, 2021 exempt from disclosure. See Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289-90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). The Department must produce any non-exempt, segregable portions of the public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a). In addition, the Department did not identify the record it is in possession that it is withholding under Exemption (c). To deny access to a record under the Public Records Law, a records access officer must identify the record, categories of records, or portions of the record it intends to withhold. G. L. c. 66, § (b)(iv); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(3)(c)(4). Order Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Ms. Campbell with a response to the request in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within 10 business days. 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. Sincerely, ,uJtJWa ·-- o .fJ A ~ ~ ~ - ~ Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Rayla Campbell