Ahmed Tahir v. Brockton, City of - Police Department (SPR 20253219)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 17, 2025 SPR25/3219 Lieutenant Victor Perez Records Access Officer Brockton Police Department 7 Commercial Street Brockton, MA 02302 Dear Lieutenant Perez: I have received the petition of Ahmed Tahir appealing the response of the Brockton 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 September 26, 2025, Mr. Tahir requested, “copies of any body-worn camera recordings, cruiser dashcam footage, or other audio/video evidence related to the incident that occurred on September 20, 2025, at [an identified address]…” In a September 29, 2025 communication to the Department, Mr. Tahir modified his request to seek the following: [1] Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) log for Call #25-98144, including all timestamps, officer assignments, and notes[;] [2] 911 call audio recordings and transcripts connected to this incident (if any were made)[;] [3] Radio dispatch audio or communications related to the officers’ response[;] [4] Supplemental incident reports, officer notes, or internal narratives prepared in connection with this call beyond the primary police report by [an identified police officer][;] [5] Booking or arrest records if any arrests were made during or following this incident. The Department provided two responses on September 29, 2025. Unsatisfied by the responses, Mr. Tahir petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR25/3219, was opened as a result. Subsequently, the Department responded on November 4, 2025. Status of the Requestor Please note that under the Public Records Law the reason for which a requestor seeks access to or a copy of a public record does not afford any greater right of access to the requested 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

Lieutenant Victor Perez SPR25/3219 Page 2 November 17, 2025 information than other persons in the general public. The Public Records Law does not distinguish between requestors. Access to a record pursuant to the Public Records Law rests on the content of the record and not the circumstances of the requestor. See Bougas v. Chief of Police of Lexington, 371 Mass. 59, 64 (1976). Accordingly, Mr. Ahmed’s status will play no role in a determination as to whether the records should be disclosed or withheld under the Public Records Law. 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 September 29th and November 4th Responses In its first September 29, 2025 response, the Department stated, “[p]lease be advised the Brockton Police Department does not have BWC’s or dash cams at this time.” In its second September 29, 2025 response, the Department stated, “[p]lease be advised that if you wish to obtain the official arrest report associated with Incident #25- 1866-AR / Call #25-98144, you may request it directly from the Brockton District Court. The court is able to assist with requests for judicial copies of arrest and court records. The remainder of the requested records, including the CAD log, supplemental incident reports, and other officer notes, are currently being processed…” In a November 4, 2025 correspondence to this office, the Department cited Exemption (a) of the Public Records Law to withhold responsive records in their entirety.

Lieutenant Victor Perez SPR25/3219 Page 3 November 17, 2025 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, 545-546 (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.” 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 November 4, 2025 response, the Department cited G. L. c. 41, § 97D to withhold responsive records in their entirety. G. L. c. 41, § 97D provides in pertinent part: 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 section 1 of chapter 209A, 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… G. L. c. 41, § 97D. In a communication with this office on November 5, 2025, the Department clarified that the requested records concerned a report of abuse perpetrated by a family or household member, as defined in section 1 of chapter 209A. As the records are restricted from disclosure in their entirety by the Legislature under G. L. c. 41, § 97D, as it operates through Exemption (a), I find the Department has met its burden in responding to this request under the Public Records Law. See G. L. c. 41, § 97D (providing that

Lieutenant Victor Perez SPR25/3219 Page 4 November 17, 2025 these reports and communications “shall not be public reports and shall be maintained by the police departments in a manner that shall assure their confidentiality”). Conclusion Accordingly, I will now consider this administrative appeal closed. If Mr. Tahir 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 of Massachusetts. G. L. c. 66, § 10A(c) (pursuing an administrative appeal does not limit the availability of applicable judicial remedies). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Ahmed Tahir