The Cumberland County District Attorney’s office has dismissed charges against Westbrook Fire Inspector Lt. Chuck Jarrett stemming from his arrest on Jan. 18. Jarrett was charged with violating a protective order by handling a firearm at the Public Safety Building.

Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Norbert said she dismissed the charges because the protective order did not prohibit Jarrett from handling a firearm in Westbrook. It was intended to prohibit Jarrett from handling firearms in the town of Sanford, where his wife lives, except on military duty.

Norbert said that she spoke to both Jarrett’s and his wife’s attorney about the language of the court order, and they both said it was their intent to limit Jarrett’s access to weapons only in Sanford. Norbert said she read the language a different way when she charged Jarrett.

“Having read the (order), I charged him with violation of the order,” she said. “I treated it like any other case that comes in. It came in, and I made a charge.”

After talking with the attorneys, however, she decided to drop the charge. Norbert said that the language in the order was ambiguous and could have been written more clearly. “Protection orders need to be written clearly,” she said. “Unfortunately, the investigation could have been limited (but) the attorneys didn’t do their job.”

Norbert also said that Westbrook Det. Sgt. Steve Lyons and Capt. Tom Roth read the court order the same way and did the right thing by arresting him. “They treated him like he was just another citizen exactly as they should have,” she said. “If they didn’t go through with an investigation, they would have been hammered.”

“I’m pleased with the (statement) from the District Attorney’s office,” said McCarthy. “But our focus is to move past this and refocus on the task at hand.”

Fred Monsen, vice president of the Westbrook Police Association, said that Westbrook officers had no choice but to arrest Jarrett based on the language of the protection. He said that if officers believe they have probable cause that a violation has occurred, Maine state law demands that they make an arrest.

Lyons agreed with Monsen’s assessment regarding the arrest. “What was in the letter pretty much sums it up,” Lyons said. “I have nothing to hide.”

Monsen said the District Attorney’s dismissal of the charges does not change the fact that the arrest was correct. “It just means there is a difference of standards and responsibilities (for) the Westbrook police and the District Attorney’s office,” he said. “Not charging the case does not mean there was no probable cause for a mandated arrest.”

Monsen also said that arrests for violating protection orders are taken seriously and that how police handle these incidents are often monitored by domestic violence advocacy groups.

Lois Galgay-Reckitt, executive director of the Family Crisis Center in South Portland, agreed that officers are required to make arrests if they have probable cause. “If they believe there’s a violation of a protection order, they have to arrest,” she said. “It sounds to me like (Roth and Lyons) did their job.”

In a March 6 letter to Westbrook Police Chief Paul McCarthy, City Administrator Jerre Bryant said the arrest was misguided. “The time expended by two of the department’s top officers on this matter was a misuse of our resources on a matter which should have been handled administratively and not criminally,” Bryant said.

In a later interview, Bryant said that his main concern was not that an arrest was made but that too much time and resources were given to the investigation considering “other things with greater importance” going on in the city. He also agreed that the protection order was “problematic” because it wasn’t well written.

Copy the Story Link