Skip to content

Judicial Watch • FBI Sanford App w Exh n Deliv Conf

FBI Sanford App w Exh n Deliv Conf

FBI Sanford App w Exh n Deliv Conf

Page 1: FBI Sanford App w Exh n Deliv Conf

Category:General

Number of Pages:10

Date Created:June 6, 2012

Date Uploaded to the Library:February 20, 2014

Tags:Deliv, Conf, App, Exh, Sanford, FBI


File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!

  • demand_answers

See Generated Text   ˅

Autogenerated text from PDF

TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT 
TIME 05/05/2012 23:30 
NAME JUDICIAL li.IATCH 
FAX 2026460190 
TEL 2025455172 
SER.# 000GBN545578 
DATE, TIME 05/05 23:24 FAX NO./NAME 2025141009 
00:06:19
DURATION JudicialWatcli 
425 Thi.rd St.1 SW, Ste. 800 
Wa.shlngton, J)C 20024 Phone::: 202-646-5 
fax; 202-646-5199 
Internet: www.judici-alwatcl1.org 
Fax 
tuA.Aer Vu.50"1 From::: 
Fax Dale!: 
Phone: Pages: (including cover page} 
Re: Urgent For Review Please Comment Please Reply 

Judicial 
Watcli 

Because one above the law! 
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL FACSIMILE 514-1009 
OIP Director Melanie Pustay 
U.S. Depa1tment Justice 1425 New York Ave., N.W., Ste. 11050 Washington, D.C. 20530-0001 

Re: FBl's Blanket Denial FOIA Records 
Dear Ms. Pustay: 
This letter timely appeals the Federal Bureau Investigation's May denial1 Judicial Watch's April records request2 regarding the federal govemment's involvement date the Trayvon Martin case.3 The May denial stated that all records responsive Judicial Watch's request are being withheld the basis law enforcement exemption the agency's overarching duty disclose.4 the Federal Bureau Investigation's blanket denial unspecified number documents falls far short what FOIA requires withholding public records and justifying the decision so, Judicial Watch challenges the adverse determination and asks that the Justice copy ofthe Federal Bureau Investigation's May denial, signed David Hardy, here 
attached Exhibit copy Judicial Watch's April records request, filed pursuant the Freedom oflnfonnation Act 
(FOJA), U.S.C.  552, here attached Exhibit U.S. Attorney Gen. Eric Holder Speaks the National Action Network 14th Annual Convention (Apr. 
l1, 2012), hnp://www .justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/20 2/ag-speech-120411.htm claiming exemption from disclosure based law enforcement privilege, the FBI cited U.S.C.  552(b)(7)(A), which excuses from the agency's overarching duty disclose such "records infonnation'' are "compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only the extent that the production such law enforcement records infonnation could reasonably expected interfere with enforcement proceedings." "To prove interference the agency must specific what information being withheld and the distinct hann that could result from its disclosure. The agency may not conclusory vague." Scheerv. U.S Dep't ofJustice, Supp. (D.D.C. l999)(citing Kt{ffel Bweau Prisons, 882 Supp. 1116, 1126 (D.D.C. l995))(intemal quotation marks omitted). "agency cannot justify withholding entire document simply showing that contains some 
exempt material. has long been rule this Circuit that non-exempt portions docwnent must 

