Lane, Andrew v. Worcester County District Attorney's Office (SPR 20260533)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records February 25, 2026 SPR26/0533 Mark Relation, Esq. Records Access Officer Worcester County District Attorney’s Office 225 Main Street Worcester, MA 01608 Dear Attorney Relation: I have received the petition of Andrew Lane of Hamel Marcin Dunn Reardon & Shea, P.C., appealing the response of the Worcester 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 February 4, 2026, Mr. Lane requested, “[p]olice reports, video & surveillance footage, and other evidence for any criminal investigations and prosecutions for the incident of 05/07/2024 at … State Street in Leominster, MA involving [three identified individuals] in the death of [an identified individual].” Additionally, on February 5, 2026, Mr. Lane requested, “…the 911 tapes arising out of an incident that occurred at the above location.” On February 11, 2026, the Office provided a response. Unsatisfied with the response, Mr. Lane petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0533, 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 establishing the applicability of an exemption). To meet the specificity requirement a custodian 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

Mark Relation, Esq. SPR26/0533 Page 2 February 25, 2026 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. Lane contends, “…the requested 911 tapes do not contain confidential or proprietary material, and we are not seeking sensitive investigative details or privileged information. These recordings are public in nature and are critical to the defense of our client in the pending civil action brought by the decedent’s family.” The Office’s February 11th Response In its February 11, 2026 response, the Office withheld responsive records, asserting, “…the incident is subject to open and pending criminal cases and so the requested report constitutes discovery materials.” 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. On February 13, 2026, the Office provided the docket numbers of the pending criminal litigation. This office has reviewed the trial court’s docket and verified that the criminal litigation relating to the records that are the subject of Mr. Lane’s appeal is active and ongoing in Worcester County Superior Court. See Commonwealth v. Juan Diaz Contreras, (Worcester County Superior Court Docket No. 2485CR00255) (November 21, 2024); Commonwealth v. Edgar K. Perez-Tuero, (Worcester County Superior Court Docket No. 2485CR00256) (November 21, 2024); and Commonwealth v. Christian Joel Santiago, (Worcester County Superior Court Docket No. 2485CR00257) (November 21, 2024). 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). It should be noted that a change in the status of this action could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b).

Mark Relation, Esq. SPR26/0533 Page 3 February 25, 2026 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Andrew Lane