Taunton will not publish the mayor's booking video despite the state decision

Should a video be published with the arrest of Taunton Mayor Shaunna O'Connell? The legal department of the city and the State Secretary of the State Prosecutor does not agree.

When Shaunna O'Connell was arrested on July 19, 2024 because she allegedly attacked her husband, the police authority recorded the arrest and film material from the booking room of the police authority body cameras.

Several news agencies – including the Taunton Daily Gazette, WCVB, WPRI, CHANNEL 7 News and WJAR/NBC 10 – have submitted public records for various videos associated with the arrest of O'Connell, according to the communications that were obtained by an application for public records requested by the gazette.

According to the law of Massachusetts, the police “reports about abuse committed by family members or household members” as well as “messages between police officers and victims of such crimes” will be regarded as confidential and must therefore not be published after an application for public records.

After the Gazette inquiries were rejected for copies of video material in connection with O'Connell's arrest, the gazette submitted the State Secretary of the State Secretary of Massachusett's appeal. The State Secretary decided that during the arrest of the body camera, the arrest would be freed from the disclosure from the disclosure, and video recordings from the booking room should be published in a reduced form.

A lawyer in the city, Matthew Costa, recently said that despite this decision from the state, the city would not publish the Body camera film material from the booking room.

We know the following.

What does the BODY camera film show in the court of Taunton Mayor Court?

Body Camera film material played a major role in criminal proceedings against Shaunna O'Connell, which was charged with a dangerous weapon for assault and battery for a family member and an attack and a battery. The accusations came from an incident in July 2024 when O'Connell's husband called the Taunton police and claimed that Shaunna O'Connell had attacked him.

The attack and the battery with a dangerous weapon load have been rejected, and Shaunna O'Connell is currently serving administrative probation for six months after the attack and battery charge of a family member continued without determining.

In a legal registration, the mayor said that she had defended herself by biting her husband and that she did not attack her husband with an object.

In this case, however, the special prosecutor said that video evidence is “inconsistent” with the claim that she acted in self -defense.

“The video presented to the police did not match the theory of self -defense, and therefore the Commonwealth is looking for approval in relation to assault and battery,” said special prosecutor Daniel Bennett at the court hearing in December, where one of the charges was dismissed.

The video evidence to which Bennett refers is a video that the mayor's husband was recorded and a taunton police officer was shown who reacted to the couple's house in the night of the incident. The video supposedly showed Shaunna O'Connell on a vehicle that tries to prevent her husband from leaving. The policeman had activated his body camera while O'Connell's husband showed him the video and thus recorded a copy of the video.

“Mr. O'Connell showed Officer Pietryzk a video that he recorded on his vehicle on his vehicle on his phone,” wrote the special prosecutor in a legal registration in which the video was described.

“The video Mr. O'Connell plays for [the Taunton Police Officer] Shows documentary evidence that the defendant refused to allow the alleged victim, to go, “said the public prosecutor.” The defendant was on Mr. O'Connell's vehicle's bonnet, she replied to questions that she wanted to answer while not answering the facts of her attack. “

Shaunna O'Connell's lawyer in particular claimed in his legal registration: “There does not seem to be a video of such a video.”

Why can't the public body camera film material be seen?

The Gazette submitted public records for video material at the Taunton Police Department in case against Shaunna O'Connell. A lawyer in the city, Matthew Costa, said that the city would not release the Body Camera film material.

“The police authority will not release the requested image camera film material,” Costa wrote in relation to the Gazette's request for copies of the Body camera film material. He cited a law of Massachusetts on the “confidentiality of reports on rape, sexual assault and domestic violence”.

This special law of Massachusetts states that “all reports on abuse of family or household members have been committed … and all communications between police officers and victims of such crimes or abuse are not public reports.”

Shaunna O'Connell's husband would be regarded by a family member – his wife – as a victim of a suspected abuse, and the Body Camera film material contains video material from him that communicates with a policeman.

After the initial public records had been rejected, the gazette opposed the rejection of public records to the State Secretary of the State Secretary of Massachusetts. The law on public records in Massachusetts enables the applicants to be rejected by the State Secretary.

The State Secretary approved Costa that Taunton did not have to release the Body Camera film material. “I think that the department has fulfilled its burden to keep the listed camera recordings back,” wrote Manza Arthur, the recording chairman in the State Secretary's office.

City, state disagree with the booking room recordings

The Gazette also submitted a public recording request for video material from Shaunna O'Connell in the police book for the Taunton police. The city denied this application for public records, and the gazette then appealed to the State Secretary.

The city argued the same law of Massachusetts, which blocked the publication of the Body camera film material, also blocked the publication of the booking area. But in a judgment of April 8, Arthur disagreed and decided that the city “did not meet its load to hold back the booking room in its entirety”.

With regard to the film material of the video book, the State Secretary of the State Secretary directed a so -called “in -camera evaluation”, where she examined a copy of the video material before it found whether the film material according to Massachusetts Public Records LAW could be published.

“In the camera rating of the reaction fast records,” wrote Arthur, “I think that the department did not contest its burden in its entirety … (the legal exceptions are narrow and are not general).

City says

In an e -mail on Thursday, April 24, the city's lawyer, Matthew Costa, said that the city does not agree with the State Secretary of the State Secretary.

“In the decision, the supervisor of records states that the booking room Audio/Video, which you are looking for as a specific person, may not be fully held back, but suggests that the except, separable parts may be reduced,” wrote Costa. “Regardless of this determination, the position of the police authority remains that the booking room Audio/Video is naturally associated with a related police report and other records that have been freed from public disclosure.”

“The publication of the requested booking room records would publish the necessary existence of such a report and material facts about it (which defines his confidentiality),” wrote Costa. “The booking room Audio/Video includes a continuation of the same police reaction to which the Body Camera film material is excluded from the disclosure in accordance with Section 97d.”

“For these reasons, the police authority has not changed its position and will reject it to publish the documents from exemption (A) on public file law,” he concluded.

Is Shaunna O'Connell a victim of domestic violence?

Costa wrote that legal submissions in the court proceedings against the mayor of Taunton “they” would “put them” into the definition of being a victim.

“In addition, mean values that were submitted in the submission of the state court, the person who, in their request in the definition of a 'victim' of 'abuse', would” bring “,” he wrote. “The law states that” all messages between police officers and victims … of such abuse are not public reports and will be maintained by the police authorities in a way that will ensure their confidentiality. “Under these circumstances, the booking room Audio/Video is looking for communication with the police that the law must remain confidential. “

Shaunna O'Connell said in a legal registration in the court against her that she was self -defense by biting her husband.

However, the prosecutor said that a video recorded by her husband recorded her husband and “inconsistent” on Taunton Police Body Camera film material with the claim that O'Connell, acted in self -defense.

What happens next?

The Gazette has lodged against the reaction of the city on the application for public records with the State Secretary.

According to the Foreign Minister “, if an agency or municipality rejected an order issued by the supervisor or not, the supervisor of the records can notify the Attorney General, who can take the measures that are necessary to ensure the general assumption that is necessary to ensure the complaint”.

The law of public records in Massachusetts also allows applicants to sue of public records, cities or cities if they believe that the law on public records by Massachusetts is not complied with.