Mark Hochberg v. Boston, City of - Police Department (SPR 20250782)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records April 1, 2025 SPR25/0782 Christine O’Donnell, Esq. Assistant Corporation Counsel Office of the Legal Advisor Boston Police Department 1 City Hall Square Boston, MA 02201 Dear Attorney O’Donnell: I have received the petition of Mark Hochberg, Esq., of Kirkland & Ellis, LLP, appealing the response of the Boston 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 February 10, 2025, Attorney Hochberg requested “… evidence used as a trial exhibit in Demond Chatman’s jury trial in Suffolk Superior Court between January 14, 2022, and January 24, 2022.” The Department provided a response on February 19, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Attorney Hochberg petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/0782, 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

Christine O’Donnell, Esq. SPR25/0782 Page 2 April 1, 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 19th Response In its February 19, 2025 response, the Department informed Attorney Hochberg that it possessed no responsive records. The Department suggested that Attorney Hochberg contact the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office. Current Appeal In his March 20, 2025 petition to this office, Attorney Hochberg contends that either the Department or the Suffolk District Attorney’s Office must possess responsive records. In a telephone conversation with this office on March 31, 2025, the Department confirmed that it possessed no records responsive to the request. No Duty to Create Records Please be advised, under the Public Records Law a custodian is not required to create a record in response to a public records request. See G. L. c. 66, § 6A(d). In addition, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). The duty to comply with requests for records extends only 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). Conclusion Given that the Department possesses no records responsive to Attorney Hochberg’s request and this office has no authority to compel the Department to create records, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Attorney Hochberg is not satisfied with the resolution of this administrative appeal, please be advised that this office shares jurisdiction with the Superior Court of the Commonwealth. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(b)(ix), 10A(c) (pursuing administrative appeal does not limit availability of judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Mark Hochberg, Esq.