Judges reinstate Roselle police chief’s firing over use of anti-gay slur

New Jersey’s Appellate Division on Friday reinstated the firing of a Roselle police chief accused of using a homophobic slur in front of an openly gay officer and in reference to other police officers.

The court’s non-precedential decision reinstates the borough’s termination of Roselle Police Chief Stacey Williams after the New Jersey Civil Service Commission in April tamped down his punishment to a 30-day suspension.

“In his actions, Williams discredited himself and the Borough and negatively impacted the public’s respect and confidence in RPD. The reinstatement of Williams to his leadership position is contrary to the Borough’s and RPD’s interest in maintaining safety, discipline, order and morale within RPD and in retaining the public’s trust and confidence,” the appeals court said.

An email seeking comment from Williams’ attorney and from the borough were not immediately returned.

The court’s reversal comes more than a year after Williams is accused of using the word fa**ot while telling a story about a personal friend to an audience that included an openly gay police lieutenant.

When confronted over the slur by a police captain who noticed the lieutenant’s distress, Williams said he would “make a big deal out of” the times the gay lieutenant discussed fellatio. A separate captain testified he had never heard the gay officer discuss his sex life at work.

Williams disputed the first captain’s recollection of that exchange and said it was “possible, absolutely” that he used the slur when telling the story.

He did not deny directing the phrase “a bunch of fa*s” at officers who became ill at the site of a badly decomposed body approximately 10 years ago.

Though the borough had pushed for Williams’ removal, the Civil Service Commission instead imposed a 30-day suspension, which was recommended by an administrative law judge. The commission then reinstated the police chief with back pay.

In its decision, the commission said Williams had not intended to offend anyone and opined removal would be inappropriate for an official who had not experienced other progressive disciplinary measures.

The appeals court disagreed. Williams’ intent was irrelevant because the commission had found he violated local regulations barring use of derogatory language and sustained a charge of conduct unbecoming a public employee. The commission’s review should have been limited to what the proper penalty was, the court said.

Progressive discipline — an employment practice that sees escalating punishments for subsequent violations — was also unneeded because some infractions were severe enough to justify immediate removal, the court said, noting the commission had called Williams’ language “abhorrent.”

“We cannot discern the difference between abhorrent language and egregious misconduct to support the CSC’s rejection of the Borough’s penalty of termination other than it acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner”

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX.