Lewis E. Floyd III v. Bristol County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20253442)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records November 26, 2025 SPR25/3442 Daniel Bennett, Esq. Special Prosecutor Bristol County District Attorney’s Office 15 Foster Street Quincy, MA 02169 Dear Attorney Bennett: On November 17, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Bristol County District Attorney’s Office (Office) seeking relief from the obligation to produce responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, I understand that the Office furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor, Lewis Floyd. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On October 12, 2025, Mr. Floyd requested the following: 1. The payroll information for employees [list of named individuals] and any other CAC employee present at the CAC located at [a specified address] on July 12, 2018 from January 1st, 2016 – October 31st, 2018. This request is specific to those whom were dually employed by the CAC and the District Attorney. 2. Any and all contracts, sales agreements and/or negotiations regarding Highland Fencing and Construction & its owner [a named individual]. The CAC and/or the District Attorney’s Office specific to ... Arch Street and the Adjunct Library from January 2018 until October 31st, 2025. This includes non- disclaimer and non-disclosure agreements or quid pro quo payments or guarantees by [a named individual], who is now employed by Day 1 in Providence. . . . 3. Any and all Brady or P.O.S.T. Commission records pertaining to: a) sustained allegations of misconduct; b) arrest, convictions and/or civil suits or settlements; c) news articles, interviews [Footnote 2] or printed publications in which Brady evidence or P.O.S.T. Commission public records are referenced or cited. This request is specific but not limited to the following individuals: [a list of named individuals]. 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

Daniel Bennett, Esq. SPR25/3442 Page 2 November 26, 2025 4. Any and all public records regarding the alleged sexual misconduct between [a named individual] and [another named individual]. This includes anything from the trial court; [the individual]’s salary in the years before, during or after the allegations; and any public records associated with her time at Roger Williams University. 5. Any and all public records ordered to be produced, that have been produced, or have yet to be produced by order in the following matters: [a list of four specified cases] 6. Any and all records regarding [a named individual] and the misconduct regarding CI’s referring him as their “Baby Daddy” and the drugs etc. found in safes near/in his cubicle. 7. Payroll information for employees [a list of named individuals]. 8. Any and all records regarding [a named individual]. 9. Any and all records regarding BBO complaint(s) against [two named individuals] debacle including, not limited to, emails available online and the picture of [an individual] as a child dressed in KKK garb. This includes records unsuccessfully sought to be sealed or impounded. 10. Any and all records, recordings or printed stories regarding the 2023 [a named individual] interview of [another named individual] in which she belittled how one in six men are victims of legitimate domestic violence in Bristol County. On October 14, 2025, Mr. Floyd requested the following: 1. Any and all POST Commission reports, evidence, resignings, retentions, or any other documents in accordance with 555 CMR 1.00–12.13. Specifically including but not limited to: [a list of named individuals]. This request includes video evidence ...; Interview Photos ...; Facebook posts ...; Texts...; or stolen / misplaced evidence. ... 2. Any and all records ordered regarding the murders of [two named individuals] by cowardly tyrants of FRPD that have been deemed public records. This includes reports, video, written statements, press releases, etc. 3. Any and all policies and procedures regarding Police Reports. This includes but is not limited to: writing reports; supplemental reports; training and accuracy of police reports. 4. Any and all Office of Professional Standards reports, findings, conclusions, or any other records from January 2018 – November 30, 2025.

Daniel Bennett, Esq. SPR25/3442 Page 3 November 26, 2025 5. Any and all Public Records regarding the federal raid of the home of [a named individual], Westport, Massachusetts in September 2024. This includes but is not limited to: press releases, news articles, Internal Affairs reports, Office of Professional Standards reports / investigations, or those of outside entities. 6. Any contracts, video evidence, or records between FRPD and Highland Fencing and Construction or the library at ... Arch Street from January 2018 until November 30, 2025. Subsequent to the opening of this petition, the Office provided this office and Mr. Floyd with a further letter in support of its petition on November 21, 2025. Petitions for an Extension of Time and Relief from the Obligation to Produce Records Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) shall provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(b).

