Breaking: Charges Against Investigative Journalist Leroy Truth Fully Dismissed in Trenton Municipal Court — Another Major First Amendment Win

Trenton, N.J. — October 14, 2025 — In a dramatic courtroom turn today, the State’s prosecutor in Trenton Municipal Court formally admitted — on the record, not just in filings — that investigative journalist Leroy Truth holds constitutionally protected rights under the First Amendment for his speech and reporting.

Following that admission, the Trenton, New Jersey assistant prosecutor Cindy Liccardo moved to dismiss all charges previously brought against him by the New Jersey State Police.

The judge granted the motion, concluding that the State’s case could not survive the threshold protection afforded to press and speech activities.

This marks yet another legal vindication for Leroy Truth in his long-running and highly contentious confrontation with Union City Mayor and New Jersey State Senator Brian Stack, whose alleged use of state institutions to silence critics has drawn renewed scrutiny in light of today’s decision.

Background: The Senate Judiciary Hearing and Unlawful Arrest

A few months ago, the New Jersey Senate Judiciary Committee, Chaired by Senator Brian P. Stack, convened a hearing on a controversial bill approved by Senators Stack and Sarlo. Leroy Truth attended to deliver his public critique, calling both the Bill that was proposed as well as New Jersey state senator, head of the New Jersey state judiciary committee and Union City, New Jersey Mayor Brian Stack corrupt and warning that the bill would effectively shield corruption and political machines.

As he spoke, Truth accused Senator Stack of being corrupt and warned the legislation’s real aim was to immunize those in power.

According to multiple accounts, Senator Stack—outraged by the criticism—immediately directed state police to forcefully remove Leroy Truth from the hearing room. Numerous horses within the New Jersey state police alleged that senator in Mayor Brian Stack had already arranged New Jersey State police to forcefully remove Leroy Truth in the days proceed in the meeting in Stack’s latest desperate attempt to stop Leroy Truth from continuing to investigate and exposes over 5000 allegation corruption that Truth has received over last 22 months.

It’s also critically important to know that New Jersey Senator and Union City mayor Brian Stack has allegedly had Leroy Truth attacks for political violence over 45 times over the last 22 months in an attempt to get right through to stop investigating exposing alleged extreme corruption.

Stacks actions of course are unprecedented in US American history where no journalist has ever endured so many political violent attacks against him as he is exercising his first amendment rights as an independent investigative journalist reporting on his YouTube Channel and Facebook Page Leroy Truth Investigations.

In the ensuing confrontation, State Trooper Sergeant Christopher Anicito, as seen on video, shockingly AND illegally turned off Leroy Truth’s camera, interfering with his recording of the event and seizing control of the narrative. The forced removal and camera shutdown triggered a cascade of claims — including abuse of authority, excessive force, and blatant First Amendment violations.

Leroy Truth was injured by the New Jersey State police as they were violently removing him and immediately went to the emergency room for medical treatment.

The removal and camera shutdown were captured on video and widely circulated, fueling public outrage and sparking lawsuits. Truth has long maintained Stack weaponized his political influence and law enforcement machinery to silence dissent. Truth was later charged by NJ State Trooper Sgt Christopher Anicito, for Disorderly Conduct/ Improper Behavior under 2C:33-2A(1).

Courtroom Today: Prosecutor Concedes First Amendment Protections

In today’s hearing, the prosecutor twice conceded that Truth’s speech and press activities were constitutionally protected, essentially stripping away the State’s justification for pursuing the charges. With no credible basis to proceed, the State voluntarily moved to dismiss all counts — a rare instance where the government itself abandons its own case in open court.

Observers say this is not just a personal victory for Truth, but a wider affirmation of press freedoms against politically motivated prosecutions. The dismissal underscores that even powerful public officials like Stack and Sarlo cannot use state police or municipal courts as blunt instruments to silence critics.

First Amendment Caselaw: Right to Record Officials and Government Accountability

Though the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet squarely recognized a universal “right to record” government officials in all settings, the trend in multiple federal appellate courts has been to treat filming or recording public officials performing their duties in public as a First Amendment–protected activity.

A widely cited example is Glik v. Cunniffe (655 F.3d 78, 1st Cir. 2011), in which the court held that a private citizen had the right to videotape public officials in public spaces. The Glik court observed that recording public officials is “an exercise of First Amendment liberties” and that the constitutional protection is not limited to professional journalists. 

Moreover, brief filed by the MFIA Clinic (Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic) refers to ongoing First Amendment litigation where Yale Law School’s clinic — which represents journalists, transparency advocates, and public-interest groups — has argued that turning off, deleting, or otherwise suppressing a person’s recording by a government actor (such as a police officer, state trooper, or public official) is itself a form of unconstitutional prior restraint and retaliation.

Turning off or confiscating a recording device is not “neutral conduct” — it’s content-based suppression.

This line of reasoning ties together multiple precedents:

Glik v. Cunniffe (1st Cir. 2011) — recording public officials is constitutionally protected.

Fields v. City of Philadelphia (3d Cir. 2017) — explicitly recognizes a citizen’s right to record police under the First Amendment.

Turner v. Driver (5th Cir. 2017) — extends the same protection, but notes officers may be immune if the right was not “clearly established” in their jurisdiction at the time.

Project Veritas Action Fund v. Rollins (1st Cir. 2020) — struck down a Massachusetts law prohibiting secret audio recording of public officials, reaffirming the strong protection of public recording activities.

Thus, the forced shutdown of Truth’s camera by Trooper Anicito arguably falls comfortably within the class of governmental action that courts have long guarded against.

Implications: Another Black Eye for Stack, But the Fight Continues

For Brian Stack and Senator Sarlo, today’s dismissal is more than a legal defeat — it is a public relations and constitutional rebuke. Stack’s alleged use of state police and prosecutorial machinery to retaliate against a journalist raises grave questions about the boundaries of political power and accountability in New Jersey.

Critics have long warned of the “weaponization of law-enforcement” — when officials under color of law use investigative or prosecutorial authority to target political opponents or critics. Today’s outcome bolsters the assertion that such tactics, if deployed, are vulnerable to judicial check.

That said, the fact that Truth had to litigate — repeatedly — to maintain his rights underscores an ongoing tension: accountability demands vigilance, resources, and legal fortitude. The victory today is significant, but it is not the final chapter.

In a comment Leroy Truth thanked his attorney Mario Blanch for helping get the charges dismissed as well as for asking the judge for the expedited expungement.

See the YouTube videos below for a recollection of the events that took place at the NJ State Senate Judiciary Committee.