Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Opening Statement to be made at FOI today at 2pm

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Opening Statement to be made at FOI today at 2pm

    FIREARM DEALERS EMAIL ADDRESSES

    I am here today on another case where DESPP has unreasonably delayed and denied promptaccess to inspect public records, apattern and practice that is evidenced by the need to file numerous complaints against the agency.

    This request for prompt access began in July of 2013, over one year ago.

    If permitted to ask questions, and present written evidence, I will paint a very clear picture of exactly what happened since my first request in July of last year.

    The case I plan on presenting today is best explained by simply connecting the dots, or in this case the dates.

    The public record provides evidence that DESPP on October 16th 2013, acknowledged the fact that they were and are "MANDATED" to release the requested information as stated in an email solicitation to Connecticut Firearm Dealers dated October 16, 2013.

    DESPP will I'm sure, present the usual opening sob story consisting of the size of their department, the number of units and employees within DESPP, the volume of FOI requests received annually, the limited number of personnel to handle FOI requests and the fact that I make numerous requests.

    Any excuses, (SOB STORIES), offered by DESPP at this hearing if valid, should be made to the legislature and not to the FOIC.

    The state of Connecticut claims to have had a surplus of 121 million dollarsfor the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014, and if true, had and has the financial resources to assign additional personnel to handle FOI requests made to DESPP in a prompt and timely manner.

    The need to obtain this information promptly, arose as part of a client's (CT CARRYINC.) desire to obtain and possess information with which to contact firearm dealers regarding existing and proposed firearm issues and legislation.

    The intent was to request, obtain and have the email addresses PRIOR to the 2014 legislative session which has now come and gone.

    Inaddition to FOI requests made exclusively for American News and InformationServices Inc., American News and Information Services also acts as an agent and obtains INFORMATION for the office of Attorney Rachel M. Baird and a variety ofother clients who desire to remain anonymous.

    Due to the post Newtown social and political atmosphere in Connecticut, information related to all aspects of firearms is being requested to better understand the evolving issues of Federal and State Constitutional rights as they relate to firearms.

    Upon learning that DESPP was soliciting and obtaining email addresses from firearm dealers in Connecticut, our client as well as American News desired to have the same information for identifying and contacting firearm dealers in a cost effective manner.

    The current issue began one year ago on July 26th 2013 with a written email request for PROPMT ACCESS to inspect the requested public records.

    The record will show that American News and Information Services Inc. was willing to give DESPP more than enough time to review the request and provide access to inspect the requested records.

    Maximum civil penalties are requested against all named individuals who failed top rovide prompt access and denied the ability to inspect the requested records as MANDATED by the law.
    Last edited by Edward Peruta; 07-30-2014 at 07:31 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Renewed FOI request to Hartford Police Deparment regarding surrendered firearms

    From: Edward Peruta [mailto:edperuta@amcable.tv]
    Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 7:55 AM
    To: 'WIEBU001@hartford.gov'; 'Brian.Foley@hartford.gov'
    Cc: rbaird@rachelbairdlaw.com; 'Rich Burgess'; 'MattCol@aol.com'
    Subject: FW: FOI request - response


    DeputyChief Foley and Detective Wiebusch,

    On July 21, 2014, I submitted a written, (email), FOI request for PROMPT ACCESS to INSPECT public records during normal business hours at Hartford Police Department.

    Additionally, I made several phone calls to you and Deputy Chief Foley with no response.

    I then presented myself in the lobby of the Hartford Police Department seeking to meet with you or Deputy Chief Foley and was informed that my request was being handled and no meeting would take place.

    May I suggest that you contact the Freedom of Information Commission,(860-566-5682), and have the law explained regarding PROMPT ACCESS to INSPECT public records during normal business hours.

    The request submitted asked for prompt access to "Any hard copy orelectronic records listing the Make, Model, Caliber and Serial Number of thefirearms surrendered" during the firearm surrender event held in your city on July 19th.

    I have filed a Freedom of Information Complaint to preserve the issue should you or your department fail to follow the law in this matter.

    I am again requesting PROMPT ACCESS to INSPECT the evidence/firearm vault logs/records listing the firearms surrendered to your department on July 19th.

    I will be in Harford this afternoon and will be available to inspect the requested records.

    Please provide a response to this email as to your ability to provide access today by the end of normal business hours.

    Respectfully,
    Edward A. Peruta
    AmericanNews and Information Services Inc.
    c/oAttorney Rachel M. Baird
    8Church Street
    Torrington,CT06790
    860-978-5455
    Last edited by Edward Peruta; 07-30-2014 at 07:59 AM.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    On the 2nd of may I filed a criminal complaint against DESPP for their continuing lack of promptness ... on June 17th the SA got back to me saying that their continual refusal to comply with dozens of orders by the FIC does not meet "to rise to a criminal matter".

    So even the SA does not understand CGS Sec. 1-240 (b) that states:

    (b) Any member of any public agency who fails to comply with an order of the Freedom of Information Commission shall be guilty of a class B misdemeanor and each occurrence of failure to comply with such order shall constitute a separate offense. (P.A. 75-342, 16; P.A. 79-631, 24; P.A. 82-188, 2.)


    Now the FIC seems to be apologists for DESPP...not willing to further put on record findings of violations of promptness.

    2nd to last FIC hearing of the full commission regarding an Ed appeal the commissioners had some smart-ass remarks about Ed & his complaint.

    I'll be filing a new complaint with the SA concerning newer requests made that have been unanswered.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    The new game of the FIC is to just ask the commission to rule "to affirm the decision of the executive director's decision not to schedule"..but such affirmations being sought are contrary to the law ... ie its improper to ask for an affirmation of the executive director's conclusions....as courts have ruled again and again.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •