PARAMUS, N.J. — A veteran Paramus police officer claims his career took a turn after he liked a Facebook post saying police officers should be held accountable and are not above the law, according to a lawsuit reported Tuesday by The Star-Ledger/NJ.com.
Officer Michael Boccher Sr., who has worked for the Paramus Police Department since 2004, alleges he was repeatedly passed over for promotion to sergeant despite his seniority, strong evaluations and commendations.
Boccher claims an Internal Affairs complaint was filed against him in December 2025, shortly after he liked the Facebook post.
The post was written after an October 2025 incident in which another Paramus officer allegedly left a police vehicle unattended in Hackensack. The vehicle was subsequently stolen with a loaded rifle inside.
A Facebook user responded to the incident by writing that “police officers should be held accountable for their actions and are not above the law.”
Boccher says he clicked “like.”
He alleges that afterward, the officer involved in the stolen vehicle incident was promoted while he continued to be passed over.
Boccher’s lawsuit also alleges Police Chief Robert Guidetti has been “hellbent on promoting only his friends and cronies” within the 95-member department, which serves roughly 26,000 residents.
According to a court filing, Paramus officials and Guidetti acknowledged that Boccher “was subject to an internal affairs complaint,” but denied the rest of his allegations.
The borough also claims Boccher’s lawsuit is barred by unspecified “prior bad acts and illegal conduct.” The filing does not identify the alleged conduct.
Boccher alleges younger and less-senior officers, including some he claims had personal or family connections to Guidetti, were promoted ahead of him.
Paramus and Guidetti deny allegations of favoritism, retaliation and age discrimination. The borough maintains that its decision not to promote Boccher was not arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable and is asking a judge to dismiss the lawsuit.
Boccher’s attorney, Albert J. Seibert, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
