Brien, David v. Westport, Town of - Police Department (SPR 20260096)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 23, 2026 SPR26/0096 Hillary Harris Administrative Assistant Westport Police Department 56 Hix Bridge Road Westport, MA 02790 Dear Ms. Harris: I have received the petition of David Brien appealing the response of the Westport 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 November 6, 2026, Mr. Brien requested, “…any and all police records to include arrests, call outs and 911 calls and investigative reports with respect to [an identified individual]. Of note: [an identified individual] was found deceased in Westport on 7/28/2017.” The Department responded on January 6, 2026. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Brien petitioned this office, and this appeal, SPR26/0096, was opened as a result. Status of Requestor Please note that 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 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. Brien’s status will play no role in a determination as to whether the records should be disclosed or redacted 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, 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

Hillary Harris SPR26/0096 Page 2 January 23, 2026 § 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. Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Brien contends: I was retained by [an identified individual] to conduct an inquiry in the death of her son…. His mother … is not aware of any ongoing legal matter or sensitive information that cannot be disclosed. To [her] knowledge all investigative matters pertaining to her son have been closed for many years. … I am respectfully requesting that this appeal is granted, and I am disclosed all records requested, unredacted, with respect to [an identified individual]. The Department’s January 6th Response In its January 6, 2026 response, the Department asserts the following: In regards to your email requesting any records [of an identified individual], these records are being denied as they contain sensitive information that is exempt from disclosure under applicable public records laws. Release of these materials could compromise privacy rights and/or an ongoing legal matter. You may contact the District Attorney’s Office for further information or to determine whether any records may be available through their office. Burden of Specificity On January 9, 2026, in an email to this office, the Department explained, “I received a record request that did not give any information as to why records were being requested and for whom except the requester being a private investigator. The record we have on file for the individual is a[n] … incident report. Out of respect for the individual and their family I considered this private sensitive information and was not to be considered a public record.” The Department further clarified in an additional email, “[n]o there is not any ongoing legal matter, that was more of a form letter to cover any of the possibilities for the record requested.”

Hillary Harris SPR26/0096 Page 3 January 23, 2026 In this case, the Department has not met its burden in responding to the request. The Department is advised that under the Public Records Law, the burden shall be on the custodian to establish the applicability of an exemption to withhold or redact records. Based on the Department’s response, it is unclear which exemption the Department is citing in order to withhold the requested records. Additionally, it is unclear which specific records the Department intends to withhold. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(iv) (a written response must “identify any records, categories of records or portions of records that the agency or municipality intends to withhold, and provide the specific reasons for such withholding, including the specific exemption or exemptions upon which the withholding is based”). See also Globe Newspaper Co. v. Police Comm’r, 419 Mass. 852, 857 (1995); Flatley, 419 Mass. at 511; Reinstein v. Police Comm’r of Boston, 378 Mass. 281, 289-90 (1979) (the statutory exemptions are narrowly construed and are not blanket in nature). Consequently, the Department must identify the records or categories of records that it intends to withhold, and explain the specific exemption or exemptions that apply. Conclusion Accordingly, the Department is ordered to provide Mr. Brien 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. Mr. Brien may further appeal the substantive nature of the Department’s response within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: David Brien