As reported by, a new report is critical of how the New Jersey State Police has handled some low-level discipline cases and faults investigators for sometimes taking too long, but overall the review concluded the agency followed the law in handling internal investigations.

The Office of the State Comptroller also raised concerns that the attorney general’s office has never examined whether a trooper’s gender, race or rank affects how they’re disciplined.

“Although our review found general compliance with governing procedures for misconduct complaints, we identified several weaknesses and have provided recommendations … to prevent discrimination,” acting State Comptroller Kevin Walsh said in a statement.

Walsh’s report, his office’s seventh concerning how the state’s largest police department investigates its own, was published late last month.

A State Police spokesman said they were “committed to providing professional and compassionate service to the public.”

“As we look toward the future, we will continue to hold our troopers to the highest standards and incorporate practices that foster transparency and accountability,” Sgt. Lawrence Peele wrote in an email.

The agency has adopted at least two of the report’s recommendations to make it easier for residents to flag problems.

As part of its review, Walsh’s office reviewed dozens of State Police misconduct investigations, and it generally appeared “that discipline imposed was consistently meted out.”

But the report also said police were wrong to dismiss some complaints just because the accusations dealt with more minor issues, such as a trooper being rude to a driver. Leaving “even those unaddressed can lead troopers to develop poor work habits that can lead to more serious issues,” the review concluded.

The State Police disagreed and argued it was a better use of resources to focus on more serious complaints, according to the report.

Furthermore, a dozen internal investigations of alleged misconduct blew past the 120-day deadline, Walsh’s team said. The report only looked at 39 investigations, meaning almost a third were delayed — and investigators failed to formally ask for extensions in a handful of those cases.

Troopers accused of wrongdoing often can’t be promoted and transferred until investigations conclude, the report pointed out. “Additionally, complainants and the public will have greater confidence in the investigative process if the 120-day rule is adhered to unless extensions are requested.”

The State Police pledged to speed up investigations, according to report.

The comptroller also pushed the Office of Law Enforcement Professional Standards, a division of the state attorney general’s office, to use “existing data” to examine, for example, if Black troopers were disciplined more severely than other troopers. The division did not say whether they would adopt that recommendation.

It is similarly not uncommon for Internal Affairs investigations to “drag on” within numerous county and municipal police departments throughout New Jersey. These investigations are also sometimes rife with conflicts of interest which likewise tends to slow down their progression. However, the impact of these IA investigations on an individual officer’s career can be significant as it puts the officer in a state of “limbo” while hurting, at least in the interim, their chance at career advancement.

Notably, the topic of delayed IA investigations was touched on in a well-known Superior Court case entitled Aristizibal v. Atlantic City, 380 N.J. Super. 405 (Law. Div. 2005). Although that dispute involved application of the 45-day rule, referring to the statutory requirement that charges against an officer be filed within 45 days after a department obtains sufficient information to bring them, the Court recognized that there was somewhat of a gray area in regard to determining precisely when a department indeed has “obtained sufficient information” to bring administrative charges. To that end, the Court proclaimed that “extensive bureaucratic delay in conducting investigations and bringing disciplinary charges is unacceptable.” Id. at 427-428.


Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Michael DeRose Michael DeRose

Michael P. DeRose is a shareholder at the firm and primarily focuses his practice in labor/ employment law and other aspects of civil litigation, such as contract disputes. He has litigated and tried hundreds of matters before the Superior Court of New Jersey…

Michael P. DeRose is a shareholder at the firm and primarily focuses his practice in labor/ employment law and other aspects of civil litigation, such as contract disputes. He has litigated and tried hundreds of matters before the Superior Court of New Jersey, the Office of Administrative Law and the New Jersey Public Employment Relations Commission on behalf of various labor unions and their members. Michael has extensive experience defending and fighting for members of law enforcement and other public employees facing adverse disciplinary action, such as termination or suspension from employment. He also frequently argues before New Jersey’s Appellate Division on behalf of his clients.

A large portion of his practice is also devoted to contract negotiations on behalf of union clients, representing such clients in grievance arbitration/ contract disputes, and otherwise advising union leaders on labor and employment matters.  Michael also has significant experience in the realm of interest arbitration on behalf of the firm’s law enforcement and firefighter unions. As a result of the firm’s robust labor and employment practice, Michael regularly appears before various state agencies, such as the New Jersey Civil Service Commission, the New Jersey Division of Pensions and Benefits, the State Health Benefits Commission, and NJ PERC. In addition to representing labor unions and active employees, Michael also represents retirees before the Division of Pensions in disability retirement applications, both ordinary and accidental disability retirement, in pension forfeiture actions, and in other miscellaneous pension disputes. He also counsels private business and their principals in contract and employment law, in addition to representing their interests in civil litigation. Michael has a track record of obtaining favorable outcomes for his clients and treats each everyone of them on an individual and particularized basis in accordance with their needs.

Before joining the firm in August of 2015, Michael was an associate counsel at a civil litigation firm out in Trenton, New Jersey, where he principally focused his practice around employment law and tort claims litigation. Prior to that, he served as a law clerk in the Superior Court of New Jersey for the Honorable F. Patrick McManimon, Mercer County Vicinage, from September of 2012 to August of 2013, where he attained significant experience in the realm of alternative dispute resolution having mediated well-over one-hundred cases, primarily related to commercial and residential landlord/ tenant disputes and contract/ business litigation. He earned his Juris Doctorate in 2012 after graduating from the Western Michigan University-Thomas M. Cooley School of Law. In 2007, he earned his Bachelor of the Arts in Criminal Justice and Public Administration from Kean University where he was a member of the Kean University baseball team and vice president of the Alpha Phi Sigma chapter of the National Criminal Justice Honor Society.

Michael is admitted to the New Jersey State Bar, the United States Federal Court for the District of New Jersey, and is a member of the Mercer County Bar Association.