Bay State Body Cam v. Department of State Police (SPR 20251283)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records May 21, 2025 SPR25/1283 Allison Mondello Public Records Manager Massachusetts Department of State Police 50 Maple Street Milford, MA 01757 Dear Ms. Mondello: I have received the petition of Bay State Body Cam (requestor) 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 April 15, 2025, the requestor sought, “access to specific records related to the incidents outlined in the Massachusetts State Police’s Weekly Summary of Police Activity, as published on MSPNews.org on April 5th.” Specifically, the requestor sought the following for each incident detailed in the summary: • Body-worn camera footage from the primary officer involved, beginning shortly before first contact with the suspect and continuing through to the moment the suspect is placed into the police vehicle. Additionally, for any pursuit or other relative incident we request cruiser camera footage. • The booking photo of each individual arrested in connection with these incidents, provided they are not juveniles and all connected reports. Previous Appeal This request was the subject of a previous appeal. See SPR25/1122 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (May 7, 2025). In my May 7th determination, I ordered the Department to clarify its claims under Exemptions (a), (c) and (f) of the Public Records Law for withholding responsive records. Additionally, I ordered the Department to clarify what types of records it possesses that it is withholding from disclosure. The Department responded on May 7, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, the requestor petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/1283, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the Department provided a supplemental response to this office on May 8, 2025. 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 SPR25/1283 Page 2 May 21, 2025 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. The Department’s May 7th and May 8th Responses In its May 7, 2025 response, the Department stated: Your request, as written, is vague and lacks specificity to such an extent that the Department is unable to research it without more detailed information. Without further specific, descriptive information, the Department cannot reasonably undertake a search of its records... Friedman v. Div. of Admin. L. Appeals, 103 Mass. App. Ct. 806, 814 (2024)… the Department requests that you respond with specifically descriptive information, i.e. dates, times, locations, involved parties, etc., that would assist the Department in researching your request. In an email to this office on May 8, 2025, the Department further clarified: The appeal(s) involve all the cases listed out in the [April 5th “Weekly Summary of Police Activity”], which is posted and generated by MSP with no dates, times, or exact location of the incidents/arrests. The Department has stated in the article… "for the integrity of ongoing criminal cases and in the interest of each subject’s privacy, we have removed personally identifying information from the narratives as well as information not subject to public disclosure…” The requester stated… "each incident is identified on that page by date, location, and type of activity/arrest..." However, please note that no such date or location is given for any of the several arrests listed within. With that said, we are unable to adequately or properly research the events within without a date, time, location, or some sort

Allison Mondello SPR25/1283 Page 3 May 21, 2025 of identifying factor… without a response or further information, the Department has exhausted its efforts in researching the request. Current Appeal In its appeal petition, the requestor states: The MSP’s claim that the request is “too vague” to process is… baseless... Our request unambiguously references a publicly published, time- and date-specific Weekly Summary of Police Activity, posted by the MSP itself on April 5, 2025. We explicitly provided the link to the exact published post from which the referenced incidents stem. Each incident is identified on that page by date, location, and type of activity/arrest, offering more than enough specificity “to enable a professional employee of the agency who was familiar with the subject area of the request to locate the record with a reasonable amount of effort” (see Friedman v. Division of Admin. L. Appeals, 103 Mass. App. Ct. 806 (2024)). Based on the requestor’s appeal for the detailed incidents reported on the Department’s April 5th “Weekly Summary of Police Activity” post on its official news blog and in conjunction with the Department’s response, it is unclear whether the Department possesses records responsive to requestor’s appeal. 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). However, 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). Consequently, the Department must clarify whether responsive records exist. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide the requestor 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. The requestor 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: Bay State Body Cam