FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
|
In the Matter of a Complaint by |
FINAL DECISION |
||
|
Paul Bass and New Haven Advocate, |
|
||
|
|
Complainant |
|
|
|
|
against |
Docket #FIC 2000-312 |
|
|
Chief, Police Department, City of New Haven |
|
||
|
|
Respondents |
November 29, 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on September 20, 2000, at which time the complainants and the respondent 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 and conclusions of law are reached:
1. The respondent is a public agency within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.
2. It is found that, by letter
dated May 15, 2000, the complainants requested that the respondent provide
them with the:
a.
written reports relating to police contact with Ovil Ruiz a/k/a Ovil
Castro in connection with the Jacqueline Shaw murder investigation, including
any interviews with Ruiz and any documentation of why Ruiz’s information was
deemed unuseable in the investigation; and
b.
written reports relating to any police interviews about the evening of
the murder with a custodian, security personnel, or any other employees of
either the Board of Education or Wilbur Cross High School, or subcontractors
working for those entities.
(hereinafter “requested records”).
3.
Having failed to receive the requested records, the complainants, by
letter dated June 19, 2000 and filed on June 20, 2000, appealed to the
Commission alleging that the respondent violated the Freedom of Information
Act by failing to provide them with the requested records.
4. Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides:
Except as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public agency, whether or not such records are required by any law or by any rule or regulation, shall be public records and every person shall have the right to inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours or to receive a copy of such records in accordance with the provisions of section 1-212.
5. It is found that the respondent maintains or keeps on file records that are responsive to the complainants’ request, and such records are public records within the meaning of §1-210(a), G.S.
6. Section 1-210(b)(3), G.S., permits the nondisclosure of: “[R]ecords of law enforcement agencies not otherwise available to the public which records were compiled in connection with the detection or investigation of crime, if the disclosure of said records would not be in the public interest because it would result in the disclosure of (A) the identity of informants not otherwise known or the identity of witnesses not otherwise known whose safety would be endangered or who would be subject to threat or intimidation if their identity was made known … (C) information to be used in a prospective law enforcement action if prejudicial to such action”.
7. The Commission takes administrative notice of the final decision in contested case docket #FIC 2000-114, Bill Kaempffer and New Haven Register v. Office of Corporation Counsel, City of New Haven, June 2000 (hereinafter “FIC 2000-114”), which also dealt with the disclosure of records pertaining to the investigation of the 1990 murder of Jacqueline Shaw, and particularly records pertaining to Ovil Ruiz.
8. The records at issue in this case were submitted to the Commission by the respondent and an in camera inspection was conducted.
9. It is found that the in camera records constitute records of a law enforcement agency not otherwise available to the public, which records were compiled in connection with the investigation of the crime of homicide, within the meaning of §1-210(b)(3), G.S.
10. It is also found that disclosure of the in camera records would not be in the public interest because it would result in the disclosure of the identity of informants not otherwise known or the identity of witnesses not otherwise known whose safety would be endangered or who would be subject to threat or intimidation if their identity was made known, within the meaning of §1-210(b)(3)(A), G.S.
11. In FIC 2000-114, the Commission found in finding 11, that:
…the respondent has a reasonable basis to believe that disclosure of the requested records at this time would not be in the public interest because such information might be used in a prospective law enforcement action and that disclosure at this time might prejudice such action.
12. Following a careful in
camera inspection of the records at issue, it is concluded, as was in
FIC 2000-114, that the respondent has a reasonable basis to believe
that disclosure of the requested records at this time would not be in the
public interest because such information might be used in a prospective law
enforcement action and that disclosure at this time might prejudice such
action.
13. Consequently, it is
concluded that the respondent did not violate §1-210(a), G.S., by failing to
disclose the in camera records to the complainants.
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 special meeting of November 29, 2000.
___________________________________
Ann B. Gimmartino
Acting Clerk of the Commission
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:
Paul Bass and New Haven Advocate
One Long Wharf Drive
New Haven, CT 06511
Donna Chance Dowdie, Esq.
Assistant Corporation Counsel
City of New Haven
165 Church Street
New Haven, CT 06510
___________________________________
Ann B. Gimmartino
Acting Clerk of the Commission