On June 13, 2016, the Township of Stafford (Ocean County) agreed to pay $34,000 to a man who claimed that Mayor John Spodofora used “the Stafford Police as his personal agents” to retaliate against him for publicly criticizing Spodofora for “stolen valor” (i.e. exaggeration of military service).

In his lawsuit, Earl Galloway, a retired Navy Master Chief, said that after he created a spoof Facebook page called “Spodophony” which contained “accurate information to correct [Spodofora’s] exaggerations and fabrications” regarding his service in the Vietnam conflict, Spodofora filed an identify theft charge against him, attempted to block Galloway’s membership into the Stafford GOP club and publicly accused him of “hacking into [Spodofora’s] child’s computer and stealing files.”

Galloway’s lawsuit also claimed that Stafford police released his phone number, date of birth and social security number to the Asbury Park Press which subsequently published this confidential information.

Also named in the suit was Stafford Police Chief Joseph Giberson.

The case is captioned Galloway v. Stafford, Essex County Superior Court Docket No. OCN-L-1146-15 and Galloway’s attorneys were Joshua S. Bauchner and Michael H. Ansell of Woodland Park.  Case documents are on-line here and the lawsuit exhibits are on-line here.

The settlement agreement contains a confidentiality clause, which prevents the parties to the suit from publicly disclosing the settlement terms.  Fortunately, however, these confidentiality clauses do not trump the public’s right to obtain copies of settlement agreements that arise out of lawsuits in which a government agency or official is a defendant.

None of lawsuit’s allegations have been proven or disproven in court.  Settlement agreements typically state that payment does not constitute an admission of wrongdoing by any of the defendants.  All that is known for sure is that Stafford or its insurer, for whatever reason, decided that it would rather pay Galloway $34,000 than take the matter to trial. Perhaps the defendants’ decision was done to save further legal expense and the costs of trying what were in fact exaggerated or meritless claims. Or, perhaps the claims were true and the defendants wanted to avoid being embarrassed at trial. This is the problem when cases resolve before trial–it is impossible to know the truth of what really happened.

Chairman of the New Jersey Libertarian Party's Open Government Advocacy Project. Please send all comments to [email protected]