Craig P. Shibley v. Worcester County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20220126)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records February 2, 2022 SPR22/0126 Mark Relation, Esq. Records Access Officer Office of the Worcester District Attorney 225 Main St. G301 Worcester, MA 01608 Dear Attorney Relation: I have received a petition from Craig Shibley appealing the response of the Office of the Worcester District Attorney (Office) to requests for public records. G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On December 11, 2021, Mr. Shibley requested, numerous targeted interview transcripts related to the 1951 murder of a State Trooper. Previous appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR22/0064 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (January 19, 2022). The Office responded on January 19, 2022. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, Mr. Shibley petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR22/0126, 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, § 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); 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). 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. 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

Mark Relation, Esq. SPR22/0126 Page 2 February 2, 2022 The Office’s January 19th response In its January 19th response, the Office stated that the requested records, “… constitute ‘investigatory materials" that are exempt from disclosure under the public records law. G.L. c. 4 § 7(26)(f).” In camera inspection In order to facilitate a determination as to the applicability of the Office’s claims to withhold the records in their entirety, the Office must provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive records for in camera inspection. After I complete my review of the documents, I will return the records to your custody and issue an opinion on the public or exempt nature of the record. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4). The authority to require the submission of records for an in camera inspection emanates from the Code of Massachusetts Regulations, 950 C.M.R. 32.08(4); see also G. L. c. 66, § 1. This office interprets the in camera inspection process to be analogous to that utilized by the judicial system. See Rock v. Massachusetts Comm'n Against Discrimination, 384 Mass. 198, 206 (1981) (administrative agency entitled deference in the interpretation of its own regulations). Records 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. Records are submitted for the limited purpose of review. 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. 32.08(4)(c). This office has a long history of cooperation with governmental agencies with respect to in camera inspection. Custodians submit copies of the relevant records to this office upon a promise of confidentiality. This office does not release records reviewed in camera to anyone under any circumstances. Upon a determination of the public record status, records 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. Please be aware, any cover letter submitted to accompany the relevant records may be subject to disclosure. Order Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the requested records for in camera inspection without delay.

Mark Relation, Esq. SPR22/0126 Page 3 February 2, 2022 Sincerely, Rebecca S. Murray Supervisor of Records cc: Craig Shibley