course of the administrative proceedings the chairs with an apt in her capacity as an enforcer and she would take whatever steps she thought were necessary to protect the records or do whatever she thought and where is that set forth in the code please administrative procedure act no it's not because it's not within the commonwealth it's the just that it's not within the executive branch of government so that initially the procedure would only refer would only cover executive agencies this is all within the judiciary so this is a series of decisions by their heads judicial employees about how they are going to release their records so they have this record that they have the report from  that if the judge is acting according to the administrative procedures that is set up in any protective florida then becomes an administrative act your argument i seek to modify it because i wish to publish op ed page piece in the boston globe and supply a relation of first amendment rights to preclude now which is that in order to get back into that particular proceeding and rockefeller in his christening bit so you have to be looking at that proceeding in order to get back into that particular proceeding on the defendant would have had the plaintiff now he was th meet in federal court automatically judicial immunity comes to mind even though the initial lawsuit while his purportedly a direct first amendment claim accepted the premise that strikes me if the boston groups directly i'm due for that that's a different situation than we have here if the boston globe made an careful about what it is where actually talking about here but i'd like to go on to the fact that that we have here are accusations of  racially motivated this is right there was going to be offered to as a defense to the assault and battery charges brought against know since the record doesn't tell us has stayed down and anything about this sad state of affairs about this probation officer and if not who is in these allegations and they did not as several years and yet at this late date right before the trial date and twenty seventeen at that date the court had not been provided with any records any affidavits any other information from plaintiffs concerning  health and they included statements from a pregnant woman who was mistreated apparently by this court well would you go back and answer one of my questions who is who would be responsible for doing an investigation w which records the trial court has under state law that one requests are given to a trial judge first before they're just given to the person who requests them you know i do not know correct ok do we know what under state law row permits require sort of sounds to me white because they knew the records were going to judge goosen and there was not an independent on the trial court didn't think it needed to make an independent determination as to the privacy of these other individuals so i don't think we're warranted in drawing  said you know there's privacy interests here so we're not going to release it there be no immunity from a first amendment challenge to that but because they had it to judge cruiser for reasons we don't know why and pursuant to authority we don't know what is she then treated it as a rule fourteen discovery request for which she could issue a protective order and now you're claiming that it is a judicial act for which there isn't unity and best very puzzling to me why we should say that that is a judicial act for which there's immunity if it's just making the same kind of privacy determination that the trial court could make and if it did made it would have no immunity because that's a kind of always it's a good way to avoid ever hav why not sell so maybe there's agreement and there's agreement i mean if the judge shares says the only way i'm going to let you have access to these records is if you agree not to tell anybody about the contents that's not have returned to them a couple of them is there something in state law for instance in the globe sought the information is there something in state law that says the court would have been apt to give notice to information they might have a perfectly valid route for doing that under state law the proper defendant would be the trial court or some officer in the trial court who is the individual it is however a sad tale about what's going on my son recorded off a series in some courts of the commonwealth and i am that you initiate the process by writing a letter requesting the documentation if anyone in the trial court has any reason why they think it should be produced and can raise that in this case there were several reasons we used including so i that's not something that i was playing around us your brothers said there were discussions about shaping the order you ask for certain things not to be there have any objection to this characterization of the rules or any additional things that our court rules pregnant to this you must  to them no judge this is these are reports they're not personnel records these are reports written by a court officer about things that happened in the public building so there's arguably and there's arguably something that happens in  lock up because that's maybe private i don't know what the statute would be but at least it's theoretically implicates a privacy concern that it wouldn't be frivolous to consider but a little bit of these were things that happened in public so otherwise it's not the thinking officer who's someone in the u s attorney's office and i raised that issue with her my understanding was that there was some investigation and that something which i'm not privy to may have happened through the federal process but i don't know that for sure and i only know that i raised it with her and was then interviewed by an i agent regarding what was happening ok thank you that's very helpful for us to now