Dear Members of the Select Board,
I would like to trust that people who make decisions that can affect others in profound ways are placed/voted/promoted/hired into these positions because they have not only the necessary training/skills, but are also capable of using sound judgment based on professional experience and personal knowledge, when necessary.
This is done in professions every day, but I’ll highlight local ones for relatability: Judges, principals, teachers, coaches — and yes, town select board members and police officers, just to name a few.
Every day, people in these professions make judgement calls — even though laws, policies, and rules are in place. And they don’t get terminated for that. They are more likely to get a “thank you,” and validation in their abilities.
If every person in any of those roles was audited, my personal experience tells me there would be many terminations in each of these roles on a regular basis.
As I started to see more and more written about the Porter case, I realized there was so much focus on Brennan, and not on Porter. It didn’t make sense to me and I wondered what I was missing?
I am not related to, or friends of, Brennan or the Brennan family. I was introduced to his wife once, many years ago. I have no personal ties to or vendettas against anyone involved in this case, including our select board.
Many residents that have supported Brennan have built their relationships through meeting him alongside his role as a law enforcement officer in our town.
The fact that he’s built these relationships within the community seems to be used against him, which also doesn’t make sense since strong relationships between police and community is mutually beneficial (and part of the job).
Reading through so many of the articles, opinions, and social media commentary, it was disturbing to see how many interpretations were presented. There seemed to be a way to find something to support several different opinions.
The problem was that these opinions wouldn’t be based on the entirety of available information.
Reading through the timeline (several times) cleared up many things and made me realize that those calling for Brennan’s termination are presenting a picture that he had knowledge of everything being discussed since the victim was 14, and failed to report it.
The timeline showed that to be so far from what happened.
There’s been plenty of opinions already shared about the time frame things were or weren’t shared, if the same actions should be taken if the victim is a consenting adult vs a child (I hope we all agree there’s only one ruling on that,) policies that were or weren’t in place, procedures, accusations, who should-have-would-have-done-what-and-when. So I won’t regurgitate all that.
These opinions are formed based on hearsay and hindsight, not on being involved “real time” as everything happened. We all have the luxury of hindsight and can only make assumptions of what should have been done or what we might have done.
Our police chief recommends “termination” for Brennan? That feels like a very easy way to deflect attention elsewhere. That just doesn’t sit well.
Why was Porter able to retire while under investigation for rape? How did that slip through the system? If Porter is found guilty, will our tax dollars still have to go to him? How come that isn’t the focus?
There’s something that’s happened that’s been missed, or someone’s hoping it’s missed? It’s messy, and it must be breaking some type of policy.
If Officer Brennan is terminated by our Select Board, then it will be a clear message to the citizens of Hopkinton that there’s a larger issue at hand.
I’ve seen more support for Brennan than at town meeting. The outpouring of community support really does speak volumes on Brennan’s behalf.
Please reinstate Officer Brennan. Not because of my request, or the countless others, or the 750+ signatures on the petition supporting this, but because “termination” never should have been considered.
And then maybe look into where our town’s system failed with Porter slipping through it.
Respectfully,
Karen Crum, Hopkinton, MA
You make many valid points. It seems the current mess this situation has escalated to, the public outcry from many citizens and the potential damage to the town, the police department, the chief and the select board could have been avoided if the recommended punishment was proportional to the offense, violating police department policy in the way that it was violated. The recommendation to terminate Sergeant Brennan permanently went far beyond that. The fact Porter was able to retire and collect his pension just adds insult to injury and should be revisited.
Well said Karen
Well said Karen. It seems crazy Porter keeps his pension and yet Brennan’s is on the line. Sounds ridiculous, seems like the chief might have an agenda.
You make a lot of great points. Particularly about Porter being able to retire and collect his pension while Brennan may be terminated and lose his. I find this completely absurd and wildly inappropriate. If this is the outcome that we are left with by the hands of the Chief and the SB, how inept and hypocritical they have proven themselves to be.
Well said, Karen. The paragraphs, “There’s something that’s happened that’s been missed…” and then followed up by “If officer Brennan is terminated…” are particularly compelling and honestly, speaks volumes about the mishandling of this case. Is Brennan the “fall guy” here? I certainly hope not.
