Selectboard chair says Moultonborough chief wasn't forced out

MOULTONBOROUGH — The town of Moultonborough is currently without a police chief, and will be for the next few months as a the search for a replacement begins.

In late January, Moultonborough Police Chief Rick Stillman resigned from his position. There was no official letter of resignation, nor public statement. Stillman's exit came just one week after the town's selectboard acquitted Detective Peter John of a list of accusations brought against him by Stillman.

The former police chief requested an investigation into John in 2021 by the State Attorney General's office. The investigation found no wrong doing or criminal activity.

Stillman then hired Municipal Resources Incorporated, a private company, to conduct a second investigation and draft a subsequent report regarding John.

Stillman then brought the MRI report to the selectboard, hoping to prove John guilty of untruthfulness, mishandling of found property, and violating the chain of command, which would justify punitive measures. After receiving the report, the board had a hearing on January 6.

“The only concern we have is the fairness of the process and to make sure all sides were heard. That was the purpose of calling the hearing,” said selectboard Chair Kevin Quinlan, “to allow all sides to state their case and rebut. All we had was the report. We hadn't heard anything in terms of the officer what his side of the story was. That should have come to us prior.”

After reviewing the report and hearing both sides of the issues, the selectboard found that in all three cases, there was not enough evidence to sustain Stillman's accusations against John.

In the first charge of untruthfulness, the report referenced the discovery of a series of case files in the police department's administrative assistant office that had not had their dispositions filed. Stillman allegedly told John to file the dispositions from the cases into the computer record system. John stated that he understood instruction as to file all dispositions from that date forward, not the entire collection. From October of 2020 to July of 2021, Stillman and John did not communicate on this issue. Stillman looked into the files, and noted that the older cases, as well as some later ones had not been filed. He did not speak to John about this and hired MRI.

When questioned about this discrepancy by MRI during their investigation, John stated his interpretation that only case files from that date forward had to be filed. As for the other missing contemporary dispositions, John stated that he had only filed the dispositions that had enough information for him to do so.

According to a nine-page summary of the the selectboard's findings, “the MRI investigator never showed any of the files to Detective John or afforded him any opportunity to explain why, as to any specific title the disposition had not been entered,” the report continued, stating that the investigation was in violation of due process. “In this regard, the MRI investigation and Report is fundamentally flawed. The MRI investigator never actually reviewed the files on which Chief Stillman based his belief that Detective John had been untruthful. As a result, Detective John never had the opportunity to view or respond to the evidence against him.”

The second charge, of mishandling of found property, surrounded the custody of a cooler containing an electronic parking meter device.

Consolidated Communications had filed a report in 2021 that some of their equipment had been stolen. An investigation was started without John's involvement. Later on, a cooler containing an electronic device was found by James Gray outside of his property. Gray, a selectboard member, contacted John, who picked up the cooler and kept it by his desk as he attempted to track down the owner.

John contacted Scott Ryan, an employee of Consolidated Communications and told him he had what appeared to be company property. This information was eventually relayed to the officer who was conducting the missing property investigation. The report states that the officer removed the property from John's office, and that it was turned over to Stillman, who then kept it in his office. The report states that at no point was the property tagged or filed into the evidence locker as is standard procedure. Instead, the cooler appears to have made the rounds at various desks and offices in the department.

According to the document, there is a “found property” box located in an unsecured closet in the station. This raised concerns with the selectboard regarding the department's adherence to rules and regulations.

“There's a lot of thoughts of cleaning up process and procedure,” said Quinlan, “Some things were highlighted and they will be addressed.”

The report highlighted other concerns regarding the chain of custody of the property stating, “Stillman explained that he did not put the property in the evidence room because he did not trust Detective John, who had a key to that room. However, at the hearing, Chief Stillman acknowledged that Detective John also had a key to the Chief's office, so the property was no more secure there than it would have been in the evidence room.”

The report also stated that the existence of a found property box “ muddies the water” as to how found property should be handled in the station.

The final accusation leveled against John was violation of the chain of command after he called two members of the selectboard when the property was taken from his office. John told the MRI investigator he reached out to the selectboard members because he saw Stillman's behavior as harassment. There is a clause in the Moultonborough Police Department chain of command policy that states, “This section shall not apply to those instances when the employee must report a possible violation of law by the Chief of Police, or when the Chief of Police is suspected of harassment or other gross violation of department policy.”

The selectboard's summary of findings acknowledged that the MRI investigation was not Stillman's first attempt to investigate John, and that the Stillman “has made known his desire to see Detective John leave the MPD. There is no real dispute that communications between Chief Stillman and Detective John had broken down.”

Despite Stillman's MRI investigation, none of his allegations were sustained by the board of selectmen. The MRI investigation, which was criticized in the selectmen's assessment, carried a price tag of over $4,200. As for who is on the hook for that bill, that has not been decided.

“Typically it would come from the police department or the selectmen's budget,” said Quinlan. “We'll determine that.”

MRI would not confirm or deny involvement with specific clients when The Daily Sun requested comment.

Stillman resigned one week later the selectboard's finding. As part of Stillman's resignation agreement, he will be paid a sum of $22,180.80 as part of his severance pay, equivalent to three months of his salary. The exact relationship between Stillman's exit and the selectboard's assessment of his investigation are unclear. Quinlan denied claims that the board asked Stillman to resign.

“That's really the chief's decision to step down,” Quinlan said. “He tendered his resignation. We did not seek it.”

What is clear, is that the Moultonborough Police Department was not completely ready for Stillman's exit. The chief had only occupied his position since 2020, and a clear line of succession was not set up during that time.

“When the chief got here one of the concerns we had was having a depth and breadth of folks that could step into a chief position, one of the early requirements was a lieutenant position, that was one of his goals was to do some succession planning, he had commented on things he had done in the past and he had done the proper succession planning with folks he had in the past,” Quinlan said.

For now, it appears that Lieutenant Andrew Lipson will be in charge of the department for the next few months as the town seeks a suitable replacement.

As for John, he is considering legal action against Stillman, and prepared a written statement.

“I cannot speak to the details of why or how Chief Stillman left so abruptly as I was not involved with those confidential details or negotiations,” John wrote. “That said, I can tell you that the professionalism and integrity of any police force anywhere in America rests on the professionalism and integrity of the chief. If he or she does not create a workplace environment of truth and respect, then it is absolutely imperative that the chief must go—either voluntarily, seemingly voluntarily, or otherwise.”

Stillman did not wish to provide comment for this article.