Caroline County charging committee holds closed session to review two complaints against officers

The Caroline County Administrative Charging Committee moved into a closed session Sept. 18 at the Public Safety Building in Denton to review two investigative complaints filed against specific police officers and to obtain legal advice, members said.

Rene, a committee member, made the motion “to go into closed session,” citing Maryland statutory provisions that govern confidentiality for matters before the committee. The motion was seconded and carried on a roll-call vote, committee members said. Committee member Jeff Martin and Nadine were recorded as voting in the roll call; the transcript does not provide a full roll-call tally of all members present.

The committee read aloud the statutory basis for closing the meeting, citing Maryland Code, General Provisions §3-305(b)(1) to permit discussion of investigative complaints and review of complaints against specific officers, and Maryland Code, Public Safety §3-104(h), which the committee said requires confidentiality of matters before the Administrative Charging Committee until final disposition. Chip, identified in the meeting as the committee’s attorney, participated in the session to provide legal advice, members said.

After the closed session, the committee returned to open session and said it had discussed “procedure and the cases presented before us,” but announced no formal findings, disciplinary recommendations, or public action at that time. A motion to adjourn followed and the meeting ended.

The Administrative Charging Committee (ACC) is the body that reviews complaints brought against law enforcement officers and may make charging or disciplinary recommendations; the committee said it followed the statutory confidentiality provisions that restrict disclosure until a case is finally resolved. The transcript records that there were two complaints under review but provides no details about the complainants, the officers involved, the allegations, or any outcomes. The committee did not provide a timeline for final disposition.

No public votes on charges or discipline were recorded in the open portion of the meeting. The committee’s statement after returning to open session reiterated the statutory confidentiality obligations and did not provide further substantive detail about the cases.

The meeting record shows the ACC followed the statutory process for moving into a closed session and consulting counsel; any formal recommendations, disciplinary actions, or final dispositions will be subject to the confidentiality and timing requirements contained in the cited Maryland statutes.