Wife of Senator Menendez Tells Cop her Driving Record is "Perfect" Despite Prior Pedestrian Fatality

Around 11:06 AM on September 9, 2021, Officer Matthew Giordano of the Tenafly Police Department was on patrol on County Road near Central Avenue. He spotted the driver of a 2019 Mercedes talking on her mobile phone while she was driving, and he initiated a traffic stop. He notified dispatch and proceeded to make contact with the driver, who was identified as Nadine Arslanian Menendez, the wife of New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez.

Officer Giordano asked Nadine for her documents, and noticed that her registration had been expired since July 9th, 2021. Nadine also told the officer that she had not yet changed her last name on her driver's license after she got married to Senator Menendez on October 3, 2020. When Nadine was told that she was talking on her phone, she attempted to make an excuse by claiming she was trying to plug in her phone, but Officer Giordano told her that he saw her speaking on her phone. She subsequently apologized for what she did.

Nadine claimed to have a "perfect" driving record when she was questioned by Officer Giordano. However, dash camera footage obtained by another press outlet shows that Nadine fatally struck 49-year-old Richard Koop in Bogota, NJ on December 12, 2018. It was later alleged that in 2019, two business associates of Senator Menendez had offered to buy Nadine a new Mercedes worth over $60,000 as part of a bribery conspiracy scheme when she was engaged to be married to the Senator. This vehicle that Nadine was driving is the Mercedes that has been implicated in the alleged bribery scheme. Records also indicate that Nadine has previously been cited for failure to observe a traffic control device in Jersey City, NJ on September 14, 2005, improper passing in East Rutherford, NJ on June 26, 2007, and for the use of a hand-held wireless device in Englewood, NJ on May 12, 2016.

After Officer Giordano ran Nadine's information through the system, he decided to not cite her for failure to present proof of insurance or for having an expired registration, but he did cite her under 39:4-97.3 for using a hand-held wireless telephone while driving. Court records indicate that on January 13, 2022, Nadine pleaded guilty to that citation and paid a total of $240 in fines.

In the police report from the fatal Bogota accident, it is noted that "Ms. Arslanian originally reported I may search her phone, handed me her phone, then shortly after reported she no longer gives consent for a cellular phone search. I immediately returned Ms. Arslanian’s phone back to her." As a result of her refusal to consent, her phone was not searched at the scene and it is not clear if the investigators ever determined whether she was using a hand-held wireless device at the time of this crash. Field sobriety exercises to check for indicators of driver impairment were also not administered.

After the Prosecutor's office investigated that fatal accident in Bogota, no criminal charges or summonses were ever brought against Nadine. While Nadine was not criminally charged, his family did pursue Nadine in civil court. Sherri Breen, the attorney who represented Richard Koop’s estate, told another press outlet that they pursued an auto insurance claim against Nadine and that they were able to recover the maximum amount.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Please LIKE, SUBSCRIBE, and consider supporting this channel (email us for more information). Donations will be used to acquire more public footage related to law enforcement activities.

Our content is educational and in compliance with YouTube's Fair Use Policy because we edit several long clips into a concise story. This is similar to other law enforcement channels on YouTube. All videos and case documents were obtained pursuant to the New Jersey Open Public Records Act, N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq. (P.L. 2001, c. 404). Defendants are considered innocent until proven guilty.

The New Jersey Supreme Court has previously affirmed in Salzano v. North Jersey Media Group, 993 A.2d 778 (2010) that “The fair-report privilege reflects the judgment that the need, in a self-governing society, for free-flowing information about matters of public interest outweighs concerns over the uncompensated injury to a person's reputation.” This video advances a compelling public interest. The summary of events was based on records that are “open to public view through open access to public records” as defined in the Salzano case. In Ramos v. Flowers, 429 N.J. Super. 13, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court has also affirmed the right to film law enforcement interactions.