winthrop police department

• officer nancy dalrymple was fired in 1992. a suffolk superior court jury found the town discriminated against her because of her gender and retaliated against her, and awarded $575,000. the appeals court upheld the verdict in 2000. ^[1]

• in 2001 the town paid her $784,633.96: the jury's award, interest, and her earlier awards from the state's discrimination commission. ^[2]

• in 2014 the commission found further discrimination and retaliation, and ordered $50,000 to her for emotional distress and a $50,000 civil penalty to the state. ^[2]

the verdict

• officer judy racow sued the town in suffolk superior court, case 1484-CV-03200. a jury found the town discriminated against her because of her sex and retaliated against her: $676,000 for emotional distress and $1,352,000 in punitive damages. ^{[2] [3]}
• the judgment came to just over $2.3 million. ^{[1] [3]}

fees

• the judge upheld the verdict and added $541,554 in legal fees and $13,187 in costs, putting the judgment at more than $2.5 million. ^[1]

paying it

• in january 2020 the council voted to borrow $1,265,000 to pay a portion of the final judgment. the state's municipal finance oversight board approved the loan that march, and the town borrowed all of it. ^{[2] [4]}
• the same agenda carried a separate $325,000 from the overlay surplus for an fy20 legal judgment or settlement. it doesn't name the case. ^[2]
• how the rest of the judgment was paid isn't in these records. ^[4]

the arrest

• on july 23, 2011, officer james freeman arrested james rosencranz, a lawyer, outside his own home, after rosencranz asked whether police had a warrant to search his neighbor and client's house. ^[1]
• by rosencranz's account: freeman chest-bumped him twice and slammed him into a car, and with another officer dragged him down the street and pulled his pants down. freeman said rosencranz poured beer on his feet. rosencranz said it spilled on the ground. ^[1]
• a third officer told him off the record that freeman was "out of control." ^[1]

internal affairs

• a citizen's excessive force complaint against freeman, case 11WIN-1-IA, was filed on august 15, 2011, for the incident of july 23. neither record names the complainant. ^{[6] [7]}
• the department's 2021 log calls it not sustained: the evidence settled nothing either way. ^[6]
• its 2023 summary to the state's police standards commission calls it exonerated: the force happened and was justified. no discipline either way. ^[7]

the suit

• he sued freeman alone in federal court in 2014, for false arrest, excessive force, false imprisonment, assault and battery, and emotional distress. ^[2]
• the claim ran under the law enforcement liability coverage that the town's insurer, MIIA, administers for it. ^[3]
• rosencranz subpoenaed MIIA for its claims on freeman and the department. MIIA said that, apart from this one, it had found only three claims against the town under that coverage, none involving freeman, and gave no span of years. it added that freeman had taken none of its training courses. ^[3]
• the court quashed the subpoena. ^[4]
• in march 2017 the court threw out the emotional distress claim and sent the rest toward a jury trial. it held freeman's claim of qualified immunity couldn't be decided without one. ^[1]

settled

• on may 26, 2017, at mediation two weeks before trial, the case settled. ^[2]
• he dismissed every claim with prejudice that june. the docket gives no amount. ^[5]

freeman's later cases

• may 2014: unprofessional conduct, exonerated. ^[7]
• april 2015: integrity, sustained. a last-chance agreement and 10 punishment shifts. the state commission lists it as untruthful statements during internal affairs. ^{[7] [8]}
• april 2015: personal conduct, sustained. a written reprimand, retraining and 3 punishment shifts. ^[7]
• april 2016: two citizen complaints of discourtesy, exonerated. ^[7]
• november 2018: comportment and a report, sustained. a 4-day suspension. ^[7]
• the 2016 and 2018 rows sit unnamed at the top of the summary's second page, under his and before the next officer's. ^[7]
• the state commission publishes only the 2015 integrity case, and lists him as still certified. ^[8]

the detail

• billed $344 for an eight-hour detail at the short beach pump station on november 24, 2014, a day he spent partly at union contract talks in town hall. ^[1]
• said he understood it as a floating detail he could cover from anywhere in town with his radio on, and that he had worked it three times that week. ^[1]
• the chief was told it was a fixed post, by the state's manager on the project and by other officers. ^[1]

fired

• fired in january 2015 on three grounds: billing for a detail he wasn't at, lying to the chief during the investigation, and lying at his hearing. ^[1]

reinstated

• an arbitrator found no just cause, cut the discipline to a letter of warning for not getting approval to cover the detail from elsewhere, and ordered him reinstated with back pay. ^[1]
• the chief afterward put a supervisor over these details. ^[1]
• the superior court vacated the award in 2017. ^[2] the appeals court restored it in 2018, noting the arbitrator had found romeo was not dishonest. ^[3]
• back on the payroll in august 2018. ^[4]

back pay

• in january 2019 the arbitrator set what he was owed: back wages of at least $252,000, average detail and overtime pay, health costs, and interest from february 2017, when the town appealed. ^[4]
• in may 2019 he and the police union sued the town in superior court, 1984-CV-01566. the docket doesn't say over what. the union's part was dismissed in 2021, and his own claims stayed open. ^[5]
• in june 2019 the town council moved $530,000 from the stabilization fund to the police payroll for his back wages, overtime and detail pay. ^[6]

retaliation claims

• his claim: as union president he helped officers dalrymple and racow with their sex discrimination cases, and the chief and town manager retaliated by firing him, docking his vacation, denying earned time off, passing him over for promotion and delaying his medical leave. ^[7]
• labor relations board: three charges that the town retaliated for his union work. investigators dismissed all three. the board revived the one over his leave and firing ^[8] and part of another ^[9], and upheld dismissing the third, over sergeants' shift bids. ^[10]
• discrimination commission complaint in october 2018, then federal court in 2022, 1:22-cv-10573. in may 2023 the court dismissed his civil rights claim against the town itself and his disability and medical leave claims, but let the civil rights claim against the chief and town manager personally, and his retaliation claims, go on. ^[7]
• the civil service commission dismissed his appeals over the sergeant and lieutenant exams in 2019. ^{[11] [12]}

settled

• in august 2023 the town settled everything still open for $430,000: $345,000 to him and $85,000 to his lawyers. ^[13]
• it also made him deputy chief on a three-year contract starting at $130,000 a year. ^[13]
• the agreement says it admits no liability. ^[13]