any records it has linking Gordon, Langford, or Ford to its investigation into the four murders, or it must follow the normal practice in FOIA cases of identifying the records it has withheld and stating its reasons for doing so.” Id. at 1182. Although the plaintiff maintains a claim of innocence, unlike in Roth, any public interest in knowing whether the defendant withholds information that could corroborate that claim does not outweigh the privacy interests at stake. c. Balancing the Privacy and Public Interests If there is a privacy interest in the requested materials and no public interest in disclosure, “[w]e need rcement agents. However, individuals mentioned in law enforcement files also have a recognized privacy interest. See Spirko v. USPS, 147 F.3d 992, 999 (D.C.Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). And plaintiff has failed to show how the
holding that the privacy interests of the employee police officers did not exceed the publics right to know recognizing the strong privacy interests of the suspects and law enforcement officers identified in the withheld documents holding that exemption 7c protects the privacy interests of all persons mentioned in law enforcement records whether they be investigators suspects witnesses or informants and their names are generally exempt from disclosure recognizing the privacy interests when requested documents neither confirm nor refute the plaintiffs allegations of government misconduct holding that exemption 7c protects the privacy interests of all persons mentioned in law enforcement records whether they be investigators suspects witnesses or informants and their names are generally exempt from disclosure  