425 Third St., SW, Suite 800, Washington, 20024 Tel: (202) 646-5172 1-888-593-8442 FAX: (202) 646-5199  Email: info@JudicialWatch.org .-. www.JudicialWatch.org 
Justice Department June 2012 
Department compel the Federal Bureau Investigation (FBI) once to: Crail search likely locate all responsive records; Promptly execute that search reasonable manner, including pursuit any logical leads; Conduct segregability analysis order redact only those portions responsive documents shown exempt from compulsory disclosure; Redact responsive records manner that indicates the amount material withheld the site the redaction, citing the precise basis for withholding; 	Release all responsive documents or, mu.Tow instances, supply particularized justification for continuing withhold whatever specific p01tions the bureau can establish are exempt from the FBI's overarching duty disclose. 
The FBI's abuse discretion this instance compounded the fact that deemed any potentially responsive records exempt, not because their specific contents, but because their location. The letter stated: "The material you requested located investigative file which exempt from disclosure ..." Hence, clear that the bureau failed discharge its duty with respect the FOJA issue that did not even conduct basic search which would identify universe responsive docwnents, yielding the exact number pages being withheld. Having failed isolate the total lot potentially responsive documents, the bureau could not have examined each page with care, developing thoughtful basis for its decision withhold each item. That being the case, the bureau's FOIA chief did not here familiarize himself respecting the particular contents specific documents sufficiently satisfy himself (or any cowt) that the records issue: were indeed compiled for law enforcement purposes; and that their production could reasonably expected interfere with enforcement proceedings. 
Hence, Mr. Hardy's all-encompassing conclusion that release any Trayvonrelated record the FBl's possession would interfere with the parallel enforcement proceeding was speculative best. 
disclosed unless they are inextricably intertwined with exempt portions. 1974, Congress expressly incorporated that requirement into the FOIA, which now states that 'any reaso11ably segregable portion record shall provided ... after deletion the portions which are exempt."' Mead Data Cent., Inc. 
U.S. Dep't the Air Force, 566 F.2d 242, 260 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (citing U.S.C.  552(b)}. 
Justice Department June 2012 
Meanwhile, the extent that the FBI coordinated communicated travel other logistics with non-enforcement agencies such the Community Relations Service (CRS) the Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board (CRB) regarding activities ancillary the FBl's parallel investigation into the Trayvon Martin shooting. any records stemming therefrom would not exempt under the cited provision because those records would not gennane any enforcement action the FBI. Consequently, any such records must released full. conclusion, because the FBI's blanket denial unsupported sound reasoning, demonstrates that the bureau failed meet any the statutory minimums described through above. Therefore, Judicial Watch anticipates receipt all responsive documents within days further cost itself, accordance with 
U.S.C.  552 (a)(6)(A)(i) and (a)(4)(A)(viii). 

Senior Investigator 

U.S. Department Justice 
Exhibit 
Federal Bureau Investigation 
Washington, D.C. 20535 
May 25, 2012 
MS. LIS5TTE J.D. GARCIA JUDICIAL WATCH 
SUITE 800 
425 THIRD STREET WASHINGTON, 20024 
FOIPA Request No.: 1189774 000 
Subject: CITY SANFORD, FLORIDA 
INCIDENT 
Dear Ms. Garcia: 
This responds your Freedom Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA) request. 
The material you requested located investigative file which exempt from disclosure pursuant U.S.C.  552{b)(7}(A). U.S.C.  552(b)(7)(A) exempts from disclosure: 
records information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only the extent that the production such law enforcement records information ... could reasonably expected Interfere with enforcement proceedings ... applying this exemption, have determined that the records responsive your request are law enforcement records; that there pending prospective law enforcement proceeding relevant these responsive records; and that release the information contained these responsive records could reasonably expected Interfere with the enforcement proceedings. For further explanation this exemption, see enclosed Explanation Exemptions Form. 
You may file appeal writing the Director, Office Information Policy (OIP), U.S. 
Department Justice, 1425 New York Ave., NW, Suite 11050, Washington, D.C. 20530-0001. Your 
appeal must received OIP within sixty {60) days from the date this letter order considered 
timely. The envelope and the letter should clearly marked "Freedom Information Appeal." Please cite 
the FOIPA Request Number assigned your request that may identified easily. 
Enclosed for your information copy the FBI File Fact Sheet and Explanation Exemptions. 
Very truly yours, 

David Hardy Section Chief, Record/Information 
Dissemination Section Records Management Division 
Enclosure 

TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT 

TIME 04/24/2012 12:02 NAME JUDICIAL WATCH FAX 2026460190 
TEL 2026465172 SER.M 000GBNG4G578 

Be(!fJ.U,1e one i., o.bot1e tile law! 
April 24, 2012 

MAIL/FAX 
FOTA Chief Carmen Mallon Office the Attorney General 
U.S. Department Justice 
1425 New York Ave., Rm. 11050 Washh'1gto 20530-0001 
(202) 616k54S9 
FOIA Chief Nelson. Hennilla Civil Rights Division 
U.S. Department Justice 300 St., N.W., Ste. 3234 Washington, 20004 
(202) 514-4209 
305-3003 
FOIA ChiefDavid Hardy Feder.al Bureau Investigation 170 Marcel Dr. 
Winchester, VA.22602-4843 
(540) 868-4500 
FOIA Chief George Henderson Community Relations Service 
U.S. Dpartment Justice 
600 St., N.W., Ste. 6000 Washington, 20004 
(202) 305-2935 
Pursuant the Freedom Information Act (FOIA), U.S.C.  552, Judicial Watch, Inc., (Judicial Watch) hereby requests that the U.S. Department ofJustice (DOJ)
speci:ficalty, the Office the Attomey General (OAG), the Civil Rights Division (CR'I), the Federal Bl.ireau oflnvestigatkni (FBI), and the Community Relations Serv1ce (CRS) ... produce the following cords within twenty (20) business days: All communications with any individual entity acting behalf 
".r. c;i.,...,.r,..,...i 1'T ...., ... An; .,.11.,. 

Judicial 

Watch 
Because one above the law! 

April 24, 2012 

FOIA Chief Carmen Mallon Office the Attorney General 
U.S. Department Justice 1425 New York Ave., N.W., Rm. 11050 Washington, 20530-0001 
(202) 616-5459 
FOIA Chief Nelson Hermina Civil Rights Division 
U.S. Department Justice 300 St., N.W., Ste. 3234 Washington, 20004 
(202) 514-4209 
FOIA Chief David Hardy Federal Bureau Investigation 170 Marcel Dr. Winchester, 22602-4843 
(540) 868-4500 
FOIA Chief George Henderson Community Relations Service 
U.S. Department Justice 600 St., N.W., Ste. 6000 Washington, 20004 
(202) 305-2935 

Pursuant the Freedom oflnformation Act (FOIA), U.S.C.  552, Judicial Watch, Inc., (Judicial Watch) hereby requests that the U.S. Department Justice (DOJ) -specifically, the Office the Attorney General (OAG), the Civil Rights Division (CRT), the Federal Bureau Investigation (FBI), and the Conummity Relations Service (CRS) --produce the following records within twenty (20) business days: 	All communications with any individual entity acting behalf Sanford, FL, especially: Sanford City Administration, including: 
Mayor Jeff Triplett, the City Commission, and staff 
City Manager Norton Bonaparte, . and his staff 
City Attorney Lonnie Groot and his staff Sanford Police Department, including: 
Police Chief Bill Lee and staff 
Acting Police Chief Darren Scott and staff Sanford Fire Department, including: Fire Chief Gerard Ransom 

II. 	All communications with any individual entity acting behalf the State Florida, especially: Governor Rick Scott and his staff Attorney General Pam Bondi and staff 
425 Third Sl., SW, Suite 800, Washington, 20024 Tel: (202) 646-5172 1888-593-8442 FAX: (202) 646-5199  Email: info@JudicialWatch.org  www.JudicialWatch.org 
OAG CRT FBI CRS 
April 24, 2012 
III. All communications with any individual entity acting behalf Miami-Dade County, especially: 	Office Community Advocacy, including the Community Relations Board, and staff 	Miami-Dade County Public Schools, including Superintendent Anthony Carvalho, and staff 
IV. 	
All agenda, notes, minutes, call logs, briefing books, and other 
memoranda created anticipation stemming from the 
April Dream Defender meeting held the Second Shiloh 
Missionary Baptist Church 
All communications regarding the City Sanford Miami-Dade County with any individual entity acting behalf the President the United States the White House 

