Old Bridge wins latest court battle with fired police officer in 'reprehensible' scheme

A state appellate court has ruled that litigation brought by a terminated Old Bridge police captain against the township be returned to Superior Court with a new judge hearing the case.

The appellate court decision is the latest twist in the legal battle between the township and Peter Lopresti, who was terminated June 27, 2022, for violating departmental regulations. LoPresti filed a lawsuit against the township days after he was fired.

In February, Middlesex County Superior Court Judge Thomas McCloskey ruled in favor of LoPresti, saying the charges brought against LoPresti were based “on a single audio recording wrongfully made” by retired Lt. Robert Schlueter in “flagrant violation” of department rules in January 2019, more than two years before the charges were filed against LoPresti.

The termination came after a disciplinary hearing in which the recording was entered as evidence.

Old Bridge appealed that decision and the appellate court agreed with Old Bridge, saying that McCloskey had erred by excluding the audio recording as evidence in the case.

Because there are different rules of evidence in civil and criminal proceedings, the appellate court wrote that McCloskey "mistakenly characterized the disciplinary hearing as quasi-criminal" when it was a civil proceeding.

The appellate court also ruled that a new judge be named to hear the case "to avoid any claim of impartiality based on (McCloskey's) original findings and legal conclusions."

The appellate court also wrote that it took no position on the outcome of the case.

Also see: Old Bridge Police Department mourns officer's death

The recording came to light during the discovery process of Schlueter’s age discrimination lawsuit against the township that was settled days before it was scheduled to go to trial. Terms of that settlement are not part of the court record.

At the time the charges were filed against him, LoPresti was serving as the department’s acting chief. He had what McCloskey wrote in his ruling was an “unblemished record” and had received several citations and commendations.

In his lawsuit, filed Aug. 23, 2019, Schlueter, among other allegations, said LoPresti had made aged-based comments to him.

The contents of the recording came to light in July 2021 when Schlueter provided it to the township as part of the evidence in his civil suit.

Besides LoPresti calling Schlueter an “old timer,” the recorded conversation allegedly contains several inappropriate comments made by LoPresti, according to a report by Brian Kronick, who conducted LoPresti’s disciplinary hearing.

At the time the recording was made, Schlueter and LoPresti were both lieutenants, but Schlueter was the superior officer because of his seniority.

In that conversation, according to Kronick’s report, LoPresti referred to several female officers on one patrol squad as “the orgy squad.”

He also expressed his desire to have sex with a female officer and referred to her by a derogatory ethnic term, the report said.

In addition, LoPresti talked about his own sex life and made comments about other officers and their wives, according to the report.

After the township received the recording, officials determined that an Internal Affairs investigation was necessary. Because LoPresti was acting chief at the time, the matter was referred to the Middlesex County Prosecutor's Office.

But then the state Attorney General’s Office referred the case to the Mercer County Prosecutor's Office because of conflict. LoPresti was then placed on paid administrative leave pending the completion of the investigation.

Courts: Woodbridge parking dispute springs defamation lawsuit by Spotswood cop against neighbors

In December 2021, the Mercer County Prosecutor's Office released its Internal Affairs report, and the township filed the disciplinary charges against LoPresti.

The disciplinary hearing was held March 2-3, 2022. After the township’s and LoPresti's lawyers submitted briefs, Kornick issued his decision and his recommendation that LoPresti be fired.

In his ruling, Kornick wrote that "while it may be true that Captain LoPresti was set up for discipline by Lt. Schlueter's duplicitous conduct in taping the conversation on Jan. 22, 2019, that does not condone the inappropriate comments made by Captain LoPresti."

Kornick also wrote that LoPresti "has yet to admit to his own misconduct, nor has he expressed remorse or regret for his behavior."

Three days after Kronick's decision, Mayor Owen Henry sent a letter notifying LoPresti that he was terminated.

In his ruling for LoPresti, McCloskey wrote that Schlueter had himself violated department rules for making the recording on his personal cellphone.

Schlueter, the judge concluded, violated the state’s Wiretap Act since the recording was made when LoPresti and the other officers who were present “not only had a reasonable, but high expectation of privacy.”

McCloskey wrote the court will not “countenance such an abuse of process and unlawful conduct, nor will it in anyway be complicit in the sinister, reprehensible and sanctionable scheme that Lt. Schlueter hatched” to pursue his lawsuit and retaliate against LoPresti for being promoted to captain over him.

But the judge also wrote that his decision “shall not be deemed in way as condoning the offensive nature” of LoPresti’s remarks.

Email: [email protected]

Mike Deak is a reporter for mycentraljersey.com. To get unlimited access to his articles on Somerset and Hunterdon counties, please subscribe or activate your digital account today.

This article originally appeared on MyCentralJersey.com: Old Bridge NJ police wrongful termination lawsuit going back to court