Mendham Records Clear In NJ AG's Police Discipline Report

MENDHAM BOROUGH, NJ — No law enforcement officers in the Mendham Borough Police Department faced "major" punishment in 2021, according to the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General's Major Discipline report. Nor did any officers in the Mendham Township Police Department.

This is the second Major Discipline report that the attorney general's office has released, with the first covering the second half of 2020.

The 2021 report displays the names and agencies of officers who were fired, demoted in rank, or suspended for more than five days. In June, then-Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal gave all New Jersey law-enforcement agencies two months to publicly release certain disciplinary info. The directive came after the New Jersey Supreme Court authorized the public release of such info on a going-forward basis.

Thirty-five agencies across Morris County had no police with major violations, according to the report.

Before the New Jersey Supreme Court decision, the Garden State shielded the identities of officers disciplined or fired from the public. But days after then-Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in May 2020, Grewal issued several directives involving police reform.
Actions included expansion of Crisis Intervention Team training, development of a statewide "Use of Force Portal" and updates to the state's use-of-force policy. New Jersey law enforcement is now banned from using chokeholds "except in the very limited situations when deadly force is necessary to address an imminent threat to life."

But Grewal's order to release disciplinary records faced pushback, which turned into a year-long legal battle. The Supreme Court's unanimous ruling found state authorities could identify officers subjected to "major" discipline in the past year and going forward. But police disciplined prior can seek a judge to try and block the public disclosure.

In June, State PBA President Pat Colligan called the Supreme Court's decision "frustrating and disappointing." But Colligan praised a provision that allows officers who agreed to discipline under the assumption that it would remain confidential, to seek a judge's approval to keep the records secret.

"We are pleased that the court recognized that many officers only resolved disciplinary actions because they received specific promises of confidentiality which they relied upon, and that they are entitled to a hearing before release of any information regarding events that may have occurred decades ago," Colligan said. "We continue to be disappointed in the Attorney General's (then Grewal) ongoing refusal to meet with us to discuss fairness within police reform as well as his continuing attacks on law enforcement."

Josh Bakan reported this story, Marlene Lang provided local details.

Get your local news! Subscribe to Patch.