Denied: State police supervisor notations, certain radar gun memos
June 22, 2009 Filed in: Denied
| Pa. State
Police | Agency
non-compliance | Record
doesn't exist | Personnel
records
Denied: A request to the
Pennsylvania State Police for certain memos on
inaccurate radar guns, and supervisor's notations
on a specific officer. The PSP stated that the
radar gun reports requested did not exist, and
that the supervisor's notations amounted to
personnel records, which are exempt from
disclosure under the Right to Know Law.
From
the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information
Coalition
Denied: A request to the Pennsylvania State Police for certain memos on inaccurate radar guns, and supervisor's notations on a specific officer.
The PSP, although it failed to respond to the request in a timely manner, provided to the Offfice of Open Records on appeal a defense of its denial of the records, claiming that the supervisor's notations were protected from release by the personnel record presumption, and that it had searched for the other records, but they did not exist.
The Office of Open Records agreed with the PSP in both instances, ruling that the supervisor's notations were exempt as personnel records, and that the PSP provided three verifications that the requested reports by specific officers on radar gun inaccuracies did not exist.
"The OOR applauds PSP’s diligence in searching for responsive records within its possession, and reminds all agencies that records of the agency, even if not within its physical possession, must be produced unless exempt from disclosure. The OOR notes that an agency’s failure to obtain records from another party in possession of its records can be deemed a denial of access."
The OOR ruling cited a recent Commonwealth court ruling in Lukes et al. vs. DPW, regarding "possession" and agency obligation or retrieval, although the ruling was made regarding the old Right to Know Law.
Garcia vs. Pennsylvania State Police -- AP 2009-0423
Denied: A request to the Pennsylvania State Police for certain memos on inaccurate radar guns, and supervisor's notations on a specific officer.
The PSP, although it failed to respond to the request in a timely manner, provided to the Offfice of Open Records on appeal a defense of its denial of the records, claiming that the supervisor's notations were protected from release by the personnel record presumption, and that it had searched for the other records, but they did not exist.
The Office of Open Records agreed with the PSP in both instances, ruling that the supervisor's notations were exempt as personnel records, and that the PSP provided three verifications that the requested reports by specific officers on radar gun inaccuracies did not exist.
"The OOR applauds PSP’s diligence in searching for responsive records within its possession, and reminds all agencies that records of the agency, even if not within its physical possession, must be produced unless exempt from disclosure. The OOR notes that an agency’s failure to obtain records from another party in possession of its records can be deemed a denial of access."
The OOR ruling cited a recent Commonwealth court ruling in Lukes et al. vs. DPW, regarding "possession" and agency obligation or retrieval, although the ruling was made regarding the old Right to Know Law.
Garcia vs. Pennsylvania State Police -- AP 2009-0423