Group wants answers on destroyed records

Questions remain why requested police documents were shredded

HAMDEN — A local group tasked with strengthening police-community ties has launched an inquiry into the destruction of Police Department documents that were subject to a records request.

In early March, the Hamden Police Department submitted a form to the Connecticut State

Library asking permission to destroy unsubstantiated internal affairs files from 2018 through 2020.

That request followed a Feb. 25 Freedom of Information request submitted by police Commissioner Daniel Dunn, who asked to review civilian complaints dating back to 2016. It also came a month after a

commission meeting at which Dunn asked the department to provide internal affairs files for all active duty officers.

The Strengthening Police & Community Partnerships Executive Committee is seeking to establish whether the records were destroyed intentionally or as the result of an oversight, according to a release from the group.

The SPCP is operating independently from the town.

It has asked for material including “email correspondence between our Commissioners and Chief, an explanation of the current record destruction timelines and mandates, and a financial audit to understand costs associated with the FOIA requests made by (Dunn),” according to a statement from SPCP facilitator Jacqueline Beirne.

“The SPCP Council's primary concerns are public safety and trust in our Town leaders,” Beirne said in the statement. “Until this matter is clearly resolved and all parties are in agreement to move forward with the business of our Town, trust in our leadership and police will continue to deteriorate.”

Chief of Police John Sullivan, who has declined comment, signed the destruction request March 3, and Mayor Lauren Garrett signed it March 9. The state granted permission March 17, but this week put a hold on all disposition requests from the Hamden Police Department after learning of the FOI request.

LeAnn Burbank, the public records administrator for the Connecticut

State Library, later said she was not aware of the FOI request. It is the purview of the requesting agency to know whether the records pertain to a pending action, she said.

By signing the destruction request, Sullivan and Garrett averred that “no records listed, in our opinion, pertain to any pending case, claim, or action.”

Garrett has said she was not aware the files were connected to an active records request when she signed the form. She had not been not copied on the FOI request, she said Wednesday.

Sullivan on Wednesday said Garrett's administration had asked him not to speak with the press about the matter.

“I don't want to not listen to the administration's wishes,” he said.

Garrett asked Sullivan not to speak publicly about the incident until he had been interviewed by her staff, she said. Asked Wednesday evening whether he could speak about what occurred, Sullivan said he had no comment.

New details emerge

When news of the records' destruction first broke, it was unclear whether the internal affairs files included civilian complaints, the subject of Dunn's FOI request. Garrett has since confirmed civilian complaints were among the files and were, in fact, shredded.

But the department has electronic copies of the internal affairs investigation reports, according to the mayor, who said they restate the contents of each complaint.

“The digital copies were supposed to be destroyed at the same time but they were not,” she said. “I'm thankful that they were not.”

Asked whether the reports summarize the complaints or include their exact wording, Garrett said she was unsure.

“The civilian complaint is basically a written copy that is signed, and that piece of paper is lost through the shredding,” she said. “But when the internal affairs investigation is done the complaint gets restated ... so we have all of the information preserved.”

Asked whether the records destruction appeared to be intentional or was done in error, “I think it's one of those things where we may never know,” Garrett said.

The SPCP aims to find the answer.

“The SPCP Executive Committee is preparing inquiries into details for the processes of record destruction by both the office of the Mayor and the Chief of Police to determine whether this was intentional or a critical failure in the records retention policies,” its release says.

The SPCP “(hopes) to help see this issue resolved in the most positive way in order to secure a focus on our Hamden public safety needs,” it says.

Accidental or intentional?

Local officials differ on why the destruction of records occurred.

“If there is nothing to hide, why were documents destroyed?” asked Councilman Justin Farmer, D-5, a longtime police accountability advocate who has called for eventually phasing out the existence of the Police Department. “I fall back to the question of what are they hiding?”

The documents should be in the police commissioners' hands by now, Farmer said.

He pointed out that Sullivan has cited personnel issues when explaining the delay in providing records.

“But he has time to destroy documents. That doesn't make sense to me,” Farmer said. “I usually don't do spring cleaning when I have other stuff to do.”

Police Commissioner Frank LaDore said he knows the situation looks bad.

“But I don't believe that it was done purposely,” he said. “The fact that there's still electronic versions … hopefully everything will come out and it will be a moot story.”

LaDore said the department routinely destroys records. While it is possible the records were destroyed because of the FOI request, he said, his impression is that it occurred in error.

“I think we have to look at the process going forward to make sure that this doesn't happen,” he said. “If there's an FOI out there, we have to keep the records.”

Connecticut State Library records show Hamden police also received permission to destroy unsubstantiated internal affairs files in 2018 and 2020.