High Court Orders Public Release of Sandy Hook Killer's Personal Writings
The state's high court ruled 5-0 Tuesday that nothing in the state's statutes prohibits the release of Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter Adam Lanza's writings. It's not clear, though, when those documents will now be made public.
October 23, 2018 at 05:39 PM
4 minute read
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled 5-0 Tuesday morning that the state police must release documents belonging to the mother of Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter Adam Lanza. The ruling overturns a lower court ruling.
Many of the document in question belonged to Adam Lanza, including a spiral-bound book written by the shooter titled “The Big Book of Granny,” a photograph of the school's class of 2002-2003, and a spreadsheet of rankings of mass murders, which also included the names, number of people killed and weapons used.
The Hartford Courant, which had sought to get the documents released, had requested to look at about 35 items seized, some of them deemed graphic, from Nancy Lanza's house. The state police declined, citing privacy rights.
Adam Lanza killed his mother before going to the school and murdering 20 schoolchildren and six educators in December 2012.
The high court sided with the Freedom of Information Commission and the Hartford Courant in Commissioner of Emergency Services and Public Protection v. Freedom of Information Commission.
Justice Raheem Mullins, writing for the high court, said the “trial court's conclusion that the search and seizure statutes form the basis for an exemption is inconsistent with our case law interpreting this exemption.”
Mullins continued: “Indeed we are not blind to the fact that limiting the disclosure of seized documents in order to protect the privacy of those whose property is seized, particularly if a criminal proceeding does not result, may be a good or even preferable way in which to deal with documents seized in this matter. The department [of Emergency Services and Public Protection], however, does not, and cannot, point to express language in the search and seizure statutes providing for such confidentiality.”
William Fish Jr., who represented the Courant, told the Connecticut Law Tribune Tuesday the law is clearly on the side of the Freedom of Information Commission and the newspaper.
“This is significant because it will allow the Courant, and the public, to have access to the records,” said Fish, a partner with Hinckley, Allen & Snyder. “These records are very important to get a look of what was going on in the shooter's head to cause such a horrific tragedy in Newtown. This ruling also clarifies the law in this area, in that if you will have exemptions from FOIA, they must be articulated in the statutes, and not implied.”
Fish added: “The ruling is also important because it makes clear that any exemption to FOIA disclosure requirements must be narrowly construed.”
There are legal timelines related to a possible motion to reconsider and remanding to the trial court, and it wasn't clear Tuesday when the seized documents could be released, Fish said.
The commissioner of Emergency Services and Public Protection was represented by Assistant Attorney General Steven Barry and Solicitor General Jane Rosenberg. Jaclyn Severance, a spokeswoman for the Office of Connecticut Attorney General, said the office would have no comment on the ruling.
In addition to Fish, the Courant was also represented by Hinckley Allen associate Alexa Millinger. The FOIC was represented by Victor Perpetua, principal attorney for the commission.
Perpetua told the Connecticut Law Tribune Tuesday: “It's nice to get a solid opinion. It reaffirms something that I was beginning to think might be in doubt, which is that records are public unless some statute says they are not. In this case, no statute said that.”
Related Stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250