Reporter charged for refusing to unpublish police blotter entry on NJ news site

Brian Donohue, reporter and editor for hyperlocal news website Redbankgreen, was issued a summons by a municipal court in Red Bank, New Jersey, on June 27, 2025, after he refused to unpublish details about an arrest obtained from a local police blotter.

According to the complaint and summons, Red Bank resident Kyle Pietila was arrested in August 2024, details of which were published by Redbankgreen on Sept. 18, alongside other crime and arrest reports provided by the Red Bank Police Department.

According to a declaration by Donohue, the arrest was expunged in March 2025, and Pietila began contacting the newspaper asking that the entry in the blotter be removed.

Donohue cited Redbankgreen’s policy, which specifies that factually correct information is never erased, but that updates noting dismissals or lesser pleas can be made upon request.

“We strongly believe that once information is published, it should stay published as-is unless a correction or clarification is warranted,” the policy states.

The news site also specifies this policy at the bottom of each police blotter report, along with the disclaimer, “An arrest is not a finding of guilt: that’s something for a court to decide. redbankgreen publishes this information in continuation of a great American newspaper tradition because we believe it has community value.”

Donohue wrote that the police blotter entry was updated in May with an editor’s note acknowledging the expungement and an order by Municipal Court Judge Frank LaRocca that the arrest “shall be deemed to have not occurred.”

However, in a complaint dated June 13, Pietila wrote that he provided Redbankgreen with his “dismissal/expungement paperwork” multiple times and that the outlet had refused to remove the content from the site.

LaRocca ruled on June 26 that there was probable cause to charge Donohue and Katzgrau with disclosing the existence of an arrest that has been expunged or sealed. According to the criminal code, both face a maximum fine of $200.

An attorney for the journalists filed a motion to dismiss and expunge the charges on July 11, arguing that the “publication of truthful information on matters of public significance cannot be punished unless it involves a state interest of the highest order.”

“Moreover, information concerning the arrest was published prior to the expungement, and there is no requirement in law that it be removed from the publisher’s website simply because an expungement had taken place,” Bruce Rosen wrote. “The issuance of probable cause in this matter is plain legal error, this prosecution is unconstitutional and in fact unfathomable, and the matter should be promptly dismissed.”

Freedom of the Press Foundation, of which the Tracker is a project, also condemned the arrest and called it the “latest in a string of egregious press freedom violations by local police and prosecutors across the country.”

“Prosecuting journalists for declining to censor themselves is alarming and blatantly unconstitutional, as is ordering the press to unpublish news reports,” FPF Advocacy Director Seth Stern said. “Any prosecutors who would even think to bring such charges either don’t know the first thing about the constitution they’re sworn to uphold, or don’t care.”

Editor’s Note: This article has been updated to include details from a motion to dismiss the charges filed on July 11, 2025.