FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of a Complaint
by SUPPLEMENTAL
FINAL DECISION
Sam Lapides,
Complainant
against Docket
#FIC 87-143
Records Division, State of
Connecticut Department of Public Safety, Division of State Police,
Respondent August
10, 1988
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case
on June 23, 1987, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared,
stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on
the complaint. On July 16, 1987 the
Commission transmitted a report of hearing officer in the matter, which report
was adopted as the Final Decision of the Commission on August 26, 1987. Notice of such Final Decision was issued on
August 31, 1987. The complainant
appealed the Commission's Final Decision to Superior Court, Docket No. 87
0336757S, and, on November 17, 1987, Judge Shaughnessy, in response to a motion
by the complainant-plaintiff, remanded the matter to the Commission for the
taking of further evidence, pursuant to §4-183(e), G.S. A supplemental hearing was held on March 16,
1988 and continued to May 4, 1988, at which times the complainant and the respondent
again appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits
and argument on the complaint.
After consideration of the entire record, the following
facts are found:
1. Paragraphs
1 through 7 of the findings in the Commission's Final Decision in the above
matter, dated August 26, 1987, are hereby incorporated as if more fully set
forth herein.
2. It is
found that all records in the respondent's files concerning case #G-71-762C,
the matter of the complainant's kidnapping, have been destroyed and that the
respondent's failure to provide records in response to the complainant's
request did not violate §§1-15 or 1-19(a), G.S.
Docket #FIC 87-143 Page
Two
3. It is
found that records relating to the kidnapping of the complainant may still
exist in the files of the Statewide Organized Crime Investigative Task Force,
the State Police Bureau of Identification or the State Police Criminal
Intelligence Center.
4. Such
agencies, however, are independent of the respondent and their files were not,
therefore, included in the respondent's search for records on behalf of the
complainant.
5. The
complainant claims that when he submitted his request for records to the
respondent he did so believing that the respondent had control of all state
police records.
6. It is
found that the respondent replied to a request for records in its files, which
request was directed to its commanding officer. Nothing in the Freedom of Information Act required the respondent
to notify the complainant of the possible existence of records in the files of
other agencies.
The following order by the Commission is hereby
recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned
complaint.
1. The
complaint is hereby dismissed.
2. The
Commission hereby incorporates by reference paragraph 2 of the Order in its
August 26, 1987 Final Decision in the above matter.
Approved by order of the Freedom of Information
Commission at its special meeting of August 10, 1988.
Catherine
H. Lynch
Acting
Clerk of the Commission