logo
Brown University police should not be exempt from public records law, ACLU lawsuit claims

Brown University police should not be exempt from public records law, ACLU lawsuit claims

Boston Globe02-06-2025
Related
:
Advertisement
The lawsuit argues that Brown University's Department of Public Safety wields state-authorized police powers and therefore fits within the state Access to Public Records Act's definition of an 'agency.'
Get Rhode Map
A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State.
Enter Email
Sign Up
'The purpose of this action is simple,' ACLU of Rhode Island cooperating attorney Fausto Anguilla said in a statement. 'Every city and town police department in Rhode Island must provide arrest reports under APRA. Brown's police should not be an exception.'
Anguilla, a former state representative, filed the lawsuit in state Superior Court against Brown University's Department of Public Safety on behalf of two journalists, after the department refused to provide them reports of arrests made by Brown officers.
In 2022, Noble Brigham, then a Brown Daily Herald reporter, was investigating the story of a man who had been charged multiple times by Brown's Department of Public Safety with trespassing and breaking and entering on the Brown campus.
Advertisement
Brigham submitted a public records request for the arrest reports, which was initially ignored by Department of Public Safety. When the department did respond, it was to assert that the Access to Public Records Act didn't apply because Brown is a private university.
In 2023, Motif Magazine reporter Michael Bilow was reporting on
When Bilow filed an public records request seeking the arrest reports, Brown public safety department ignored the request. Bilow and Brigham filed complaints with Attorney General Peter F. Neronha's office. In January, his office issued an opinion, agreeing with Brown that the university was not subject to the state's Access to Public Records Act.
The lawsuit Monday
notes that the public records law applies to private agencies that are 'acting on behalf of and/or in place of any public agency,' and the suit claims the Brown Department of Public Safety fits that definition.
'By engaging in one of the most fundamental functions of government — the enforcement of criminal laws and exercising the power to search and seize individuals — (the Brown Department of Public Safety) is acting on behalf of and/or in place of a government agency or public body," the suit states.
The lawsuit asks the judge to declare that the Brown Department of Public Safety is a public body within the meaning of Access to Public Records Act, and that it must comply with requests for arrest records and other publicly available law enforcement documents.
Advertisement
Bilow said, 'Experience has proven that preventing police abuses depends on full transparency under the law, and it is a civic responsibility of news reporting to keep the public aware and informed about what is done in their name.'
Brigham said, 'Access to police reports is a basic public right. The public should be able to understand why police have arrested someone, and Brown's stance that its nonprofit status exempts them from the state law every municipal Rhode Island police department follows is troubling.'
Brown University did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Edward Fitzpatrick can be reached at
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The Hockey Canada trial could have been a reckoning. It was something else
The Hockey Canada trial could have been a reckoning. It was something else

