detail the sexual abuse of a minor, the privacy interests are at their apex. Desjpite the different privacy interests implicated in the two types of information sought, the plaintiff nonetheless fails in establishing that the balance tilts in favor of disclosure. Specifically, although the plaintiff has argued that disclosing the names of the law enforcement agents and the child victim’s statements will expose government misconduct, the plaintiff has failed to provide any support for his assertion. See Blackwell, 646 F.3d at 41 (requiring, under the Favish test, that a requester provide enough information to allow a reasonable person to find that Government misconduct may have occurred). Therefore, no recognized public interest in disclosure exists. See Spirko, 147 F.3d at 999 (<HOLDING>). Likewise^ the plaintiffs asserted interest in
recognizing privacy interest in medical records requested under freedom of information act recognizing the strong privacy interests of the suspects and law enforcement officers identified in the withheld documents recognizing the privacy interests when requested documents neither confirm nor refute the plaintiffs allegations of government misconduct recognizing that allegations of government misconduct are easy to allege and hard to disprove  holding that privacy interests outweighed public interests even though the public is already familiar with certain aspects of the requested data