New Details On Why East Haven Police Officer Fired: Report

EAST HAVEN, CT — New details are being released concerning the termination this week of Police Officer Vincent Ferrara, an 11-year police officer.

Ferrara has contended that he was retaliated against for assisting the federal government in a prior corruption probe against the Police Department which resulted in officers arrests. Ferrara also has pending litigation against the Police Department. Ferrara told the Connecticut Post that he plans to appeal the town's firing and it would add more fuel to his lawsuit.

Board of Police Commissioners meeting minutes have been released which elaborate on the charges against Ferrara. Two meetings were held on the topic, Jan. 14 and Jan. 22.

Here are the details, according to the Police Commission meeting minutes beginning with Jan. 14.

"Attorney Stephen M. Sedor presented the Chief of Police’s request that Officer Ferrara be terminated from the East Haven Police Department. He summarized internal affairs investigation 17-13 by stating that in approximately September 2017, Officer Ferrara was found to have sent seven (7) nude or partially nude photographs of three (3) women in suggestive positions through his Department email.

Through the investigation of that matter, Officer Ferrara not only denied having done that but then denied knowing who those individuals were. Upon investigation, not only did he know who they were, he was friends with them and at least one of the women had sent the photographs to him, thus he misrepresented during the IA investigation what his conduct truly was, and lied about what he had actually done.

It was also found during the IA investigation that one of the women in the nude photos – again, a friend of his – he was actually involved in a conflict of interest by investigating a domestic disturbance involving this individual on April 9, 2017. Although he represented that this was a simple noise complaint to Dispatch and to Officer Brockett during the IA investigation, the truth actually is that he was at this residence for the entire evening because he was asked to be there by a female individual via text to investigate the matter.

This is also a case of an officer who is not without discipline. Most recently, he was given a 10-day unpaid suspension for using excessive force on a teenage Hispanic male while the Department was still under the DOJ Consent Decree, he has received a 5-day unpaid suspension for divulging confidential juvenile material to a friend, and also disciplined for failing to report force.

Attorney Sedor distributed his presentation binders to the Board, Attorney Zullo and Attorney Norm Pattis. The presentation binder was divided into three parts: 1) the Internal Affairs Investigation with all the exhibits attached; 2) East Haven Police Department Policies and Procedures; and 3) an outline summary of prior discipline for Officer Ferrara....

Attorney Pattis, representing Officer Ferrara, noted that Mr. Ferrara has pending litigation against the Town and the Police Union represented by his independent counsel, Attorney James Brewer, who brought him in to handle these limited matters under Mr. Brewer because he could not appear on the Union’s behalf, and he defers to Mr. Brewer’s strategic decisions in this case and to advance Mr. Ferrara’s interests.

He stated that Mr. Ferrara has a 16-year history as a law enforcement officer – eleven with EHPD, he has some blemishes on his record, however, officers are not expected to be perfect, they are expected to be reasonable, make instantaneous decisions and snap judgements on a day-to-day basis.

We ask them to remember their training, follow the rules, and not make mistakes that put the public at risk. He asserts that despite the history of misconduct and discipline, there is no pattern of rampant lawlessness, exposing the city to liability and no pattern of discernable harm except for one use of force incident.

Attorney Pattis states that the photos speak for themselves but do not violate the limited use of departmental email and he concedes that the most serious offense is Officer Ferrara’s lack of candor throughout the Internal Affairs investigation, acknowledging he could have been more forthcoming.

He suggested that shame was Officer Ferrara’s motivation, not deception. Attorney Pattis advised the Board to defer making a decision pending the outcome of the independent medical evaluation stating that the Town and the residents of East Haven owe Officer Ferrara that for putting his life on the line.

Although Mr. Ferrara struggles with health issues, his doctor says he is clear to return to work. If he is cleared to return to work, then make a decision. If he is not cleared to return to work, please afford him an opportunity to apply for a disability retirement.

If he is clear to return to work and the Board still chooses to terminate Officer Ferrara on his record, it will only fuel Mr. Brewer’s lawsuit. Chairman Illingworth asked if there were any witnesses either attorney would like to present. There were none ....

Chairman Illingworth gave Attorney Pattis another opportunity to address any of the charges specifically.

Attorney Pattis summarized by saying that in his experience, officers are massively overcharged and recommended the Board adopt a center of gravity on essentially three (3) charges: 1) salacious material, 2) the misuse of the internal email system of the police department, and 3) lack of candor.

He further requested that the Board take all the time necessary to review the substantial amount of material. Although his client had requested a public hearing, they would consent to private deliberations and therefore withdraw their request for a public hearing insofar as the Board’s deliberations go .... Chairman Illingworth stated that due to the volume of evidence presented this evening and the serious recommendation facing Officer Ferrara, the Board needs more time to examine all the evidence and do a thorough and fair job of judging this matter.

Vice Chairman DiSilvestro made a motion to have this Special Meeting continued to Tuesday, January 22 at 7:00 PM to make a recommendation, and at that point in time, Attorney Zullo would advise the Board their responsibility with regard to the Disciplinary Matrix and the charges against Officer Ferrara; seconded by Commissioner Carbo.

Information via Jan. 22 meeting minutes of the Board of Police Commissioners meeting minutes:

Chairman Illingworth stated the purpose of this meeting is to resume deliberations upon advice of counsel and then render a decision. Chairman Illingworth acknowledged Attorney Healy from Pattis & Smith Law Firm representing Officer Vincent Ferrara and asked if the deliberations should be private or public. Attorney Healy, on behalf of his client, stated, “in public, please.” ....

