McPhee v. Laino

Background

The court reviewed, in private, the Office of Special Investigations investigative file concerning the October 3, 2022 incident. The review followed a July 21, 2025 conference and objections submitted by counsel for the defendants. The file was divided into 13 numbered items for purposes of the ruling.

Item-by-item rulings

- Item 1: A February 20, 2024 letter. Because the defendants did not state a position about it, the court ordered it produced. - Items 3 through 9 and 11 through 12: The defendants did not object to producing these materials. They include an email; grievance, disciplinary, and incident materials; a disciplinary hearing packet and audio files; use-of-force and unusual-incident reports; medical records; videos and a transcript of McPhee’s interview; videos of the incident; and notices closing the investigation. - Item 2: A February 2024 “Case Closing (Final Report).” The defendants argued that it contained privileged communications and sensitive investigative methods. The court was not persuaded by the blanket objection and ordered production. It noted that the report mainly summarized witness statements and other evidence and that the presence of hearsay did not, by itself, prevent disclosure during discovery. - Item 10: Videos and transcripts of Defendant Laino’s interviews with the Office of Special Investigations. The defendants argued that the materials reflected investigative strategies and included information they viewed as irrelevant. The court ordered production, explaining that lack of relevance ordinarily did not justify withholding an entire document and that the questions appeared routine and not sensitive. The video production is subject to the same facility-based restrictions that apply to the other recordings. - Item 13: The 12-page “Case Master Report,” which includes the final report and other summaries of the investigation. The court rejected the same blanket objections asserted against Item 2 and ordered production.

Redactions and production process

The defendants may submit proposed, narrowly limited redactions for Items 2, 10, and 13 for further private review by August 15, 2025. The court also clarified that any proposed redactions to other portions of the file must be submitted by that date. If the defendants do not seek further review, they must confirm by letter that they are prepared to produce the file in full.

The defendants are not required to make an immediate piecemeal production. They must wait until the court resolves any proposed redactions and then make one production of the items ordered produced. Copies of the audio and video recordings will be maintained at the facility where McPhee is incarcerated, and he may review them subject to the facility’s rules. The Clerk was directed to mail the order to McPhee, who is representing himself.

Classification basis

This is a discovery order. It resolves objections to producing documents and recordings without deciding the underlying claims concerning the October 3, 2022 incident.