New York Times

timea day ago

  • New York Times

The Hockey Canada trial could have been a reckoning. It was something else

LONDON, Ont. — On Day 13 of the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial, in the Ontario Court of Justice, defense attorney Daniel Brown stood at a lectern cross-examining the 27-year-old woman at the center of the allegations against five former pro hockey players. 'You have this alter ego. We'll call her 'Fun E.M,'' Brown said. 'You feel like you can't be fun without the alcohol.' Advertisement As he suggested that a 'metamorphosis takes place' when she drank, Brown taunted her, using her real name — not 'E.M.' as she must be called here, to protect her identity: 'Fun E.M. needs more alcohol. … Fun E.M. dances freely. … Fun E.M. is outgoing. … Fun E.M. acts on her impulses. … Sober E.M. wouldn't have chosen to cheat on her boyfriend. Right?' During a pause in this intense back-and-forth, Justice Maria Carroccia interjected: 'I've been advised that there is a street party outside on Dundas Street. I think it might get loud.' The London Knights — the Ontario Hockey League's top team — had a playoff game later that evening, and the brick road between the Ontario Court of Justice and the Canada Life Place, where the major junior team plays, was closed as fans reveled in advance of the big game. The bass from loud music below buzzed the courtroom wall. A short time later, court was dismissed early … on account of the raucous hockey party outside. If there was a moment that encapsulated the Hockey Canada trial, this was it. The most high-profile legal battle in the sport's history was muted by a celebration of a junior hockey team. On Thursday, Carroccia acquitted all five players — Michael McLeod, Dillon Dubé, Alex Formenton, Cal Foote, and Carter Hart — on sexual assault charges, stating that she did not find the victim's claims 'credible or reliable.' It ended an eight-week trial and a seven-year saga that began one night in London between a 20-year-old woman and members of the 2018 Canadian World Junior Hockey team. In an austere, wood-paneled courtroom, the five players were on trial and, to some degree, so too was the woman. But the case has always been viewed more broadly. After the allegations emerged three years ago via news of a settlement quietly paid by Hockey Canada, it highlighted how the sport and its leaders have long been unable or unwilling to create accountability. The lurid accusations against the Hockey Canada 5 echoed decades of similar incidents, and the case became a stand-in for other allegations that were minimized or ignored. Advertisement The sport faced scrutiny and shame, including Parliamentary hearings and lectures from, among others, then-Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, but would anything truly change? The Hockey Canada case — involving Canada's gold medalists turned professional players — would be the test of it, the chance to send a resounding message about the sport's direction. And that message was sent. It was just not the one many expected. From the glass elevator within the Delta Armouries hotel, you can look out over London and, within one panorama, see all the key locales featured in the case: the concrete court of justice that neighbors Canada Life Place, the Knights' 10,000-seat home arena; and beyond a large public park and a gothic cathedral, Jack's bar, where the woman and the players first connected. London is the largest city in southwestern Ontario, home to close to 450,000 people. It is the central commercial hub for the rural communities that stretch to the shores of Lake Erie to the south and Lake Huron to the northwest. It is home to more than 80,000 university and college students. But more than anything, London is a hockey town — home to the Knights, a team that boasts the highest attendance in major junior hockey and has had more players drafted to the NHL than any other team. The Knights would win their third national championship in June, with thousands of fans flocking to celebrate in the street between the court and the arena, littered with green and gold confetti. This was the backdrop in which a 20-year-old woman met members of the 2018 Canadian World Junior team at Jack's on dollar-beer night seven years ago. After a consensual encounter with one of those players, she claimed to have been assaulted by several members of the national team in room 209 of the Armouries hotel. Advertisement Though London police closed an initial investigation without charges, an out-of-court settlement for an undisclosed amount was reached between the alleged victim and Hockey Canada five years later. That settlement was supposed to have been the end of it. But news broke of the allegations and the payout, creating a firestorm of media attention and public outcry. Canada's national pastime became a national crisis. Trudeau criticized Hockey Canada's handling of the incident. Politicians demanded mass resignations. Amid that scrutiny, the London Police Service reopened its investigation. The five players were charged with sexual assault in late January 2024 and were granted indefinite leaves of absence from their pro teams. There was wide speculation that none of them would play in the NHL again. Before those charges were brought, E.M. and her mother sat on the second floor of 254 Pall Mall St. in downtown London and were presented with the opportunity to end the case. Meaghan Cunningham, a veteran Ottawa-based prosecutor who chairs the Sexual Assault Advisory Group within the Crown's criminal