Emma Rindlisbacher v. Suffolk County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20251802)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records July 7, 2025 SPR25/1802 Caileigh Durkin Records Access officer Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office One Bulfinch Place Boston, MA 02114 Dear Ms. Durkin: I have received the petition of Emma Rindlisbacher appealing the response of the Suffolk 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 April 4, 2025, Ms. Rindlisbacher requested the following: [C]opies of any evidence in the possession of the Suffolk da’s office related to [a named individual]. This would include “the evidence submitted to the Commonwealth, particularly the witness intimidation emails and the recent violations of her bail and Harassment Protection Order (HPO) by [the named individual].” (I assume this evidence was submitted by [another individual] and/or her legal representation). The Office responded on April 24, 2025. Unsatisfied with the Office’s response, Ms. Rindlisbacher petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR25/1802, 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 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

Caileigh Durkin SPR25/1802 Page 2 July 7, 2025 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 April 24th Response In its April 24, 2025 response, the Office states the following: Our office has requested the case file from the West Roxbury District Court and will begin work on producing public records upon receipt. You will receive additional correspondence within the next ten business days with an update on [the Office’s] progress. Current Appeal In her appeal petition, Ms. Rindlisbacher contends that “it has been well past two weeks since [she] made the request, and more than a month since [she] received an acknowledgement email.” Timeframe for Providing Records G. L. c. 66, § 10(b) provides, in pertinent part, that if the magnitude or difficulty of a request unduly burdens the other responsibilities of the agency or municipality such that the agency or municipality cannot provide records within 10 business days, the agency or municipality must inform the requestor in writing within 10 business days. With respect to the timeframe to produce responsive records, the written response shall: identify a reasonable timeframe in which the agency or municipality shall produce the public records sought; provided, that for an agency, the timeframe shall not exceed 15 business days following the initial receipt of the request for public records . . . and provided further, that the requestor may voluntarily agree to a response date beyond the timeframes set forth herein. G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vi). Where Ms. Rindlisbacher submitted her request on April 4, 2025, and the Office has not provided responsive records, nor cited an exemption for withholding records, I find the Office has not met its burden in responding to the request in accordance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b). Consequently, the Office must provide an estimated date as to when it intends to complete the search and provide the responsive records. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(a) (records must be provided

Caileigh Durkin SPR25/1802 Page 3 July 7, 2025 without unreasonable delay). To the extent possible, the Office must provide responsive records on a rolling basis. Conclusion Accordingly, the Office is ordered to provide Ms. Rindlisbacher 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. Ms. Rindlisbacher may further appeal the substantive nature of the Office’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Emma Rindlisbacher