FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

In the Matter of a Complaint by                        Final Decision

 

Tracey Thomas, T. Dennie Williams and The Hartford Courant,

 

                                Complainants

 

                against                   Docket #FIC 95-237

 

State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, Division of State

Police and State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection,

 

                                Respondents                        April 24, 1996

 

                The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on January 24, 1996, at which time the complainants and the respondents appeared, stipulated to certain facts and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  Docket #FIC 95-247, T. Dennie Williams and The Hartford Courant v. State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety and Troop F, State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, was consolidated with the above-captioned matter for purpose of hearing.

 

                After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

                1.  The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of 1-18a(a), G.S.

 

                2.  By letter of complaint dated July 17, 1995 and filed with the Commission on July 18, 1995, the complainants appealed to the Commission alleging that the respondents violated the Freedom of Information ("FOI") Act by denying them access to reports concerning the July 6, 1995 Hammonasset beach state park drowning of twenty-one year old special olympian athlete Ramesh Mali (hereinafter "the drowning").

 

                3.  It is found that between July 6, 1995 and July 17, 1995 the complainants made several requests to the respondents for reports drafted by the respondents regarding the drowning, including reports of the respondents' inquiries into the drowning and life guard and beach manager reports.  The complainants renewed their request to the respondent department of public safety by letters dated July 25 and October 19, 1995.

 

                4.  It is found that the respondent department of environmental protection provided the complainants with records responsive to their requests on or about July 25, 1995.

 

Docket #FIC 95-237                                             Page 2

 

                5.  It is found that the complainants, by letter dated July 25, 1995, informed the Commission that they were withdrawing the complaint as against the respondent department of environmental protection.

 

                6.  It is found that the respondent department of public safety (hereinafter "the respondent department") informed the complainants by letter dated July 12, 1995 that their request was being reviewed.

 

                7.  It is found that the respondent department denied the complainants request by letter dated July 19, 1995 claiming that the investigation "is not completed."

 

                8.  It is found that the respondent department provided the complainants with access to all of the requested records by letter dated November 8, 1995.

 

                9.  Accordingly, the only issue before the Commission is whether the respondent department's provision of access on November 8, 1995 comports with 1-19(a), G.S.

 

                10.  It is found that the requested records consist of a one page initial missing person report dated July 8, 1995; summaries of the drowning incident and chronology of action taken dated July 8, 10, 12 and 26, August 10 and 16, 1995, and September 7, 1995; statements of witnesses dated July 6 through July 9; map of Hammonasset beach state park; copy of Mali's special olympic identification card; log of federal, state and local agencies involved in the investigation; a report of the photographs taken of Mali at the office of the chief medical examiner on July 11, 1995; records of the search and search area worksheet; United States coast guard message sheet and log regarding the search; department of environmental protection case report dated July 11, 1995; and a log of the search dives (hereinafter "requested records").

 

                11.  It is found that the requested records are public records within the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

                12.  The respondent department contends that the requested records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to 1-19(b)(3), G.S.

 

                13.  Section 1-19(b)(3), G.S., permits nondisclosure of:

 

                                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 (A) the identity of informants not otherwise known

 

Docket #FIC 95-237                                                  Page 3

 

                                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, (B) signed statements of witnesses, (C) information to be used in a prospective law enforcement action if prejudicial to such action, (D) investigatory techniques not otherwise known to the general public, (E) arrest records of a juvenile, which shall also include any investigatory files, concerning the arrest of such juvenile, compiled for law enforcement purposes, (F) the name and address of the victim of a sexual assault under section 53a-70, 53a-70a, 53a-71, 53a-72a, 53a-72b or 53a-73a, or injury or risk of injury, or impairing of morals under section 53-21, or of an attempt thereof or (G) uncorroborated allegations subject to destruction pursuant to section 1-20c.

 

                14.  It is found that the requested records were compiled during the respondents investigation of the drowning incident.

 

                15.  It is found that on July 11, 1995 the chief medical examiner certified the cause of Mali's death as asphyxia and the manner of death as an accident.

 

                16.  It is found that the respondent department of public safety, from the onset of the investigation, treated the investigation as potentially a criminal matter, not then being able to conclude whether a homicide, accident or suicide had occurred.

 

                17.  It is found that the respondent department's Major Crime Squad conducted the investigation.

 

                18.  It is found that the August 16 and September 7, 1995 portions of the investigation report, described in paragraph 10, above, indicate that the investigation was closed and coded "no criminal aspect."

 

                19.  It is therefore found that as of August 16, 1995 the respondent department no longer treated the investigation as potentially a criminal matter.

 

                20.  It is also found that the respondent failed to prove that disclosure of the requested records prior to August 16, 1995, would not be in the public interest because it would result in the disclosure of the identity of informants or

 

Docket #FIC 95-237                                                 Page 4

 

witnesses within the meaning of 1-19(b)(3)(A), G.S., information to be used in a prospective law enforcement action within the meaning of 1-19(b)(3)(C), G.S., investigatory techniques within the meaning of 1-19(b)(3)(D), G.S., arrest records of a juvenile within the meaning of 1-19(b)(3)(E), G.S., and the name and address of the victim of a sexual assault within the meaning of 1-19(b)(3)(F), G.S.

 

                21.  It is found however, that disclosure of the requested records prior to August 16, 1995, when the investigation was still being treated as a possible criminal matter, would have disclosed signed statements of witnesses within the meaning of 1-19(b)(3)(B), G.S.

 

                22.  Consequently it is concluded that the requested records, with the exception of the signed witness statements, described in paragraph 21, above, are not exempt pursuant to 1-19(b)(3), G.S.

 

                23.  It is concluded that the respondent department of public safety violated 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S., when it failed to promptly provide the complainants with access to a copy of the requested records, except the signed witness statements, as soon as such records were prepared, received and being maintained within the the meaning of 1-18a(d) and 1-19(a), G.S.

 

                24.  It is also concluded that the respondent department of public safety violated 1-15 and 1-19(a), G.S., when it failed to promptly provide the complainants with access to a copy of the signed witness statements as of August 16, 1995.

 

                25.  The Commission in its discretion declines to impose a civil penalty in this matter.

 

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

 

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

 

                2.  The complaint is dismissed as against the respondent department of environmental protection.

 

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of April 24, 1996.

 

                                                                             

                                                Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

Docket #FIC 95-237                                             Page 4

 

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:

Tracey Thomas, T. Dennie Williams and The Hartford Courant

285 Broad Street

Hartford, CT 06115

 

 

State of Connecticut, Department of Public Safety, Division of State Police and State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection

c/o Sharon Hartley, Esq.,Assistant Attorney General

110 Sherman Street

Hartford, CT 06105

 

                                                                             

                                                Elizabeth A. Leifert

                                                Acting Clerk of the Commission