division, was there. So was Heather Donkers, an assistant crown attorney, just a few years older than E.M. As a university student, she was a victim of sexual assault. She went through a lengthy police investigation and testified in court. That experience, which ended in a guilty verdict, led her to a career in criminal justice. Karen Bellehumeur, a former Crown attorney who specializes in representing victims of sexual violence, sat beside them. They believed E.M. and wanted to prosecute the players, Cunningham said, but if E.M. was hoping to see them convicted, they warned her to think hard about moving forward. Her life would be picked apart. Media coverage would be intense. Public discourse would be cruel. Advertisement Despite that reality, some victims want to be heard. They want to be seen. They want to fight back. In a six-page document outlining the 68-minute meeting, two sentences offer the only glimpse into E.M's thoughts: No questions, the notes state. EM wants to proceed. It was a circus almost from the start. During a three-hour stretch early in the trial, one courtroom attendee would be arrested on suspicion of secretly recording proceedings with his smart glasses; another attendee would be banished from the building for exploding at a reporter and blaming him for 'ruining those boys' lives.' Later, a police officer would intercept a man for trying to find E.M. in the courthouse while she testified remotely. A local newspaper accidentally breached a publication ban and published materials that revealed E.M.'s identity. There were also multiple delays caused by a malfunctioning HVAC system that made the heat in the courtroom almost unbearable, and there were near-constant IT issues that slowed or stopped the proceedings. Even the clock in the 13th-floor courtroom didn't work, ticking four hours ahead. On top of all that, two juries were dismissed. Shortly after Crown attorney Heather Donkers' opening statement, one juror claimed that, while standing in the same line at a nearby market over lunch, defense attorney Hilary Dudding noted all the 'head-nodding' that had occurred that morning. Dudding denied the allegation when it was discussed in court, but the defense lawyers agreed that the jury of 11 women and three men had to be dismissed. Carroccia declared a mistrial. Then, on May 22, after E.M. finished nine grueling days on the stand, a juror handed Carroccia a note: 'Multiple jury members feel we are being judged and made fun of by (defense) lawyers (Daniel) Brown and Hilary Dudding. Every day when we enter the courtroom they observe us, whisper to each other and turn to each other and laugh as if they are discussing our appearance. This is unprofessional and unacceptable.' Advertisement In both instances, the Crown fought to preserve the jury, asking that intermediate measures be applied to remedy the situation, but the defense argued vehemently that even the optics of impropriety were too problematic and it would be impossible for their clients to receive a fair trial. Carroccia agreed with the defense. The second jury was dismissed. E.M. sat alone in a sterile gray office 10 floors below the courtroom, at a desk that held a glass of water and a box of tissues, throughout a withering cross-examination by five teams of defense attorneys. 'I'm going to suggest that part of what made Mr. McLeod attractive to you is that he was an elite hockey player and that he was loaded,' said David Humphrey, McLeod's lawyer. 'One of your coping mechanisms may have actually been offering things and asking to have sex with these men,' Megan Savard, Hart's lawyer, suggested. 'As long as it's a tall guy, you'll go home with him?' Daniel Brown asked, rhetorically. 'You refer to these individuals as man and men over and over, and you not once, not one single time, refer to them as boy or boys,' said Julianna Greenspan, Foote's attorney, arguing that E.M. had a 'clear agenda' in doing so. 'In your head you wanted to be the focus of the room,' said Lisa Carnelos, Dubé's lawyer, 'But these boys were having fun amongst themselves separate and apart from your existence.' Early in those cross-examinations, E.M. was apologetic and compliant. But as the days passed, she grew agitated and combative. By the end, she was self-assured. At one point, Brown questioned why she didn't disclose what had happened when she spoke with a friend the next morning. 'I was really embarrassed,' she testified. 'I felt so much shame. I was just messaging her as if nothing was wrong. I was coping.' Brown saw an opening. Advertisement 'Shame and embarrassment at the choices you made,' he said, and then: 'Thank you, your honor …' 'No, I'd like to finish,' E.M. interrupted. 'I made the choice to dance with him and drink at the bar. I did not make the choice to have them do what they did back at the hotel.' It is impossible to know how a jury would have viewed E.M.'s many hours of testimony. But Carroccia, on Thursday, said: 'I conclude that I cannot rely on (her testimony).' We all need to say the same thing if we get interviewed, McLeod texted on June 26, 2018, in a group chat with his teammates who were in room 209, can't have different stories or make anything up. They debated organizing a phone call or a group chat on SnapChat. Jake Bean, one of the players in the room, reminded everyone that McLeod took two videos that night in which he pressed E.M. to say she consented after sexual acts had occurred. Ok ya f— boys we are fine the boys who did things got consent so just tell them that and it's fine, Dubé responded. Brett