FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by FINAL DECISION

 

David W. Cummings,

 

Complainant

 

against Docket #FIC 91-33

 

East Windsor Police Department,

 

Respondent September 11, 1991

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on April 29, 1991, at which time the complainant and the respondent appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony 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 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

2. By letter dated February 4, 1991 and filed on February 8, 1991, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that on May 17, 1990 and January 21, 1991 the complainant requested from the respondent copies of two internal investigations, conducted by the respondent, of the complainant's arrests which occurred on March 11, 1986 and March 29, 1986, and that the respondent failed to respond to either request.

 

3. It is found that the respondent did not respond to either of the requests described in paragraph 2, above.

 

4. It is concluded that the records requested by the complainant are public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d), G.S.

 

5.     At the hearing, the respondent provided the complainant with copies of both of the investigation files described in

 

Docket #FIC 91-33 Page 2

 

paragraph 2, above, and indicated that if the complainant wanted copies of photographs related to the investigations or to order a transcription of the tapes, accommodations would be made for him to do so.

 

6. The respondent maintains that no response was given to the complainant's two requests due to certain circumstances within the respondent's department and concerns the respondent had about possible litigation, but it did not offer any statutory basis for its failure to provide access to the requested records.

 

7. It is therefore concluded that the respondent violated 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S., by failing to promptly provide copies of the records requested by the complainant.

 

The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint.

 

1. Henceforth the respondent shall strictly comply with the disclosure requirements of 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

2. The Commission admonishes the respondent for its failure to respond at all to the complainant's request for records.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 11, 1991.

 

 

Karen J. Haggett

Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC91-33 page 3

 

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:

EAST WINDSOR POLICE DEPARTMENT

25 School Street

P.O. Box 544

East Winsdor, CT 06088

 

DAVID W. CUMMINGS

100 Everett Avenue

Suite 16C

Chelsea, MA 02150

 

 

Karen J. Haggett

Clerk of the Commission