Quintin, Charles v. Northampton, City of - Police Department (SPR 20260879)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records March 23, 2026 SPR26/0879 Julie A. Gaudreau Records Supervisor Northampton Police Department 29 Center Street Northampton, MA 01060 Dear Ms. Gaudreau: I have received the petition of Charles Quintin appealing the response of the Northampton 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 February 16, 2026, Mr. Quintin requested a “copy of the police report relating to the charge of OUI against [an identified individual] around January/February 2026.” The Department responded on February 17, 2026. Unsatisfied with the Department’s response, Mr. Quintin petitioned this office and this appeal, SPR26/0879, was opened as a result. While this appeal was pending, the Department provided a supplemental response on March 20, 2026. 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. 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

Julie Gaudreau SPR26/0879 Page 2 March 23, 2026 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 February 17th and March 20th Responses In its February 17, 2026 response, the Department stated: …your request for records [is] related to the incident resulting in Commonwealth v. Kabell, Northampton District Court, Docket No. 2645CR000072, which remains pending prosecution. The criminal case has been formally charged and is proceeding through the judicial system, but has not yet been resolved. The Department is denying your request under two independent grounds: [1] 950 CMR 32.08(2) - Subject Matter of Active Litigation… [2] Exemption (f) - Prejudice to the Defendant’s Right to a Fair Trial… In its March 20, 2026 response, the Department reiterated its pending litigation and Exemption (f) claims, and stated that the matter “remains in active litigation before the Northampton District Court, with a pretrial conference currently scheduled for March 26, 2026.” Current Appeal In his appeal petition, Mr. Quintin stated, “I do not understand what is under investigation since the arrest has already happened. My understanding is that the record should be released with redactions to the investigation information rather than a blanket denial.” 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 record is related to active and ongoing litigation in Northampton District Court. See Commonwealth v. Kabell, (Northampton District Court Docket No. 2645CR000072). 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 Exemption (f) of the Public Records Law to the requested record. Please note that a change in the status of this action could impact the applicability of 950 C.M.R. 32.08(2)(b).

Julie Gaudreau SPR26/0879 Page 3 March 23, 2026 Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Charles Quintin