Monday, June 29, 2015

Connecticut State Police appeals Altimari Sandy Hook Document Decision

The State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (Connecticut State Police)/(CSP) has appealed the Connecticut Freedom of Information (FOIC) ruling that the State Police must release to the public the Sandy Hook shooter's documents.

Back ground references are below.

In short, several of the shooters documents were seized by CSP in the investigation subsequent to the December 14, 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. These documents were not released with the final report.

The Big Book of Granny is one of the contested items.

The Courant and Sandy Hook Facts filed FOI request to obtain those documents and both were denied. The Courant appealed.

When the CSP denied Sandy Hook Facts' FOI request, the basis of the denial was that "items of personal property seized from a private residence in connection with an investigation into criminal activity are not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information act".

The Commission ruled in favor of Dave Altimari and the Courant ruling the items were public interest and should be released.

On June 26, 2015 the CSP filed a 31 Page Administrative Appeal.

The appeal again contends that the items seized are not subject to FOI, the argument the CSP made during the hearing. In fact, the CSP had attempted a motion o bifurcate the hearing to first determine of seized items were subject to FOI.  The motion to bifurcate was denied.

The CSP Contends that the FOIC rulings were:
1. In violation of constitutional statutory provisions.
2. In excess of the statutory authority of the agency.
3. made upon unlawful procedure.
4. affected by error of law.
e. erroneous in view of the record.
f. arbitrary and capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion.


Sandy Hook Facts is directly affected by this court case as the CSP has also denied our right to access these documents.

It is clear that the Sandy Hook shooting is indeed a matter of significant public interest.  Nationwide, laws and policies are written based on this incident.  The incident remains in the newss daily.

We must ask:
But for a case like Sandy Hook, why is there Freedom of Information at all?

The shooter's information is essential information and information that has been denied the public at large. This information includes photos of the shooter holding a gun to his head and the shooter in "dress rehearsal" clothing, writing, videos of the shooters activities including DDR, and many other articles that the public has a right to view.

This shooter is entitled to no public protection. Indeed, he should be hung from a hook in town square for the public to view. In fact, such open disclosure would do well to send many of the "on the fence" hoaxers on to other subjects.

It is clear that the public interest out weighs the states interest to keep theses matters from the public and we offer our full fledged total support to David Altimari and the Courant. 

Reference Links:

(Hosted on PDF Archive)

FOI Case - Superior Court New Britain
Petition - Appeal Administrative Ruling

Motion to Stay FOI Ruling

Order to Show Cause

Commission rules in Favor of Courant

FOI Hearing #1 - Jan. 6, 2015

FOI Hearing #2 - Feb 19, 2015


Anonymous said...

I've read the CT Law Tribune article and this seems to be an issue over "chain of custody". Usually, after investigation's wrap up, the materials are turned back over to their owners.

While Lanza is dead, I'm not sure who would get this. The document is not piece of investigative documentation (something generated by the investigation), but a piece of personal property so, the FOIA is not black and white.

Interesting issue, though.

Anonymous said...

Agreed, a very interesting issue.

I would think that anything which would have been evidential to a court proceeding in obtaining a conviction of the perpetrator, should he have survived, can not be classified as personal property. Evidential in terms of say, ascertaining a motive to the crime. As an example, the 'Book of Granny' would seem to me to be evidential.

The Truthers are in a feeding frenzy over this; squealing "cover-up!" as expected. I will not speculate myself. I do hope that it does get disseminated properly by persons far more knowledgeable about law than I.