Well said and you raise a lot of very interesting questions:
Why was Porter allowed to retire when the Chief HAD knowledge of these accusations?
Is there no policy about an officer/town employee indicted on rape (or any major crime) having to be immediately terminated pending an investigation of a felony??
Does this really mean since he was allowed to retire that he will be able to collect his pension? Does that not raise a red flag? Why are not more people up in arms about this?
Probably because everyone is so focused on Brennan, who violated policies. Before you jump down my throat, I understand it is not as clear cut as that, as the latest letter to the editor points out that nothing is black-and-white. We all know the court of public opinion has already weighed in heavily enough at this point so I am not debating that here.
But, if in fact, Porter was given time between the chief finding out about this, his indictment and his arraignment to file for retirement, which potentially means he can collect his pension, that raises the question that if Brennan gets terminated for violating policies (no crime committed), does that mean he doesn’t get his pension? I truly hope that is not the case and I pray our system is not that corrupt! If Brennan does indeed lose his pension, and Porter is convicted, one would hope he loses all rights to his pension as well.
But this still begs the question, why was Porter given the time and the right to retire in the first place?
The majority of headlines since this news broke all seem to intensely focus on Brennan. This gives the appearance that Hopkinton cares more about his violation of policies than the very real possibility that an officer from our town sexually assault/raped a 14 year old. That should make us all take pause and reevaluate what we should really be focusing on here.
Yes, he violated policies and there should be consequences.
Brennan has already testified to a grand jury and taken responsibility for his actions, whether we agree with his actions or not, and he was given the consequence of a leave. Based on the last several months, it also appears that an unintended but very real
consequence he and his family have had to endure is the unimaginable public shaming. Shaming coming from many people that have no idea what they would have done in this very unique situation. They all think they know what they would do, but no one truly knows if they would actually run into that “burning building” until you are standing there in front of it facing the reality of the situation.
It just seems to me that the Selectboard should not be determining anyones fate until they have fully investigated both Porter and the Chief and how this entire situation was handled by the Hopkinton Police department.
But unfortunately Brennan’s fate lies in their hands tonight and I just hope that the SB makes an informed decision based on the facts and testimony in this case and not based on the jaded and often uninformed commentary from the court of public opinion.
Okay. So how’s about this for “consequences” — 7 MONTHS OUT OF WORK AND LOSS OF INCOME (>$25,000.00, according to one of earlier published letters to the Select Bd.), public HUMILIATION (and arguably defamation), workplace humiliation, LOSS OF SLEEP, NAUSEA, OTHER ILLNESS, and the many of the same types of things suffered by his family members, too. How’s that? That enough “consequences” for everyone? For an intentionally cryptic catch-all policy violation (that may or may not have existed at the time of the alleged violation)! NO CRIME!!! NOT EVEN THE SLIGHTEST CRIMINAL ACCUSATION!!! Because there *is none*! And with all of this attention on “policies”, have you all asked yourselves which policies YOU may have violated over the years? I’m betting it’s a bunch, whether you were aware of it or not. And I’m pretty sure that if all of us looked back at our respective office’s administrative protocols over the years, at various jobs, we, too, could find some that were totally ambiguous and overreaching (probably done intentionally by employers). Let’s have a little perspective, here, people; a little perspective. Remember…”Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.” as Mom used to caution.
The underlying consequences you mention are so real, and incredibly heartbreaking. You can’t get those things back. They run far deeper and last a lot longer than the current financial loss.
It’s unlikely any of the people who could have (should have) already rectified this thought about exactly what they were (wrongly) doing to someone (and their entire family).
I can’t wrap my head around how this could have happened. Seriously, WHO IS IN CHARGE??!!
The Select Board and Cheif Bennet are in charge. The mob is not.
No. Those are not consequences.
He has been on paid administrative leave. Any discussion of ‘loss of income’ is moot – the additional ‘pay’ that is cited is not guaranteed and can not be part of the discussion.
There is no crime, but there is a violation of professional standards. There are times that I may have violated professional standards, but if I knowingly violated the standards in place to protect _THE COMMUNITY_ I would understand being terminated.
The victim has an important part of the context, but the violation of professional standards is what this is about. The moral actions towards the victim are commendable, but there were ethical violations in regards to protecting the entire community.