FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Dennis C. LaGanza,

 

                        Complainant

 

            against              Docket #FIC 93-78

 

Chief of Police, Hartford Police Department,

 

                        Respondent                  October 27, 1993

 

            The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on July 8, 1993, at which time the complainant 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 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

            2.  By letter dated February 3, 1993, the complainant requested of the respondent access to copy all records pertaining to an investigation carried out by the respondent of Michael Pineault, an employee of the respondent and also a client of the complainant.

 

            3.  By letter dated February 10, 1993, the respondent denied the complainant's request claiming that the investigation in question was ongoing and therefore the requested records were unavailable at that time.

 

            4.  By letter dated March 4, 1993, the respondent again denied the complainant's request claiming that although the investigation had been concluded the requested records are nonetheless exempt from disclosure pursuant to the Freedom of Information (hereinafter, "FOI") Act.

 

            5.  By letter dated March 26, 1993, and filed with the Commission on March 29, 1993, the complainant appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondent violated the FOI Act by denying him access to the requested records.

 

            6.  It is found that the requested records are public records within the meaning of 1-19(a), G.S.

 

            7.  The respondent contends that the requested records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(3)(F) and 1-20c, G.S.

 

Docket #FIC 93-78                             Page 2

 

            8.  Section 1-19(b)(3)(F), G.S., provides that nothing in the FOI Act shall require disclosure of:

 

                        (3) records 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 ... (F) uncorroborated allegations subject to destruction pursuant to section 1-20c.

 

            9.         Section 1-20c, G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

                        that records of law enforcement agencies consisting of uncorroborated allegations that an individual has engaged in criminal activity shall be reviewed by the law enforcement agency one year after the creation of such records.  If the existence of the alleged criminal activity cannot be corroborated within ninety days of the commencement of such review, the law enforcement agency shall destroy such records.

 

            10.  It is found that the respondent failed to prove that the records described in paragraph 2, above, are exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(3)(F) and 1-20c, G.S., because he failed to prove that disclosure would not be in the public interest, and therefore the respondent's denial of access to them constitutes a violation of the FOI Act.

 

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

 

            1.  The respondent shall forthwith provide the complainant with a copy of the records described in paragraph 2 of the findings, above.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of October 27, 1993.

 

                                                                 

                                    Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 93-78                                      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:

Dennis C. LaGanza, Esq.

Leone, Throwe & Nagle

33 Connecticut Boulevard

P.O. Box 8225

East Hartford, CT 06108-0625

 

Chief of Police, Hartford Police Department

c/o Lt. Gerald Kumnick

Hartford Police Department

50 Jennings Road

Hartford, CT 06120

 

                                                                 

                                    Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                    Acting Clerk of the Commission