"Due the heavy workloads and shortage of staff, the Department needs additional time to complete an installment." --Seattle PD, November 14^th

Sometimes connections help

Summary: 9 updates from the police department of Seattle but still nothing material/concrete, only promises and major delays

There are numerous ongoing requests (different accounts, albeit similar requests) with the Seattle Police Department (SPD or SPPD). There might even be more on the way, but additional requests would slow down an already-slow process. The pertinent details probably merit an addendum or a few addenda.

"We don't want to speculate about causes for delay or about sincerity, at least not at this point."One person who put in a request has just shared recent updates from the SPD. They send similar/identical messages to all requesters. "NAMELY LIBERTY will be publishing all correspondence from SPD related to this request in due time. Stay tuned," it said, "watch for future updates."

The introduction says this: "It’s been nearly 5 years now, since Rick Allen Jones was convicted, and these documents seem to have been completely ignored by media. While the Seattle Police Department has been responsive to this request, to date, they have not produced any of the above requested items. In the several status updates they have sent, related to this request, confirmed there to be “over 2000 pages” and that attempting to download the report, at even 1/4 at a time, has caused their system to crash."

We saw the same updates. We don't want to speculate about causes for delay or about sincerity, at least not at this point.

"The Three Most Recent Communications From Seattle Police Department," the site said, are as follows.

December 5, 2019 – SPD sent the following:

Good morning,

I’ve been trying to download the requested report all morning, every time it crashes my system. This report is over 2000 plus pages. I’ve even tried taking 1/4 at a time. It’s still taking forever.

I will need to speak with my supervisor with ideas of getting you this report. I will need to push this request out again. I don’t know how long it will take, but you will hear back from me tomorrow.

I appreciate your patience.

S. Hurst, Seattle Police Department, Legal Unit

December 12, 2019 – SPD sent the following:

The purpose of this communication is to provide a status update regarding your request.

The Seattle Police Department needs additional time to respond to your request due to the following:

*** The report has finally downloaded, and is being reviewed for any redaction’s ***

At this time, we anticipate having a response/installment to you on or about 1/8/2020.

S. Hurst, Seattle Police Department, Legal Unit

January 9, 2020 – SPD sent their most recent update:

The purpose of this email is to provide you with a status update. We are having technical problems with trying to process your request, because this report is over 2000 pages it keeps trashing on us. We are trying to figure out how it get this processed. At this time, we anticipate getting back to you on or about February 17, 2020.

S. Hurst, Seattle Police Department, Legal Unit

Based on public pages such as these from MuckRock, Sauncy Hurst works for the "Seattle Police Department" in the "Public Disclosure Unit". The style is consistent and the name is already in the public record. So we doubt privacy is being compromised here.

This did not start with Seattle's PD though. Correspondence record/timeline which was shared with us included: (notice how they discuss redactions whilst also claiming to have issues opening the file):

• September 13, 2019 - Written request made to King County Sheriff’s Office: “Request is made for the following public records regarding criminal case # 14-1-06789-1: 1. Full police report. 2. Search warrant application and affidavit. 3. CAD report. 4. All transcripts/audio recordings/statements from defendant and witnesses related to this case. 5. Property/Evidence Report.”



• September 13, 2019 - Received email from Sakilyne Kally | Functional Analyst II | Public Disclosure Unit - Subject: Public Disclosure Request Reference #P039465-091319. Message: “Using the information provided, the KCSO Disclosure Unit has determined that the incident you are referring to occurred outside the jurisdiction of the KCSO. We suggest you contact Seattle Police for records that may be responsive to your request. You may reach them at (206) 684-5481. Your request is now closed.”



• September 13, 2019 - Submitted same written request to City of Seattle Public Records Request Center. Included additional optional fields for reference: “Incident Number: 14-1-06789-1. Incident Date: March 20, 2014.”



• September 13, 2019 - Request received by SPPD, reference number is P047691-091319. City of Seattle Public Records Request Center user account created and confirmed by email.



• September 16, 2019 - Status update received. “Your request status is: Assigned.”



• September 19, 2019 - Email from Sauncy Hurst, Seattle Police Department Public Disclosure Unit: “Are you involved in this incident? If you are please provide your date of birth to make sure we locate the correct incident.” My only response, same day, was, “No.”



• September 19, 2019 - Email received with: “Your request status is: Being Researched/Reviewed.”



• September 19, 2019 - Email received from Sauncy Hurst: “Pursuant to RCW 42.56.520, this is notification that the Seattle Police Department has received your public disclosure records request and needs additional time to respond. At this time, we anticipate having a response or a status update to you on or about 10/22/2019. We are initiating the process of researching your request, collecting responsive records, and/or preparing records for dissemination.



• October 22, 2019 - Received status update email from Sauncy Hurst: “The Seattle Police Department needs additional time to respond to your request due to the following: Records are currently being reviewed for redactions At this time, we anticipate having a response/installment to you on or about 11/13/2019.”



• November 14, 2019 - Received status update email from Sauncy Hurst: “Due the heavy workloads and shortage of staff, the Department needs additional time to complete an installment. At this time, we anticipate getting back to you on or about December 4, 2019.”



• December 4, 2019 - Received status update email from Sauncy Hurst: “I’ve been trying to download the requested report all morning, every time it crashes my system. This report is over 2000 plus pages. I’ve even tried taking 1/4 at a time. It’s still taking forever. I will need to speak with my supervisor with ideas of getting you this report. I will need to push this request out again. I don’t know how long it will take, but you will hear back from me tomorrow. I appreciate your patience.”

Further updates are already out there, quoted at the top. And yes, there's some communication among petitioners. Coordination? No. But communication. It's important to advance the request, even if not all stakeholders share the same views/positions/motivations. The public needs and definitely deserves to know what happened there. Nobody is above the law. Or maybe...

"This might be "strategic delaying" (giving you the mere impression of progress while never intending to make any)."File splitting, I might add, is very simple. It should not be hard to process such a request. I assume they use something from Microsoft, possibly even hosted by Microsoft (on a so-called 'cloud'). They might be using Microsoft tools and maybe Microsoft hosting. If it's them who saved these files in the first place, can't they open their own files? Was there tampering? We don't know and we don't want to guess. No police department can hold a company accountable if that company controls that department's IT facilities. That much should be obvious...

In terms of the dates, we all need to wait another month or so. This might be "strategic delaying" (giving you the mere impression of progress while never intending to make any). We're meanwhile also advancing on the other front: court documents. We'll post details separately in the next addendum. ⬆