Public Access to Police Records to Increase

TRENTON – Announcing his directive on public disclosure of police disciplinary information (https://bit.ly/2ZNZ46Q), New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal said, “Today (June 15), we end the process of protecting the few to the detriment of the many.” 
Grewal’s action was one of many being taken across the nation in the wake of massive demonstrations following George Floyd’s death.
The directive requires law enforcement agencies, in New Jersey, “to begin publicly identifying officers who commit serious disciplinary violations.” Under the order, law enforcement agencies must begin publishing an annual list of officers who were fired, demoted, or suspended for more than five days due to serious disciplinary violations. The first such list must be made public by the end of this year (2020).
The directive comes as state Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) introduced a bill (S-2656) that would classify complaints, transcripts of disciplinary hearings, internal affairs records, body camera footage, and more as information subject to the Open Public Records Act (OPRA). There is a similar bill in the state Assembly (A-4283).
The rising tide of voices calling for greater transparency in police matters risks becoming an overreaction in the eyes of some.
The New Jersey Police Benevolent Association (PBA) said it backs a crackdown on police misconduct, but worries that basing disclosure on variables like the length of a suspension fails to take into account wide disparity across the state in how departments apply punishment.
PBA President Pat Colligan said, “These chiefs are all over the place.” The PBA promises to protect the rights of its members.
A release from the New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police states that “New Jersey’s chiefs of police stand unequivocally for transparency and accountability.” It argues that “the attorney general directive does not do anything to remove a bad cop, nor does it truly serve the public interest of transparency and accountability.”
The New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police’s statement calls the directive a “hazard approach” that “misses the mark.” What the New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police argues is that the list mandated by the attorney general would allow “good and dedicated officers,” guilty of relatively innocuous infractions, “to get tarred with the ‘bad cop’ label.”
The statement also raises the concern for “the safety of officers and their families,” which might be jeopardized by the directive’s requirements.
While the New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police asks for “an immediate stay be placed on implementation of the directive,” the statement offers no corrective to the directive except a willingness to work with interested parties to move policing forward in the state.
The legislation being considered, in Trenton, would go much further than the directive. Only 12 other states currently permit public access to police disciplinary records, 15 others allow some form of limited access, and 23 states, including New Jersey, classify the records as confidential.
Thus far, the attorney general has not altered his directive. The pressure for more openness in terms of police misconduct is not likely to end soon.
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.