Shawn Wiley v. Essex County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20251723)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 30, 2025 SPR25/1723 Kristen W. Jiang, Esq. Assistant District Attorney Appeals Division Essex County District Attorney’s Office 10 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 Dear Attorney Jiang: I have received the petition of Shawn Wiley appealing the response of the Essex County District Attorney’s Office (Office) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On June 10, 2025, Mr. Wiley requested, [C]opies of the following public record(s) exclusively related to the Criminal Investigations Division (CID): [1] The complete CID report, referral, or investigatory file generated in connection with Incident #23011525 created on 6/17/2023 Danvers Police Wiley vs Melo [2] The official date of any referral made to CID, and any record showing the referral’s acceptance, denial, or review status. [3] The name(s) of CID personnel assigned or consulted in this matter, if applicable. [4] If no formal CID report exists, please provide a statement confirming that no such record was requested and or created, and any associated record indicating why. The Office provided Mr. Wiley with a response on June 12, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, Mr. Wiley petitioned this office and SPR25/1723, 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 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

Kristen W. Jiang, Esq. SPR25/1723 Page 2 June 30, 2025 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 Office’s June 12th response In its June 12, 2025 response, the Office states, “[a]ll of the records in the possession of this Office that are responsive to your request below were sent to you by email on January 8, 2025.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Wiley states: To date, no such records have been produced—nor have I received any written statement confirming the absence of these materials, despite repeated claims from Danvers Police, ADA … and the POST Commission that such an investigation occurred. The CID report has been used as a basis to close my complaint and deny accountability, yet no one can produce it. No Duty to Create Records Please note that 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). Further, under the Public Records Law, a public employee is not required to answer questions, or do research, or create documents in response to questions. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a); 32 Op. Att’y Gen. 157, 165 (May 18, 1977). However, in accordance with the Public Records Law, 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). In an email to this office on June 18, 2025, the Office asserted, “[a]s detailed in the

Kristen W. Jiang, Esq. SPR25/1723 Page 3 June 30, 2025 attached email to Mr. Wiley, on January 8, 2025, in response to a similar public records request, this Office produced a copy of all of the records in our possession related to Mr. Wiley, inclusive of any and all ‘CID’-related materials. There are no other records in the possession of this Office that are responsive to Mr. Wiley’s most recent request dated June 16, 2025.” Conclusion Where the Office confirmed that it does not possess additional records responsive to Mr. Wiley’s request, and has no duty to create records responsive to the request, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Wiley 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: Shawn Wiley