Howden agreed. All we have to say is 'someone brought the girl back to the room. We were all in there ordering food and then this girl started begging from everyone to have sex with her,' he wrote. Nobody would do it. But then as time went on she gave three guys head. Once things started to get out of hand we all left and got her out. Yeah or no? Howden asked. Sounds good to me, Maxime Comtois responded. In another exchange, the players strategized how to deal with the investigation. Howden, for one, expressed anger that the woman's claims had caused them such embarrassment. If anything we should put an allegation on her, he wrote. Carroccia rejected the Crown's premise that players were attempting to get their stories straight. During the trial, the Crown called Howden, Taylor Raddysh, Boris Katchouk and Tyler Steenbergen as witnesses. Teammates testifying against teammates. Advertisement 'Sitting here today, I don't remember exactly what interactions I had,' Raddysh testified of that night. Katchouk was asked what happened at Jack's bar that night. 'I can't remember.' It was his birthday. He was pretty drunk, he said. Did he have any memory of receiving the group text message from McLeod that night inviting his teammates to join in a three-way? 'I don't recall.' Steenbergen didn't recall that text message from McLeod either. But he remembered that he made it to the room, looking for food, and that everyone was in 'shock' over E.M.'s request for sex acts. Donkers asked who was standing around the bed when Foote straddled E.M. 'I don't remember.' Was he clothed? 'He came in with them on, and I couldn't see afterward.' Howden, who vividly described E.M being slapped on the buttocks 'so hard it looked like it hurt so bad' in a text to Raddysh a week after the incident, had no memory of it while on the stand. Did he remember where in the room it happened? 'No, I don't. … I don't remember seeing it.' Does he remember if she was clothed or unclothed? 'No, I don't.' Does he remember what she was doing in the moment she was spanked? 'No, I don't.' Did he remember how he felt when it happened? 'I don't remember how I felt. I don't have a memory of that.' Howden's recollection was so poor that Cunningham accused him of feigning memory loss to protect his former teammates. The defense jumped in, bringing up the multiple head injuries Howden has suffered in his hockey career as a plausible reason why he wouldn't be able to even recall the text message he sent describing Dubé slapping E.M.'s buttocks. Hart was the only defendant to take the stand. He remembered much: E.M. asking for sex, receiving oral sex from her, E.M. leading Formenton to the bathroom, holding his hand. He recalled her offering more sex, in various ways. He remembered that E.M. laughed when Foote straddled her in the splits, with his pants on. Advertisement Was there physical contact between them? 'No, there was not. … I was standing right beside them.' Hart was also certain he did not see Dubé slap her naked buttocks or hear the woman cry. Was it possible he forgot? 'No. I wouldn't have stayed in the room.' By his own account, Hart could only recall about half of what happened while he was in the room, but what he remembered featured no wrongdoing. Later, Hart acknowledged his memory loss. 'Yes, I do have gaps,' to which the Crown attorney remarked that he spent more time in that room doing things for which he had no memory than doing things for which he had a memory. Did Hart agree with that assessment? 'I'm really not sure.' Carroccia, in her analysis, considered these memory lapses to be the understandable result of the influence of alcohol and time passing. Even before the verdict came, hockey teased the final message the scandal would deliver. In early May, as the trial entered its fourth week, Joel Quenneville was hired as head coach of the Anaheim Ducks, after a four-year exile from the league for his part in covering up the sexual abuse of one of his former players by a member of his coaching staff with the Chicago Blackhawks. A few days later, two-time Stanley Cup champion and Olympic gold medalist Adam Foote was named head coach of the Vancouver Canucks. At the news conference introducing Foote, he declined to discuss what was happening in the London courthouse where his son sat charged with sexual assault. Carroccia's verdict was not needed for the discourse to turn to the pros and cons of signing one of the Hockey Canada 5, presuming the NHL reinstates them. Those musings swirled mostly on social media until former goalie and current NHL Network analyst Kevin Weekes mused on TSN's 'Free Agency Frenzy' special whether Carter Hart might be a fit in goal for the Edmonton Oilers. Popular blogs and podcasts soon followed with similar speculation. Carroccia's complete exoneration of the players clears the path for teams to add them. It will only be a matter of time. Advertisement In the final accounting, the most tangible change resulting from the scandal is that Hockey Canada no longer has a slush fund to quietly pay off victims. Yes, some sponsors left, but several — like Tim Hortons, Telus, and Bauer — have already returned. Others, undoubtedly, will follow. There will be Hockey Canada galas in the years ahead to fete young heroes, just with no open bar, per new alcohol policies. As for the message sent… The players and the sport were the victims. And now the game is free to move on. (Illustration: Dan Goldfarb / The Athletic; Andy Devlin, Peter Power / AFP / Getty Images; Geoff Robins / The Canadian Press / AP Photo; iStock)

