News

Judge seals filings in ongoing Stone case

By Patrick Adrian
[email protected]
CLAREMONT — Sullivan County Superior Court Justice Brian Tucker has ordered the sealing of all document filings in the ongoing case between former Claremont police officer Jon Stone and the city of Claremont.

Tucker’s order, issued on Wednesday, Oct. 7, came one week after the Eagle Times reported on a legal memorandum filed by Stone’s attorney, Peter Decato, on Wednesday, Sept. 30. In the memorandum, Decato questioned whether Claremont had breached the terms of a 2007 agreement with Stone by retaining copies of Stone’s employee records that the city had agreed to purge.

According to the Sullivan County Superior Court Clerk Daniel Swegart, the memorandum was supposed to have been filed “under seal” but was mistakenly released to the Eagle Times.

The city has since filed a response in court to the memorandum but has been sealed per Tucker’s order.

Tucker has ordered that redacted versions of the documents, as well as future filings, will be made public, “with redactions of information that is the subject of [Stone’s] complaint and arguably private.”

“Unless the other party objects, the redacted versions of the pleading . . . will become part of the public file as soon as possible,” Tucker’s order states.

Public files could also include documents which both legal counsels found to not require redactions, according to the order.

Stone, an active Claremont city councilor, is seeking an injunction against the city from releasing records of 11 investigative cases in Stone’s conduct while serving as a police officer.

In May, the New Hampshire Supreme Court overturned a 30-year precedent that exempted municipal employee files, including police officers, from being publicly released under Right to Know. Since that ruling multiple journalists have filed Right to Know requests in Claremont for the release of the case investigations of Stone.

This pending case has raised two arguable legal questions.

The first question concerns the undefined balance between a public’s right to know and an individual’s right to privacy. While the Supreme Court ruled that police personnel files could potentially be public records, the court provided no guidelines or specifics to determine those situations. Claremont initially sought guidance on this question from Sullivan County Superior Court in July, but Tucker dismissed the case with instructions that Claremont should comply with the Right-to-Know request.

A second question, as raised by Decato, is why Claremont still had physical copies of Stone’s records in 2020 when the city had agreed to purge Stone’s records in 2007.

On June 9, 2007, the city negotiated an agreement with Stone’s union representatives from American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Council 93 to resolve four grievances filed by Stone against the Claremont Police Department. Stone filed the grievances after the department issued him a notice of termination on March 27, 2006.

According to the 2007 stipulated award, Stone agreed to tender his resignation from the department and the union would withdraw the four grievances.

In return, the city rescinded the one-day suspension of Stone dated March 8, 2006, and would “purge Jonathan Stone’s personnel file of all reference to the one-day suspension of March 8, 2006, the March 27, 2006, notice and all events leading up to them,” according to the award.

Decato, citing the American Heritage Dictionary, notes that the word “purge” by definition means “to clear,” “to remove or eliminate” or “to rid.”

“Now, 13-plus years later, it appears that the city counts amongst the records it considers responsive, records that relate to Mr. Stone’s suspension and his termination,” Decato said.

Decato argued to Tucker in a hearing on Thursday, Sept. 17, that Claremont cannot release Stone’s records now because the records legally should no longer exist.

Tucker has not rendered a decision regarding that contention.

Avatar photo

As your daily newspaper, we are committed to providing you with important local news coverage for Sullivan County and the surrounding areas.