On January 21, 2025, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in the case of Antonio Fuster v. Twp. of Chatham, 2025 N.J. LEXIS 14, 2025 WL 248744 (2025) reversing a judgement from the Appellate Division and ordering the release of body worn camera (“BWC”) footage to the plaintiffs. The Court considered whether plaintiffs Antonio Fuster and his wife, Brianne Devine, could access the BWC recording of Fuster’s statement made to the Chatham Township Police Department (“CTPD”).
Background
In May 2022, Antonio Fuster went to the CTPD to report that his special needs child had accused an adult male relative of sexual misconduct. During the visit, police interviewed Fuster, and the conversation was recorded on a BWC. After reviewing the initial police report, Fuster and Devine informed the police that the report was inaccurate. Fuster subsequently submitted an Open Public Records Act (“OPRA”) request for the BWC video footage of his interview with police, but this request was denied. Following several unsuccessful attempts to obtain the BWC footage, the plaintiffs filed a complaint to compel its release. Both the trial court and Appellate Division ruled against the plaintiffs, concluding that “the video was exempt from disclosure under judicial case law’s well-established confidentiality exemption protecting an uncharged person’s law enforcement records from disclosure.” The Supreme Court later granted certification for the case.
On Appeal
Bressler Attorneys Diana C. Manning, Benjamin J. DiLorenzo, and Kyle A. Valente submitted a brief on behalf of Partners arguing that the nature of rights and interests at stake favored the disclosure of BWC footage to a victim reporting a crime of violence even if the suspect was not arrested and charges were not brought. The team asserted that, in certain circumstances, a victim’s right to access this footage must take precedence over potential privacy concerns, and that BWC footage is crucial to challenging police reports that may otherwise conflict with a victims’ contemporaneous statements – a circumstance that could easily arise in the context of incidents of domestic violence to which police respond.
The Court’s Position
In its opinion ordering the release of the BWC footage, the Supreme Court acknowledged and agreed with the position advanced by the Bressler team that crime victims seeking copies of BWC footage of their statements to police have legitimate and cognizable interests in obtaining this footage, including victims of domestic violence.
A copy of the published opinion by the New Jersey Supreme Court can be accessed online here.
For more information about the appellate advocacy and amicus work by Diana C. Manning, Benjamin J. DiLorenzo, and Kyle A. Valente, visit their firm bios or e-mail them directly at: dmanning@bressler.com; bdilorenzo@bressler.com; kvalente@bressler.com.