Petition for release of info and FOIL info

[LINative13]

Nice work Mom. About time we all did something instead of arguing in circles. Great job. Don't let the critics get to you; its easy to be a critic, but not one successful person I know was never critcized one way or another (there is no way he cna pull that off; thats a stupid idea; what a waste of time; etc etc).

Will the request get denied? Possibly. Will it raise awareness? Definitely.

 

[Justiceforever]

I couldn't agree with you more Native! I don't understand why anyone who wants the truth to come out wouldn't encourage and participate in letter writing, signing the petition and filling out a foil request.

 

[PreciousDust]

I don't understand why anyone who wants the truth to come out wouldn't encourage and participate in letter writing, signing the petition and filling out a foil request.

I signed up for the letter writing, I signed the petition - but I can't imagine what the point would be of more than one person sending a FOIL request.

 

[mysterymom7]

I signed up for the letter writing, I signed the petition - but I can't imagine what the point would be of more than one person sending a FOIL request.

Because there is power in numbers. If 20 people request the same information and it goes to court, the judge is going to have a hard time denying the request with redacted info. It then becomes a public interest on a larger scale. If you don't want to send a FOIL request, it is of no consequence to me. Thanks for your signature and participation in writing a letter.

 

[PreciousDust]

Because there is power in numbers. If 20 people request the same information and it goes to court, the judge is going to have a hard time denying the request with redacted info. It then becomes a public interest on a larger scale.

Yeah, well, like you say, "I respectfully disagree". Flooding the FOIL system with multiple requests for the same info won't impress the police or the courts. In my opinion. Constructively.

 

[Seajay]

Has Mari Gilbert, through her lawyer filed for the 911 tapes under the FOIL act??? That would go a long way.

 

[mysterymom7]

Has Mari Gilbert, through her lawyer filed for the 911 tapes under the FOIL act??? That would go a long way.

I gave her the information because I agree... it would go a long way.

 

[LINative13]

Yeah, well, like you say, "I respectfully disagree". Flooding the FOIL system with multiple requests for the same info won't impress the police or the courts. In my opinion. Constructively.

Thanks Preciousdust. What the case needs is attention. I am not sure if you are from LI but in my town (babylon) this case has been swept under the rug. Noone speaks about it. I belive the letter writing, the foil/foia, and the possible vigil all around the same time as SG's discovery anniversary will make people look at this again. Will the flooding of FOIL/FOIA requests slow it down? I do not know? Will people who deal with those requests get sick of seeing the samething over and over again....damn right. I think the requests should be mentioned in our letters. I will post that now, Thanks for the idea and your help.

 

[mysterymom7]

Thanks Preciousdust. What the case needs is attention. I am not sure if you are from LI but in my town (babylon) this case has been swept under the rug. Noone speaks about it. I belive the letter writing, the foil/foia, and the possible vigil all around the same time as SG's discovery anniversary will make people look at this again. Will the flooding of FOIL/FOIA requests slow it down? I do not know? Will people who deal with those requests get sick of seeing the samething over and over again....damn right. I think the requests should be mentioned in our letters. I will post that now, Thanks for the idea and your help.

I agree. Thanks for your constructive criticism, Precious! I hadn't considered that, but it's a definite possibility. LI, I think adding it to our letters (for those who filed a FOIL request) would be a great idea!

 

[mysterymom7]

I have a feeling that the police/incident report won't be found. The way it seems is that there wasn't one. I hope that's not the case, but I have a feeling it is.

 

[Seaslug44]

911 recordings are protected from release due their nature...

(f) could if disclosed endanger the life or safety of any person;

No way SUFFOLK is going to release 911 recordings.

Talk about opening Pandora's box.

Citizens need to know that it is their right to maintain the protection that the privacy of the 911 system affords to them. If we allow 911 recordings to be released with simple FOIL requests, then every felon who is snitched on could use the legal system to discover who turned them in.

 

[mysterymom7]

911 recordings are protected from release due their nature...



No way SUFFOLK is going to release 911 recordings.

Talk about opening Pandora's box.

Citizens need to know that it is their right to maintain the protection that the privacy of the 911 system affords to them. If we allow 911 recordings to be released with simple FOIL requests, then every felon who is snitched on could use the legal system to discover who turned them in.

You're correct... to a degree. That is why witness names are redacted. DOB, address, phone numbers and other identifying details are also required to be redacted. When you call 911, the first thing you hear is, "This call is being recorded," which is the first legal step you know it is not a private call and that what is said on the call can be heard at a later date.

Please note the following case law and decisions that were overturned by the Supreme Court:

Laporte v. Morgenthau, 11 AD3d 410, 783 NYS2d 571 (2004) - -

Affirmed order requiring disclosure of audiotapes, following redaction of witnesses’ identities pursuant to §87(2)(f).


New York Times Company v. City of New York Fire Department, 835 NYS2d 92, 39AD3d 414 (2007) - -

Some tapes of 911 calls made during attack on 911 “include, by repetition, by 911 operators... identifying information provided by the caller.” Court of Appeals in NY Times v. NY Fire Dept., previously held “words” of 911 callers be redacted, and that “redaction of repeated information is consistent with the intent of the Court of Appeals.”


