NORTH HAVERHILL — A state court judge has denied the town of Hanover’s petition to reconsider a court order for the police department to release arrest reports pertaining to the detention of two Dartmouth College student protesters in October.

Judicial Referee Steven Houran, in a eight-page decision dated Aug. 14, rejected Hanover’s challenge to disclosure of the arrest records, saying he was “not persuaded” by arguments the town advanced in its claim that the court erred in applying the state’s Right-to-Know law in ordering release of the records.

“The petitioner failed to meet its burden of showing — on the unique record of this case and limited to that unique record — that disclosure of the arrest records would more probably than not seriously interfere with the fairness of the circuit court proceedings,” Houran wrote.

Last December, the Valley News sought under the state’s Right-to-Know law the reports Hanover police had prepared relating to the arrest two students who were arrested while protesting in front of Dartmouth’s administration offices in October.

The town refused to release the arrest records, claiming they fell within exemptions of the Right-to-Know law and that disclosure would compromise the on-going prosecution of the students.

Hanover then turned to the court and sought a declaratory judgment for guidance on how to proceed.

In early June, the Grafton County Superior Court ruled that Hanover Police must release the arrest reports for the two students, Kevin Engel and Roan Wade, who were charged with trespassing.

The court also ordered the town to pay the Valley News “reasonable attorney’s fees and costs,” which the newspaper had incurred in fighting for release of the documents.

But in the ruling earlier this month where he reaffirmed the arrest records are public records, Houran reversed the order pertaining to legal fees.

Ten days following the initial court ruling, Hanover filed a petition asking the court to reconsider both rulings — requiring disclosure and awarding attorney’s fees — arguing that the court had “misapprehended critical points of fact and law.”

In support of its argument, Hanover said the arrest records sought by the Valley News contained details of the police’s investigation of the alleged crimes by the two students and their arrests.

The town asserted the records’ release would interfere with the prosecution of the case and should therefore qualify for exemption allowed under the Right-to-Know law.

Houran, citing statutory and case law both within the state and outside, again disagreed with the town’s arguments and said Hanover must release the arrest records.

But the judge noted that, upon reconsideration, he did err in his original decision to order the town to pay the newspaper’s attorney’s fees, acknowledging part of the matter before the court involved an “unsettled area of law” in New Hampshire.

“The court in its (original) order overlooked the efforts made by the petitioner to resolve this issue prior to bringing the question to court for resolution,” Houran wrote, adding Hanover had “made a good faith effort to navigate a complex and unsettled area of the Right-to-Know law.”

Nonetheless, when and if the public will see the students’ arrest records is unclear.

Hanover has 30 days from Aug. 14 to decide whether or not to appeal Houran’s decision to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

Matthew Burrows, attorney for the town of Hanover, said via email that the town is assessing the decision and declined further comment.

Contact John Lippman at jlippman@vnews.com.