In the realm of criminal investigations of police shootings, transparency and confidentiality are historically not miscible in theory or practice. But in North Jersey Media Group, Inc. v. Township of Lyndhurst et al., the New Jersey Supreme Court has bridged the gap.

At issue was whether certain records documenting an investigation of a fatal shooting of a suspect by police were disclosable under the Open Public Records Act (OPRA) and the common law right of access. On Sept. 16, 2014, a multi-town, high-speed pursuit of a criminal suspect ended in the police shooting and killing the driver, who tried to accelerate his vehicle after police had cornered him with their cars. Consistent with attorney general directive, a shooting response team (SRT) investigation was undertaken. Also, as required by attorney general policy, use of force reports (UFRs) were submitted internally. Finally, a press release was issued by the Attorney General's Office within hours after the incident, which reported certain facts other than the names of the officers and how many fired.

Certain media entities then filed with the various law enforcement agencies requests for records under both OPRA and the common law right of access. The documents requested included 9-1-1 calls, incident reports, arrest reports, UFRs, dashcam videos from mobile video recorders (MVRs), motor vehicle accident reports, computer-aided dispatch (“CAD”) reports, mobile data terminal printouts, and information required to be timely released under §3(b) of OPRA. In response, no documents were disclosed.