Daniel Bennett, Esq. SPR25/3442 Page 4 November 26, 2025 The Office’s Request for Relief In its petition, the Office requests relief from the obligation to provide responsive records. In support of its petition, the Office provides copies of numerous witness statements, and argues, among other things, the following: Mr. Floyd should have no contact with Bristol County and Bristol County is exempt from responding to any records requests regarding Mr. Floyd’s case. The Commonwealth believes that there should be an exemption for producing such files under M.G.L. C. 66, Sec. 10, c (v). . . . Specifically, this request is intended to harass and intimidate [named individuals], against whom the Defendant has previously made threatening and/or life- threatening statements. The Commonwealth asks that the Supervisor of Public Records deny the Defendant’s requests as they fall squarely under the exception in M.G.L. C. 66, Sec. 10, c(v), by requesting records from [named individuals] – victims in an active criminal case against the Defendant – and other public officials for whom the Commonwealth has reasonable suspicion to believe Mr. Floyd intends to intimidate and/or harass. The Commonwealth asserts that Mr. Floyd is using the Public Records Law in this instance to intimidate and harass [named individuals]. The purpose of the Public Records Law is to promote transparency regarding governmental activities. Mr. Floyd’s request is an attempted abuse of the Public Records Law to circumvent the privacy and safety of his victims. The request is targeted at private information and calculated to intimidate and harass Mr. Floyd’s past victims and those in proximity to his victims. This request also appears to be an effort to gain information about members of the Fall River Police Department and Bristol County District Attorney’s Office in service of Mr. Floyd targeting more individuals. The Commonwealth believes Mr. Floyd may intend to ‘dox’ these individuals, as he is already alleged to have threatened to do to public officials in the Fall River Warrant Report # 25-438-WA and September 27th, 2025 Witness Statement of [a named individual]. Sensitive and private information related to addresses and contact information may be included in the documents he requested. The Commonwealth asserts Mr. Floyd intends to use this information for untoward purposes. Furthermore, the Commonwealth believes Mr. Floyd may be gathering this information to make threats of or actual steps towards violence, up to taking the life of the public officials listed in this request. As evidenced by the Fall River Warrant Report # 25-438-WA and September 27th, 2025 Witness Statement of [a named individual], Mr. Floyd has previously threatened to hurt and kill public officials. The Commonwealth believes Mr. Floyd is gathering more information about additional public officials to threaten their safety or to physically harm

Daniel Bennett, Esq. SPR25/3442 Page 5 November 26, 2025 them. . . . As Mr. Floyd is submitting this lawful records request for the purpose of targeting, doxing, threatening, harassing, intimidating, and/or harming past victims and/or other public officials, the Commonwealth respectfully asks the Supervisor of Public Records to deny this request in its entirety. Additionally, the Office explains the following: All such materials requested in Mr. Floyd’s two recent requests are part of the pending prosecution. They will be utilized in this investigation and/or grand jury process related to Mr. Floyd’s case. Therefore, they cannot be accessed because the prosecuting attorney in this case will analyze which of these documents will be utilized in his prosecution. Further, in its November 17th and November 21st letters, the Office indicates that it intends to withhold responsive records pursuant to Exemptions (c), (f), (o), and (i) of the Public Records Law. See G. L. c. 4, §7(26)(c), (f), (o), (i). Pending Litigation 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b) provides in pertinent part: the Supervisor may deny an appeal for, among other reasons if, in the opinion of the Supervisor: 1. the public records in question are the subjects of disputes in active litigation, administrative hearings or mediation. This office has reviewed the docket of the trial court and verified that the requested records are the subject of active and ongoing litigation in Fall River District Court. See Commonwealth v. Lewis Floyd, Fall River District Court Docket No. 2532CR003714 (Nov. 4, 2025). In light of the pending litigation, I decline to opine on this matter at this time. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Additionally, I decline to opine on the applicability of Exemptions (c), (f), (o), and (i) to the requested records. Please note that a change in the status of this action could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b). Please note, Mr. Floyd has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c).

Daniel Bennett, Esq. SPR25/3442 Page 6 November 26, 2025 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Lewis Floyd