FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        FINAL DECISION

 

Vera S. Zima,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 90-154

 

Reports and Records Division, State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, Division of State Police,

 

                        Respondent                  November 28, 1990

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 10, 1990, at which time the complainant and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.

 

            The complaint was consolidated for hearing with Docket #FIC 90-257, Vera S. Zima v. North Haven Police Department and State's Attorney, Judicial District of New Haven; and Docket #FIC 90-241 Vera S. Zima v. State's Attorney, Judicial District of New Haven; Forensic Science Laboratory, State of Connecticut Department of Public Safety; Division of State Police; and Chief of Police Wallingford Police Department because of the similarity of their subject matters.

 

            After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

            1.         The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.         By letter of complaint received April 30, 1990, the complainant alleged that she had been denied access to certain records; in particular, 127 crime scene photographs, 2 videotapes, 27 slides and a list of the 4 reports utilized in a criminal investigation identified as Wallingford Case 86-4146, and Forensic Lab Case #ID-86-C 00478 X2, which she requested April 11, 1990.

 

            3.         The complainant has not received the requested records.

 

            4.         The respondent claims it is not required to provide any records because it does not have the photographs, slides and

 

#FIC 90-154                           Page Two

 

videotapes requested by the complainant.

 

            5.         It is found that the respondent does not have the requested records.

 

            6.         It is concluded because the respondent does not have the photographs, slides and videotapes requested by the complainant, it is not required to provide the requested records.

 

            7.         It is concluded because the complainant requested only answers to questions concerning the four reports utilized by the respondent, the respondent is not required by the Freedom of Information Act to answer her questions.

 

            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.

 

Approved by order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of November 28, 1990.

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

#FIC 90-154                           Page Three

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

 

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

VERA S. ZIMA

114 Lincoln Avenue

Forestville, CT 06010

 

REPORTS AND RECORDS DIVISION, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DIVISION OF STATE POLICE

c/o Margaret Quilter Chapple, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General

MacKenzie Hall

110 Sherman Street

Hartford, CT 06105

 

                                                         

                                    Tina C. Frappier

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission