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