Joe Biden's Presidential Memoir Sells for $10 Million
Joe Biden's Presidential Memoir Sells for $10 Million

New York Times

timea day ago

  • New York Times

Joe Biden's Presidential Memoir Sells for $10 Million

Former President Joe Biden is writing a memoir about his time in the White House. The book, which doesn't yet have a title or a publication date, was acquired by Little, Brown & Co., an imprint within Hachette, in an auction, according to industry executives familiar with the deal. News of the book's acquisition for a roughly $10 million advance was first reported in The Wall Street Journal. Biden, 82, who was diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer in May, has spoken about the book at public events in recent months, and indicated that he feels intense pressure to finish it quickly, as he contends with illness. At a recent event in San Diego, Biden said that he was 'working like hell with a publisher' to research and crash a memoir that will focus on his presidential term. While it's standard practice for former presidents to publish books reflecting on their time in office, Biden's memoir may allow him a chance to reshape the narrative of his presidency and address questions about his mental and physical fitness. Biden, who aspired to be president for most of his decades-long political career, became the oldest person to ever hold the office when he was inaugurated in 2020, and then made the stunning decision to bow out of the 2024 race amid questions about his fitness for office. Since then, questions about whether his inner circle and party ignored his apparent decline have dominated the headlines. One of this year's biggest nonfiction titles, Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson's book 'Original Sin,' chronicles how Biden's closest and most protective aides refused to acknowledge his frailty, and put the Democrats' chances of winning the election at risk. It became a breakout hit, selling close to 100,000 hardcover copies, according to Circana BookScan. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

3 men arrested for posing as Amazon delivery drivers to ransack home: Police
3 men arrested for posing as Amazon delivery drivers to ransack home: Police

Yahoo

timea day ago

  • Yahoo

3 men arrested for posing as Amazon delivery drivers to ransack home: Police

Three men were arrested after posing as Amazon delivery drivers in order to gain entry and ransack a home in Florida, according to the North Port Police Department. The three suspects -- Robert St. Germain, Anton Bradley Brown and Adlet Javon Francis -- are now in custody after being involved in a "targeted armed home invasion" that occurred in May, police announced on Wednesday. Back on May 23 at approximately 1:30 p.m., officers responded to a report of an armed robbery at a residence in North Port, Florida, police said. The investigation revealed that three males "posed as Amazon delivery drivers to lure a young female resident to the door," officials said. When the female opened the door, the men -- who were all armed -- "forced their way inside," stole cash and "ransacked the residence in search of additional valuables," police said. The suspects also "held the daughter and mother inside the home while waiting for the father to return," police said. Once the father returned home at approximately 5 p.m., he "noticed the front door was locked and attempted to enter through the back," officials said. The father was confronted by one of the suspects and a "brief struggle ensued," police said. MORE: Man arrested for allegedly posing as US Marshal during attempted robbery, police say The suspects eventually fled the scene, police said. One of the suspects later found an unoccupied Ford F-150 with the keys inside, stole the truck and "fled the area," police said. The vehicle was recovered later that weekend in a shopping center, police said. After the robbery at the home, crime scene technicians "processed the primary scene and surrounding areas" and recovered evidence like items "believed to have been left by the suspects," police said. Officials believe the robbery was a targeted incident and not a "random act of violence," since the suspects were known to one of the victims. MORE: Robbers posing as cops hold up NYC deli, remain at large: Police Francis was arrested on July 12 on "unrelated charges" and Germain and Brown were arrested on Tuesday, police told ABC News. Their charges include conspiracy to commit home invasion, home invasion, robbery, kidnapping and use of a two-way device to commit a felony, police said. Brown also faces a charge of grand theft auto, police said. Germain is currently being held at the the Indian River County Jail, Brown is held at the Broward County Jail and Francis remains at the Orange County Jail, police told ABC News. North Port Police Chief Todd Garrison said the case "demonstrates the relentless commitment of our detectives." "Their tireless work has been instrumental in advancing this investigation and brining those responsible to justice," Garrison said in a statement. It remains unclear whether the suspects have attorneys who can speak on their behalf.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store