Ollie J. Spears v. Fall River, City of - Police Department (SPR 20253068)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 3, 2025 SPR25/3068 Amanda Matton Records Clerk Fall River Police Department 685 Pleasant Street Fall River, MA 02721 Dear Ms. Matton: I have received the petition of Ollie Jay Spears appealing the response of the Fall River 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 August 15, 2025, Mr. Spears requested, “... copies of all body-worn camera footage from the following [identified] officers in connection with incident Ref: 25- 2302-AR and Docket # 2532CR003054 Date of Incident August 15, 2025 ... Location Riverside Gas Station Address 1101 N Main St, Fall River, MA.” Prior Appeals This request was the subject of prior appeals. See SPR25/2600 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (September 16, 2025) and SPR25/2782 Determination of the Supervisor of Records (October 6, 2025). In my October 6th determination, I found that it was unclear if the Department possesses any additional records responsive to his request. The Department responded on October 15, 2025. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Spears petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3068, 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). 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

Amanda Matton SPR25/3068 Page 2 November 3, 2025 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 October 15th Response In its October 15, 2025 response, the Department cited Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law to withhold the requested records. Current Appeal In his appeal, Mr. Spears states that there is, “[i]mproper application of statutory exemption - FRPD is misapplying the domestic violence exemption to withhold records that do not involve the protected party ... FRPD has not explained how the domestic violence exemption applies to footage taken at a location where the victim was not present.” In further support, Mr. Spears states, “FRPD provided only footage of me in my living room - not the requested footage of officers entering my property.” 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, 154 (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.”

Amanda Matton SPR25/3068 Page 3 November 3, 2025 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. In its response, the Department states the following: [t]he below exemptions apply due to the nature of the call being domestic related, which did not involve Mr. Spears. Mr. Spears was provided body worn camera video that involved himself, all other video is exempted per the exemptions below: Exemption (a) – The Statutory Exemption (a) applies to records that are: specifically, or by necessary implication, exempted from disclosure by statute.... Domestic Violence Reports PROHIBITED: All domestic violence reports and associated documents can only be released to the victim, victim’s attorney, and a few select others. See the actual statutory language below: 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 c.209A sec. 1, 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; provided, however, that all such reports shall be accessible at all reasonable times, upon written requests to: [1] The victim, the victims, attorney, others specifically authorized by the victim to obtain such information, [2] Prosecutors, ]3] Victim-witness advocates as defined in chapter 258B §1 (an individual employed by a prosecutor, the Victim and Witness Assistance board, or other criminal justice agency to provide necessary and essential services in carrying out policies and procedures under Chapter 258B- Rights of Victims & Witnesses of Crimes) [4] Domestic violence victims' counselors as defined in chapter 233 § 20K (a person who is employed or volunteers in a domestic violence victims' program, who has undergone a minimum of twenty-five hours of training and who reports to and is under the direct control and supervision of a direct service supervisor of a domestic violence victims’ program, and whose primary purpose is the rendering of advice, counseling or assistance to victims of abuse.) In Camera Inspection In order to facilitate a determination as to the applicability of the Department’s claims to withhold the requested records pursuant to Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law, the Department must provide this office with an un-redacted copy of the responsive records for in

Amanda Matton SPR25/3068 Page 4 November 3, 2025 camera inspection. After I complete my review of the records, I will return the records to your custody and issue an opinion on the public or exempt nature of the records. 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 records for in camera inspection without delay. Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Ollie Jay Spears