exercising its discretion in the interest of justice, the court
must weigh the sometimes competing interests of the
public, grand juries, police and prosecutors on the one
hand against those of potential witnesses, targets, and
defendants on the other. In Re Doe Application for Pre-
Indictment Discovery, 184 N.J. Super. 492, 497 (Law Div.
1982).
When time is a critical factor, disclosure should be
denied upon an in camera showing of a present need for
secrecy while a criminal investigation is in progress. Id.
If the contents of a wiretap are to be disclosed at trial, a
copy of the order and accompanying application must be
sent to the defendant at least ten days before trial.
N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-20. The court may waive this
requirement where it finds that the service is not
practicable and the parties to the action will not be
prejudiced by it. State v. Dye, 60 N.J. 518, 546, cert.
denied, 409 U.S. 1090, 93 S.Ct. 699 (1972).
Furthermore, if it is demonstrated to the court that
there are recorded conversations of innocent persons or
persons wholly unconnected with the suspected criminal
activities which have minimal evidential worth and their
revelation might be unduly embarrassing or humiliating,
these conversations may be withheld from disclosure.
State v. Braeunig, 122 N.J. Super. at 330. Similarly,
conversations concerning other criminal activities which
may be the subject of pending investigations, privileged
or confidential conversations, or communications which
disclose the identity of informants or the nature or
techniques of police investigative procedures may also be
withheld. Id. However, the withholding of such
conversations should be counter-balanced by the
ultimate desideratum of full discovery for all legitimate
pretrial and trial purposes. Id.
E. Disclosure
An investigative or law enforcement officer who has
lawfully obtained knowledge of the contents of
intercepted communications or evidence derived
therefrom may disclose such knowledge to any other law
enforcement officer if it is appropriate to the proper
performance of the official duties of the officer making or
receiving the disclosure. N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-17a; see In re
Spinelli, 212 N.J. Super. 526, 530 (Law Div. 1986); see,
e.g., State v. Murphy, 137 N.J. Super. 404, 423-24 (Law
Div. 1975), rev’d o.g., 148 N.J. Super. 542 (App. Div.
1977) (New Jersey officials may disclose information
obtained by wiretapping to New York officials if they
have a reasonable belief that such disclosure is
permissible); cf. In re Spinelli, 212 N.J. Super. at 532 (it
is unlawful to disclose properly intercepted tape
recordings to a public official for the purpose of using the
recording in a disciplinary proceedings of a police officer).
Disclosure under the Act is limited to criminal matters.
See In re Spinelli, 212 N.J. Super. at 537 (although the
police chief was deemed an “investigative or law
enforcement officer,” in the context of a departmental
disciplinary proceedings, the police chief was function-
ing as the administrative head of a municipal department
in a purely civil matter; the intended use of the tape
recording was not of the type envisioned by federal or
state wiretap law).In addition, any person who has lawfully obtained
such knowledge may disclose it only while testifying
under oath or affirmation in any criminal proceeding,
provided that the contents of those interceptions may be
initially disclosed solely through the use of the testimony
of the witness to such communication or the actual
recording of the communication. N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-
17b; cf. State v. Braeunig, 122 N.J. Super. 319, 330 (App.
Div. 1973) (recorded conversations of innocent persons
or persons wholly unconnected with the suspected
criminal activity, having minimal evidential worth and
their revelation might be unduly embarrassing or
humiliating, could be withheld from disclosure). The
contents of intercepted communications or evidence
derived therefrom may otherwise be disclosed only upon
a showing of good cause. N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-17c.Likewise, interception of communications relating to
offenses other than those specified in the order may be
disclosed only under the same circumstances as provided
in N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-17. N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-18.F. NoticeThe contents of any intercepted communication
shall not be disclosed in any trial, hearing, or proceeding,
unless the parties to the action have been served, not less
than 10 days before trial, with a copy of the order and
accompanying application under which the application
was authorized. N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-20. Service may be
waived by the court if service is not practicable and the
parties are not prejudiced by the failure of service. Id.G. Criminal LiabilityUnless specifically authorized pursuant to the Act,
any person who knowingly uses or discloses the existence
of an order authorizing an interception or its contents or
information derived from it is guilty of a third degree
crime. N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-19.