Chairman Illingworth then read aloud the list of charges:

Use of Department Email for Inappropriate Purposes that Violate EHPD Policies: The charges against you allege that you used the EHPD email system to send two (2) pictures of nude women to your home email account; and four (4) pictures of partially nude women in their bras and/or underwear in sexually suggestive positions.

These emails were sent on September 29, 2015, April 27, 2017, May 24, 2017 (2 photographs), May 25, 2017 and August 2, 2017.

In addition, you used your EHPD email to send approximately 24 Connecticut Intelligence Center (“CTIC”) bulletins to your personal email. This conduct constitutes a violation of EHPD Policies and Procedures – there are ten (10) violations listed.

Untruthful and/or Misleading Responses to the IA Officer that Violate EHPD Policies: During your interview with the IA Officer on December 14, 2017, you are alleged to have given untruthful and/or misleading responses when questioned.

This includes the following responses: You repeatedly stated that you did not send the pictures of the nude and partially nude women through your EHPD email, while the investigation revealed that you did send them through such email.

During your interview on December 14, 2017, you initially stated, untruthfully, that you did not know the women who were in the photographs that you sent via your EHPD email. However, the investigation revealed that you knew two (2) of the women who were in five (5) of the six (6) photographs as friends and/or acquaintances. These two (2) woman stated during the investigation that they were in fact friends and/or acquaintances of yours.

The investigation further revealed that one (1) of these women sent you four (4) of the six (6) pictures herself.

 You involved yourself on or about April 9, 2017 in an investigation involving the woman identified in one (1) of the photographs identified above. This raised the question of whether you had engaged in a conflict of interest.

During your interview on December 14, 2017, you gave misleading responses as to how you became aware of the incident on that night. However, the investigation revealed that you were contacted directly by the woman and that you were parked in close vicinity to the woman’s residence that evening for more than an hour. This conduct constitutes a violation of EHPD Policies and Procedures – there are three (3) violations listed.

Possible Conflicts of Interest that Violate EHPD Policies: The charges against you allege that on April 9, 2017, you involved yourself in an investigation of a domestic matter involving one (1) of the women whose nude photographs you had sent and that this woman was a friend and/or acquaintance of yours.

It is also alleged that you were contacted directly by this woman and that your car was parked in close vicinity to this woman’s residence during that evening. This conduct may constitute a violation of EHPD Policies and Procedures – there are three (3) violations listed.

Again, the purpose of the pre-disciplinary hearing is to give you an opportunity to be heard on these allegations before any decision is made as to whether any disciplinary action should be taken against you....

Attorney Healy had some questions about obtaining copies of Mr. Ferrara’s personnel file, paystub records and a transcript of the prior processions and testimony – are these records available tonight or on request only.

Attorney Zullo stated that as of last week, the presentation and evidentiary portions of the hearing were closed; both sides were asked if they had anything further, if they wanted it to remain open; both sides said it was closed and the only thing that would take place [tonight] would be deliberation. At this point, it would be improper to accept any further testimony or presentation from either party.

Attorney Healy noted the exception with the completeness of record in terms of deciding the officer’s fate with the Department, it would be appropriate to consider a more complete record of his service to the Town of East Haven as a police officer, the Commission should consider every aspect in regard to his overall performance when considering discipline. So, again, asking for an opportunity to obtain copies of Mr. Ferrara’s personnel file, paystub records and a transcript.

Attorney Zullo commented that a transcript [of the prior meeting] was made but is not ready yet, and requests for personnel records can be made through the FOI process during normal business hours, obviously it would not be available tonight. Regardless, his advice to the Board remains the same. Counsel for both sides had more than adequate time to prepare for this, in fact, half a year.

Again, if both sides agreed to close the evidentiary and presentation portions, it would be absolutely improper for the Board to receive any more evidence or testimony – if either side had something else to present, the time to present it would have been before the close of presentation.

Chairman Illingworth asked if Attorney Healy had met with Attorney Pattis prior to this meeting. Attorney Healy said they had met briefly. Chairman Illingworth called for determination on each of the charges, starting with the most serious.

On the charge of Untruthful and/or Misleading Responses to the IA Officer that Violate EHPD Policies, Vice Chairman DiSilvestro finds no mitigating factors and all aggravating factors; seconded by Commissioner Torrealba. All agreed unanimously. No one opposed or abstained.

On the charge of Use of Department Email for Inappropriate Purposes that Violate EHPD Policies and in addition, the use of EHPD email to send approximately 24 Connecticut Intelligence Center (“CTIC”) bulletins to personal email, Vice Chairman DiSilvestro finds no mitigating factors and all aggravating factors; seconded by Commissioner Torrealba. All agreed unanimously. No one opposed or abstained.

On the charge of Possible Conflicts of Interest that Violate EHPD Policies, Vice Chairman DiSilvestro finds no mitigating factors and all aggravating factors; seconded by Commission Torrealba. All agreed unanimously. No one opposed or abstained.

With regard to the charges, under the rules and regulations of the East Haven Police Department, Vice Chairman DiSilvestro made a motion to proceed with the termination of Officer Ferrara; seconded by Commissioner Torrealba. All in favor. No one opposed or abstained. Motion carried unanimously.