← Back to Search
Raphael Morales v. Barnstable, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20250630)
Massachusetts Public Records Appeal · Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records · Filed 03-21-2025
ClosedAppealPetitioner Won
SPR 20250630 is a Massachusetts Public Records Law appeal filed by Raphael Morales concerning records held by Barnstable, Town of - Police Department, opened 03-21-2025. Type: Appeal. Status: Closed. Supervisor of Public Records determination: Petitioner won — agency ordered to provide records.
Case Details
- Case Number
- 20250630
- Case Type
- Appeal
- Case Subtype
- In Cam
- Status
- Closed
- Requester
- Raphael Morales
- Date Opened
- 03-21-2025
- Date Closed
- 04-11-2025
- Date Request Submitted
- 03-05-2025
- Response Provided Date
- 03-05-2025
- Processing Fees Charged
- 0.00
- Petitions Regarding Fees
- No
- Went to Court
- No
- In Camera Opened
- 03-21-2025
- In Camera Closed
- 04-11-2025
PDF Document
Extracted Text (searchable & copyable)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 18, 2025 SPR25/0630 Danielle L. Paradis Records/Property Supervisor Barnstable Police Department 1200 Phinney’s Lane Hyannis, MA 02601 Dear Ms. Paradis: I have received the petition of Raphael Morales appealing the response of the Barnstable Police Department (Department) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On March 5, 2025, Mr. Morales requested a specific police incident report “for an event that took place on [06/01/2010 - 01/27/2020] at [Barnstable/Hyannis].” The Department responded on March 5, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Morales petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/0630, 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. 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. 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 Danielle L. Paradis SPR25/0630 Page 2 March 18, 2025 The Department’s March 5th response In its March 5, 2025 response, the Department cited G. L. c. 41, § 97D, as it operates through Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law to withhold the requested responsive record. Exemption (a) Exemption (a), known as the statutory exemption, permits the withholding of records that are: specifically or by necessary implication exempted from disclosure by statute G. L. c. 4, §7 (26)(a). A governmental entity may use the statutory exemption as a basis for withholding requested materials where the language of the exempting statute relied upon expressly or necessarily implies that the public’s right to inspect records under the Public Records Law is restricted. See Att’y Gen. v. Collector of Lynn, 377 Mass. 151, 54 (1979); Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. v. Appeals Court, 372 Mass. 539, 545-46 (1977). This exemption creates two categories of exempt records. The first category includes records that are specifically exempt from disclosure by statute. Such statutes expressly state that such a record either “shall not be a public record,” “shall be kept confidential” or “shall not be subject to the disclosure provision of the Public Records Law.” The second category under the exemption includes records deemed exempt under statute by necessary implication. Such statutes expressly limit the dissemination of particular records to a defined group of individuals or entities. A statute is not a basis for exemption if it merely lists individuals or entities to whom the records are to be provided; the statute must expressly limit access to the listed individuals or entities. G. L. c. 41, § 97D provides in relevant part: All reports of rape and sexual assault or attempts to commit such offenses, all reports of abuse perpetrated by family or household members, as defined in section 1 of chapter 209A, and all communications between police officers and victims of such offenses or abuse shall not be public reports and shall be maintained by the police departments in a manner that shall assure their confidentiality… G. L. c. 41, § 97D. The Department states, “[w]ith respect to your request, please be advised that the record is being withheld in its entirety pursuant to exemption (a) of G.L. c. 4, sec. 7(26). Exemption (a) is the ‘Statutory Exemption’; records that are specifically exempt from disclosure by statute Danielle L. Paradis SPR25/0630 Page 3 March 18, 2025 maybe withheld. In particular, G.L. c. 41, Section 97D requires law enforcement agencies to keep all reports of abuse perpetrated by family or household members, as defined in section 1 of chapter 209A confidential. As a result, such information must be withheld under the law.” In camera inspection In order to facilitate a determination as to the applicability of the Department’s claims to withhold the requested record pursuant to Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law, the Department must provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive record for in camera inspection. After I complete my review of the document, I will return the record 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 Department is ordered to provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive record for in camera inspection without delay. Danielle L. Paradis SPR25/0630 Page 4 March 18, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Raphael Morales