VI. All receipts, invoices, and check requisitions for costs incurred connection with the federal government's interest the Trayvon Martin case, including travel, lodging, and per diem for visits Tallahassee, Sanford, Miami-Dade County. 
VII. 	All communication with the Rev. Sharpton any member the National Action Network. 
The time frame for this request February 26, 2012 thro the present. placing this request, Judicial Watch directs your attention President Barack Obama's January 21, 2009 Memorandum concerning the Freedom Information Act which states: 
All agencies should adopt presumption favor disclosure, order renew their commitment the principles embodied FOIA ... The presumption disclosure should applied all decisions involving FOIA. 
Freedom Information Act. Pres. Mem. January 21, 2009, Fed. Reg. 4683. 
The memo further provides that ''The Freedom Information Act should administered with clear presumption: the case doubt, opem;Less prevails." 
Nevertheless, any responsive record portion thereof claimed exempt from production under FOIA, please provide sufficient identifying information with 
OAG CRT FBI CRS 
. 

April 24, 2012 
respect each allegedly exempt record portion thereof allow assess the propriety the claimed exemption. Vaughn Rosen. 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974). addition, any reasonably segregable portion responsive record must provided, after redaction any allegedly exempt material. 
u.s.c.  552(b). 
Judicial Watch also hereby requests waiver both search and duplication fees pursuant U.S.C.  552(a)(4)(A)(ii)(II) and (a)(4)(A)(iii). Judicial Watch entitled waiver search fees under U.S.C.  552(a)(4)(A)(ii)(II) because member the news media. National Security Archive Department Defense, 880 F.2d 1381, 1387 (D.C. Cir. 1989)(defining news media within FOIA context). Judicial Watch has also been recognized member the news media other FOIA litigation. See, e.g., Judicial Watch Inc. U.S. Department Justice, 133 Supp.2d (D.D.C. 2000); and, Judicial Watch, Inc. Department Defense, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44003, 
(D.D.C. June 28, 2006). Judicial Watch regularly obtains information about the operations and activities government through FOIA and other means, uses its editorial skills tum this infonnation into distinct works, and publishes and disseminates these works the public. intends likewise with the records receives response this request. 
Judicial Watch also entitled complete waiver both search fees and duplication fees pursuant U.S.C.  552(a)(4)(A)(iii). Under this provision, records: 
shall furnished without any charge charge reduced below the fees established under clause (ii) disclosure the information the public interest because likely contribute significantly public understanding the operations activities government and not primarily the commercial interest the requester. U.S.C.  552(a)(4)(A)(iii). addition, records are not produced within twenty (20) business days, Judicial Watch entitled complete waiver search and duplication fees under Section 6(b) the OPEN Government Act 2007, which amended FOIA U.S.C.  552 
(a)(4)(A)(viii). 
Judicial Watch 501(c)(3}, not-for-profit, educational organization, and, definition, has commercial purpose. Judicial Watch exists educate the public about the operations and activities government, well increase public understanding about the importance ethics and the rule law government. The particular records requested herein are sought part Judicial Watch's ongoing efforts document the operations and activities the federal government and educate the 
OAG CRT FBI CRS April 24, 2012 

public about these operations and activities. Once Judicial Watch obtains the requested records, intends analyze them and disseminate the results its analysis, well the records themselves, special written report. Judicial Watch will also educate the public via radio programs, Judicial Watch's website, and/or newsletter, among other 
outlets. also will make the records available other members the media researchers upon request. Judicial Watch has proven ability disseminate in:fonnation 
obtained through FOIA the public, demonstrated its long-standing and 
continuing public outreach efforts. 
Given these circumstances, Judicial Watch entitled public interest fee waiver both search costs and duplication costs. Nonetheless, the event our request for waiver search and/or duplication costs denied, Judicial Watch willing pay $350.00 search and/or duplication costs. Judicial Watch requests that contacted before any such costs are incurred, order prioritize search and duplication efforts. effort facilitate record production within the statutory time limit, Judicial Watch willing accept documents electronic format (e.g. e..llnail, .pdfs). When necessary, Judicial Watch will also accept the "rolling production." documents. Judicial Watch anticipates prompt receipt the requested documents and waiver both search and duplication costs within twenty (20) business days. Thank you for your timely compliance with all applicable laws. 

Lisette Garcia, J.D. 
Senior Investigator