officers. Every police agency is required to implement such guidelines pursuant to state statute N.J.S.A. 40A:14-181.
Under the guidelines, documents generated during the course
of an Internal Affairs investigation are considered confidential.
These documents, which may include, but are not limited to,
investigative reports, transcripts of statements and copies of documentary evidence in state and federal criminal history record
information can be referred to as “raw” investigative information.
Because of the nature of this information and the sources of
which it may be obtained, the need to maintain its confidentiality
is crucial to the integrity of the Internal Affairs process. The dissemination of this information to a non-law enforcement entities
or individuals could discourage citizens from coming forward
with complaints and/or compromise an investigation. Essentially,
civilians are to have nothing to do with Internal Affairs investigations.
Furthermore, civilian directors do not have authority beyond
an ordinary citizen to review general police reports. They cannot
access “criminal investigative reports, nor may he or she have
access to criminal history information. Likewise, such individuals
must refrain, unless specifically directed by the County
Prosecutor, from directing the investigation of criminal activity.”
Opinion Letter from Deputy Attorney General O’Grady to Chief
Robert DeLitta, Nutley Police Department, September 5, 1997.
In addition, when a director serves in an agency that also has a
chief, the powers are separated. N.J.S.A. 40A:14-118, known commonly as the “Police Chief’s Bill of Rights,” reserves to chiefs the
sole right to administer and enforce rules and regulations and
36
NEW JERSEY COPS
■
JULY 2015
special emergency directives for the disposition and discipline of
the force, exercise the functions, powers and duties of the force
and set the duties and assignments of all subordinates and other
personnel. Directors cannot infringe on areas traditionally under
the authority of the chief. In one decision, the director of police
and fire infringed upon thepolice chief's responsibilities when the
director appointed a lieutenant to be acting chief of police for
period of four days while the chief was on vacation. Gauntt v.
Mayor and Council of City of Bridgeton, 194 N.J.Super. 468
(A.D.1984). Furthermore, in a case in which provisions of a borough ordinance (which established the office of Director of Police)
were in direct conflict with a law, such provisions were impliedly
repealed, as they attempted to interfere with the “line of
authority” from police chief to governing body, and attempted to
rob the chief of powers granted by statute. Quaglietta v. Borough
of Haledon, 182 N.J.Super. 136 (L.1981).
The conclusions of the court cases and laws are clear: Public
Safety Directors and Police Directors have authority as administrators, but have no actual law enforcement powers, and cannot
act as police officers. Any exercise contrary to this notion lies
against the decisions of the New Jersey Courts, and is an improper
exercise of authority. d
Stuart J. Alterman, Esquire, of the firm Alterman & Associates, L.L.C.,
has been practicing law since 1986. He served as a municipal police
officer, a county corrections officer and a municipal prosecutor and has
represented police officers for nearly 23 years in all areas of
employment issues, including union issues, worker’s compensation,
wage and hour, personal injury, criminal, and family law.