Martha's Vineyard sheriff will not handover records sought by DA’s office (2024)

This story was updated at 3:15 p.m. on June 13, 2024, to add comments from Barnstable County Sheriff Donna Buckley’s office.

Despite now facing legal action from Cape and Islands District Attorney Rob Gailbois, the Dukes County sheriff has no plans to comply with Galibois’ request for employee records dating back 20 years.

On Thursday, Jack Collins, the general counsel for Dukes County [Martha’s Vineyard] Sheriff Robert W. Ogden and Nantucket County Sheriff James A. Perelman, said Ogden and Barnstable County Sheriff Donna Buckley were hit with lawsuits by Galibois’ office this week.

In the suit, Galibois seeks a court order compelling the sheriffs to provide his office with 20 years worth of personnel records for department employees — an attempt, he says, to comply with the landmark 1963 Supreme Court decision, Brady v. Maryland.

The ruling requires prosecutors to disclose any information that could be beneficial to a defendant’s case, including police disciplinary records.

• Read more: Sheriff sued by Cape DA says records sought in suit could cause harm to his office

Galibois has said the records serve to fulfill prosecutors’ discovery obligations under a recent interpretation of the decision and state and federal laws. But, Collins contends that Galibois is the only district attorney in the state seeking such a broad swath of records.

In fact, he said in an interview Thursday, the Brady obligations the sheriff’s office might be required to fill only apply to pending cases where a department employee would be called as a witness or was involved in the investigation. In those cases, the sheriff’s office has consistently met its requirements under the law.

“Anytime they’ve asked, we’ve always done that, and we’ll always continue to do that,” Collins told MassLive. “There’s never been a case. Not one single case where they asked us for information about a pending case that we didn’t provide in a timely manner. Not one.”

Collins also noted that the sheriff’s office is not making arrests, and its primary role is to house people in jail as they await trial.

“Our only involvement is maybe a courtesy breathalyzer test for them,” he said. “We don’t make arrests, we don’t go out and enforce the law. We don’t commit investigations. So really, our involvement, or any concern about Brady with our people, is pure speculation and almost nonexistent. Let’s be serious.”

Barnstable County Sheriff’s Office “is surprised by this filing, which we believe is inappropriate,” said Katherine Meyers, spokesperson for Sheriff Donna Buckley. “We have contacted the State Attorney General’s office to determine next steps.”

The district attorney’s office has said it fears it will be forced to begin dropping cases because it can no longer attest that it has fulfilled its obligations under Brady.

Already, one case has been dismissed by an Edgartown District Court judge after the district attorney’s office filed a motion indicating it could not meet its obligation.

• Read more: Cape DA sues MV sheriff over failure to disclose records, throwing cases into jeopardy

Collins forcefully denied that the case had anything to do with the sheriff’s office.

“Nothing to do with Brady, nothing to do with us,” he said. “That’s a total fabrication.”

While Collins declined to speculate on Galibois’ motivations, he accused the district attorney of “grandstanding.”

“It has nothing to do with his duty to prosecute,” Collins said. “What in the world does a record of somebody who doesn’t even work for us anymore, who used to work for a sheriff’s office 20 years ago, have in connection with that case? That’s absolute absurdity.”

A spokesperson for Galibois declined to comment, citing the pending litigation.

Prior to the filing of either suit, Galibois told The Boston Globe in an interview his office needed to ensure it was abiding by its “professional obligations and moral and ethical obligations and that we are proceeding with a case that we believe in.”