FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF
CONNECTICUT
In the Matter of
a Complaint by FINAL
DECISION
John R. Powell,
Complainant
against Docket #FIC 89-359
Chief of Police,
Wethersfield Police Department,
Respondent March 14, 1990
The above-captioned matter was heard
as a contested case on February 6, 1990, 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 September 5, 1989, the complainant requested: a) copies
of all documents prepared by the Wethersfield Police Department in reference to
infraction complaint number 048444-4 dated May 15, 1989, and b) copies of all
material prepared by the respondent and the respondent's department in
reference to the complainant's letters dated June 22, 1989 and August 2, 1989.
3.
By letter filed with this Commission on September 19, 1989, the
complainant appealed the partial denial of his request and sought a refund for
charges of copies not covered by his requests.
4.
It is found that the complainant initially received 23 pages of
documents in response to his September 5 request, some portions of which were
redacted.
5.
The respondent claims that the redacted portions of the records supplied
to the complainant and identified in paragraph 4, above, were exempt from
disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(3)(B), G.S.
Docket #FIC
89-359 Page 2
6.
It is found that at the time of the complainant's request, court cases
were pending against two of the subjects of the records identified in paragraph
4, above.
7.
It is further found that all of the requested documents identified in
paragraph 4, above, were made available to the complainant in unredacted form
after the court cases identified in paragraph 7, above, were no longer pending.
8.
It is concluded therefore that it is unnecessary to decide whether the
redacted portions of the records described in paragraph 4, above, were exempt
from disclosure at the time of the complainant's request.
9.
The complainant also claims that three pages of documents supplied to
him by the respondent were not responsive to his request.
10.
It is found that the three pages of documents identified in paragraph
10, above, consist of part of the record that was 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.
The complaint is hereby dismissed.
Approved by
order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of March
14, 1990.
Tina C.
Frappier
Acting Clerk
of the Commission
Docket #FIC
89-359 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:
JOHN R. POWELL
473 Wolcott Hill
Road
Wethersfield, CT
06109
CHIEF OF POLICE,
WETHERSFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT
c/o T. William
Knapp
505 Silas Deane
Highway
Wethersfield, CT
06109
Tina C.
Frappier
Acting Clerk
of the Commission