Ian Davis v. Sterling, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20232995)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records December 26, 2023 SPR23/2995 Dawn L. Metcalf Executive Assistant Sterling Police Department 135 Leominster Road Sterling, MA 01564 Dear Ms. Metcalf: I have received the petition of Attorney Ian Davis appealing the response of the Sterling Police Department (Department) to his request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On November 21, 2023, Attorney Davis requested: [1.] All reports related to [a named individual] from his arrest on June 23, 2023; [2.] All photographs and videos related to [a named individual], including but not limited to those from booking and the holding cell at the Sterling Police Department; and [3.] All witness interviews[.] The Department responded on November 29, 2023. Unsatisfied with the response, Attorney Davis petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR23/2995, 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 agency or municipality 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. 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

Dawn L. Metcalf SPR23/2995 Page 2 December 26, 2023 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. The Department’s November 29th Response In its November 29, 2023 response, the Department stated, “[the Department has] been advised by District Attorney Early’s office that they will be the distribution point for this public records request. The below-listed party will be fulfilling your request.” Based on the Department’s response, it is unclear if the Department possesses any records responsive to the request. The duty to comply with requests for records extends to those records that exist and are in the possession, custody, or control of the custodian of records at the time of the request. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a)(ii). Custodians are expected to use their superior knowledge of the records in their custody to assist requestors in obtaining the desired information. See 950 C.M.R. 32.04(5). The Department must clarify whether it possesses records responsive to the request. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Attorney Davis with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law, and its Regulations within 10 business days. A copy of the response must be provided to this office. It is preferable to send an electronic copy of the response to this office at pre@sec.state.ma.us. Attorney Davis may appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Ian Davis, Esq.