Wooten v. New York City Police Department, Supreme Court, New York County, September 9, 2008 - -

Petitioner requested records relating to a complaint that he filed, including a 911 transcript of a call made by the manager of a store where petitioner was present, and a copy of the police report filed by two named officers. After numerous delays, petitioner was informed that 911 transcript is no longer maintained and was erased before receiving his request and that police report could not be found. Held that agency "failed to provide any statement certifying that the requested documents are not in its possession and control or that the documents could not be located after a thorough and diligent search, which would be sufficient to render petitioner's application moot", citing Rattley. Also held that agency offered no factual basis for claiming privacy exception concerning redactions made from police report and ordered disclosure of unredacted report.

 

[PreciousDust]

I am not sure if you are from LI ...

I'm from West Islip, though I haven't been there for a long time.

 

[LINative13]

Slug, I think a mother should be able to hear her daughters last known communication if she winds up dead. What do you think? If that was your child, mother, father, brother, sister......and they placed a call to 911, supposedly a call that was right before they expried under suspicious circumstances; wouldnt you want to hear it? Who are they putting in danger if they released the call? Shes already dead.

 

[mysterymom7]

127 signatures! Please help keep the petition moving by sharing with friends and family! Thanks for all your help!

 

[Seaslug44]

You're correct... to a degree. That is why witness names are redacted. DOB, address, phone numbers and other identifying details are also required to be redacted. When you call 911, the first thing you hear is, "This call is being recorded," which is the first legal step you know it is not a private call and that what is said on the call can be heard at a later date.

Please note the following case law and decisions that were overturned by the Supreme Court:

I have called 911 many times in my life and never once did they say the calls were being recorded (so I am unclear where you received that misinformation).

The calls always start...

911... WHAT IS YOUR EMERGENCY?

 

[mysterymom7]

I have called 911 many times in my life and never once did they say the calls were being recorded (so I am unclear where you received that misinformation).

The calls always start...

Ok, maybe I'm thinking of the non-emergency line? Maybe a 911 call doesn't say that since it is known? I don't know, the last 911 call I made was 13 yrs ago.

Either way, the 3 cases I've cited show 911 calls fall under FOIL.

 

[Seaslug44]

More recent case law:

http://www.dos.ny.gov/coog/lesher.html

This case law simply states that an agency cannot issue a generically written denial for records that are part of an ongoing investigation. The appeals court ruled that the agency has to take the time to write a specific reason for the denial and explain why the requested information is relevant to the case.

So in other words, when Suffolk County denies your requests for copies of the 911 recordings they cannot simply write "your request is denied because we do not release any information related to an ongoing investigation". Instead, Suffolk County has to write something like this;

"We are denying your request for copies of the 911 Oak Beach recordings of May 1, 2010 because there is an ongoing investigation and we still have not concluded whether or not the information contained on those recordings are relevant to the case or provide evidence that might later be used to secure a conviction".

And since the statute of limitations for murder is... well eternity... that is the amount of time Suffolk County can continue to deny your requests under the FOIL act exclusions.

The ME's office has made it clear that SG's cause of death has been classified as "Inconclusive" at this time. That COD leaves the possibilty of murder on the table. As long as any crime is on the table as being unsolved, the 911 tapes are evidence that must be preserved for possible trial. Releasing them can compromise the investigation.

If SG was indeed murdered, certainly we would all like to see the guilty party convicted -right??

If so, then why would you petition for the County to do something that can hurt the chances of that conviction?

It's the same Catch-22 dilemma that the Gilbert family faces; you argue that SG's 911 recordings could be released to the public because the police are implying that her death was probably an accident yet at the same time you want so badly for her death to be pursued as a murder investigation. You simply cannot have it both ways.

Murder Investigation = no 911 recordings released to the public.

It's that simple. Even if 911 recordings could be released by Suffolk County via FOIL requests, wishing that the May 1st recordings are released is an indirect way of asking SCPD to completely give up on considering the possibility that SG was murdered.

Be careful of what you wish for.

Once you put your names on those FOIL requests there is no turning back.

I feel the same frustation as you do about the content of the recordings. Many of us want so badly to hear them for ourselves to help further our investigation and to help figure out what exactly happened that evening. But I do appreciate the value that the content of those tapes may hold for the investigators and the future prosecutors (should there ever be someone charged for her murder).

Why attempt to jeaopardize the investigation?

 

[Justiceforever]

I see your point Slug. I never thought of it like that. Probably because I was under the impression that they were treating her death as an accident. All of these misunderstandings could be cleared up if they just held a press conference to inform the public wtf is really going on! The extent that they could without jeopardizing the investigation. Don't you think it is our right to know what is being done if anything to solve these cases? Even just to reassure us that SOMETHING IS being done to solve these deaths?

 

[PreciousDust]

I'll bet it wouldn't be that hard to get a detective on the phone who would confirm that SG is an ongoing investigation, and that a lot is being done to solve these cases, the details of which they can't discuss. I can't see them holding a press conference to make those points, though.