Brandon Stokes v. Department of State Police (SPR 20250568)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 11, 2025 SPR25/0568 Allison Mondello Records Access Officer Massachusetts Department of State Police 470 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702 Dear Ms. Mondello: I have received the petition of Brandon Stokes, of 7 News WHDH Boston, appealing the response of the Department of State Police (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On January 27, 2025, Mr. Stokes requested “State Police dashcam and bodycam video of the traffic stop and arrest of [a named individual] on 495 in Bolton on Saturday 1/18/25 around 2:40pm.” The Department responded on February 21, 2025, and assigned reference number P001002-012725 to this request. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Stokes petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/0568, 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. 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

Allison Mondello SPR25/0568 Page 2 March 11, 2025 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. The Department’s February 21st Response In its February 21, 2025 response, the Department cites Exemption (f) of the Public Records Law for withholding responsive records. See G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(f). Exemption (f) Exemption (f) permits the withholding of: investigatory materials necessarily compiled out of the public view by law enforcement or other investigatory officials the disclosure of which materials would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest G. L. c. 4, § 7(26)(f). A custodian of records generally must demonstrate a prejudice to investigative efforts in order to withhold requested records. Information relating to an ongoing investigation may be withheld if disclosure could alert suspects to the activities of investigative officials. Confidential investigative techniques may also be withheld indefinitely if disclosure is deemed to be prejudicial to future law enforcement activities. Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 62 (1976). Redactions may be appropriate where they serve to preserve the anonymity of voluntary witnesses. Antell v. Att’y Gen., 52 Mass. App. Ct. 244, 248 (2001); Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 290 n.18 (1979). Exemption (f) invites a “case-by- case consideration” of whether disclosure “would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest.” See Reinstein, 378 Mass. at 289-90. In its February 21st response, under Exemption (f), the Department argues the following: The Department has identified records which are responsive to your request. However, at this time, the Department denies your request for any records relating to this incident pursuant to M.G.L. c. 4, §7, cl. 26 (f), as this matter remains the subject of an active on-going prosecution by the Worcester County District Attorney’s office. . . . The Department asserts that providing these materials to you would prematurely disclose the Commonwealth’s case prior to trial, which would prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement. It is not in the public’s interest to release this information, as such release could potentially taint any potential jury pool. Therefore, the records you seek are not subject to release at this time pursuant to

Allison Mondello SPR25/0568 Page 3 March 11, 2025 M.G.L. c. 4, §7, cl. 26 (f). Based on the Department’s response, although the Department refers to an ongoing investigation, it is not certain how the responsive records pertain to that investigation. Further, the Department did not demonstrate how disclosure of the withheld records “would probably so prejudice the possibility of effective law enforcement that such disclosure would not be in the public interest” as required to withhold records under Exemption (f). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (a 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”). The Department must clarify these matters. It is further uncertain why the records must be withheld in their entirety. The Department must explain whether any exempt information can be redacted from the records so that segregable portions can be provided. See Reinstein, 378 Mass. at 289-90 (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). Any non-exempt, segregable portion of a public record is subject to mandatory disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(a). Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Stokes with a response to the request, provided in a manner consistent with this order, the Public Records Law and its Regulations within ten (10) business days. A copy of any such 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. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Brandon Stokes