Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

moniss

(8,409 posts)
4. Assuming material came through court etc. that would
Mon Nov 17, 2025, 02:41 PM
17 hrs ago

be a logical assumption but as I have pointed out in a different post a few days back "the files" do not necessarily mean all documents and information of all kinds in possession of members within the agency. Once a document is placed into a file it is now considered to be a part of the file. For example if an informant hands an agent a slip of paper with some names and dates written on it but the agent never produces a report of the piece of paper and places that report in the file it is not a part of the file and so when people ask for "the files" it never means you have everything. As I pointed out lawyers are wise to this in FOIA cases, legal cases for damages etc. and they will be quite expansive and thorough in describing the categories of materials they seek rather than just asking for "the files".

Environmental case files, for example, in crooked jurisdictions will often contain little of the real information of what the situation is and is known. Deniability, limiting liability and limiting responsibility of those in the environmental agency and companies is the aim of such practices. It goes on with other matters as well such as foster care, safety inspections, building inspections etc.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Here's an attorney friend...»Reply #4