Former Chesterfield police lieutenant challenges firing in court

Ciarcia said the chief’s actions were based on a presumed outcome rather than a fair review.

A former Chesterfield Police Department lieutenant has sued the town, arguing that his dismissal was driven by a one-sided internal probe and that the police chief moved to punish him before the review was complete.

The civil case centers on John Ciarcia, who says Chief Lance Rouse relied on a narrow set of records to build a misconduct finding and then pushed for termination without using an outside investigator. According to the lawsuit, Rouse singled out six daily activity logs from more than 1,600 entries and treated them as proof of fraud based on GPS information.

Ciarcia contends the disputed entries amount, at most, to minor timing mistakes and says he still has not been given the GPS records he requested. He also says some of the time in question was spent working remotely from home, something the suit says was permitted and routinely done for police business.

The conflict intensified after Ciarcia said he raised wage-and-hour concerns with Town Administrator Alissa Thompson on February 17. He says she told him she would speak with Rouse. Four days later, Ciarcia says he was placed on administrative leave and told he could resign or face a termination recommendation to the Chesterfield Select Board.

He said no specific allegations were presented to him at that point and no internal investigation had been explained. Ciarcia argues that Rouse had already decided the outcome before completing his inquiry.

Rouse recorded sustained misconduct findings for Ciarcia on March 7, while the chief did not interview him until April. The document was a Form B, which departments must file with the state Police Standards and Training Council within 15 days of a change in an employee’s status. The March filing listed both administrative leave and a resignation or discharge, while a second Form B signed in June confirmed termination.

Ciarcia said the chief’s actions were based on a presumed outcome rather than a fair review. He is asking the court to overturn the Select Board’s decision and to prevent his name from being placed on the Exculpatory Evidence Schedule, commonly known as the Laurie List. That state list identifies officers whose conduct could matter if they later testify in criminal cases, including record falsification.

Rouse addressed the lawsuit in a statement on Aug. 6, saying he could not discuss the matter because it involves confidential personnel information. He added that his duties remain centered on public safety, the department’s operation, and preserving trust in the agency.

The Police Standards and Training Council has become part of the case as well. Ciarcia said his matter is now before the council’s Conduct Review Committee, but that the panel will not hold a misconduct hearing while the civil suit is active. PSTC confirmed that it cannot move forward on misconduct issues during an ongoing lawsuit tied to the grievance process, though some certification-related proceedings may still be possible if requested.

Ciarcia said he has been told that if he accepts the allegations, the hearing process could move ahead, but he refuses to do that. He described the situation as leaving him in limbo and said the unresolved case has effectively blocked him from returning to law enforcement.

The former lieutenant, who previously worked in Rindge and Mason, said the dispute has also made it difficult to find other work. He said he briefly had an offer from a local police department he would not name, but that offer disappeared after the department learned of the CRC situation.

He said the delay leaves him unable to restart his career and struggling to support a family of five after earning close to $40 an hour as a police lieutenant. The case now awaits the outcome of the court action, which PSTC says could influence any later misconduct review by the committee.