This story by Aaron Calvin was first published in The Stowe Reporter on Nov. 14
One day last summer, former Stowe Police Department detective Fred Whitcomb walked into a room and his career began to unravel.
He was first confronted by police chief Donald Hull and the head of Stowe’s human resources department, Charleen McFarlane, who informed him that an investigation was underway to determine if he had violated department and town regulations by conducting an intimate relationship with a subordinate.
Whitcomb was immediately turned over to Ingrid Jonas, a recently retired Vermont State Police commander who was appointed to the position of community safety advisor in Burlington in August.
Jonas was contracted by Paul, Frank & Collins, a law group specializing in labor matters, to conduct the investigation that ultimately found that Whitcomb’s relationship with a subordinate officer did indeed violate department and town regulations that forbid inappropriate fraternization with a subordinate.
Whitcomb was subsequently demoted from lieutenant detective to detective, stripped of supervisory authority and forced to serve out a two-week unpaid suspension. Whitcomb filed a grievance over the punishment. In October, the Stowe Selectboard approved a settlement agreement with the formerly second highest-ranking member of the department and accepted his retirement after nearly 25 years.
The Jonas report — consisting of two interviews with Whitcomb, the subordinate officer, Hull, five Stowe police officers and members of the public who witnessed Whitcomb and the subordinate conduct their relationship outside of the workplace — paints an intimate picture of a close-knit police department thrown into turmoil by one high-ranking police officer’s behavior — an “infatuation” with a new recruit, as one officer described it — that was allowed to continue for two years, despite Hull being aware of the issue.
A copy of the report was provided by the town of Stowe with heavy redactions, leaving visible only the names of Whitcomb, Hull and town manager Charles Safford, but the details it provides show how Jonas eventually concluded that the nature of Whitcomb’s relationship went against policy and brought low an illustrious career, while raising further questions about the hierarchy of leadership in the department.
“Some of Lt. Whitcomb’s behavior and actions regarding how he related to (his subordinate officer) reached the point of violation of the department’s policy on fraternization,” Jonas wrote in her conclusion. “These actions and behaviors over the last two years compromised his judgement (sic) and authority, compromised the chain of command, and negatively impacted morale. Additionally, his actions created a sense of partiality or unfairness, disruption and distraction.”
Jonas believed, however, that Whitcomb did not bear sole blame for the relationship. In defending himself throughout the investigation, Whitcomb claimed that he had made Hull, his boss, aware of the relationship, which should absolve him of wrongdoing. But Jonas asserted that he and Hull never “formally discussed the relationship from the standpoint of how to manage it, whether it was negatively impacting Whitcomb’s subordinates, whether it violated policy, nor were attempts made to address the power imbalance or perception of preferential treatment.”
“Earlier intervention by Whitcomb’s supervisor would have lessened the impact on the department,” Jonas wrote. “Intervention is necessary when issues such as those stemming from relationships create problems in the workplace. One member of the department said they approached the chief over a year ago about the perception and adverse impact of Whitcomb’s way of relating with (the subordinate officer).”
An inappropriate relationship
In Whitcomb’s first interview with Jonas, she described the then-lieutenant detective as “upset and taken off guard,” willing to answer questions but often characterizing the investigation as “bullshit.”
Jonas noted he was occasionally tearful during the interview, particularly when considering the potential outcome the investigation could have on the subordinate officer’s career, and it was also clear to him what just speaking to the investigator meant for him.
“My life is f—ed, and now it’s really f—ed,” Whitcomb said at one point in the interview.
At the time Jonas conducted her first interrogation, Whitcomb was, by the accounts of the other officers interviewed, the de facto leader of the Stowe Police Department. Over the years, he steadily rose through the ranks, culminating in a promotion to lieutenant detective in 2022, the same year the subordinate officer joined the department.
While Whitcomb noted that, through the chain of command, he only had direct supervisory authority over one other detective, every other police officer characterized Whitcomb as their direct supervisor.
One officer interviewed described Whitcomb as “the one who runs the show,” and said, “he’s the man that you go to — ask the lieutenant and if we can get it, we will.” He called Whitcomb “the motor, the brain, the epicenter and the heart of (the department).”
Jonas’ report noted that Whitcomb spent 15 weeks as acting chief while Hull was absent.
Despite being promoted to an upper-level management role within the department, Whitcomb also led the Stowe Police Officers Association, an unusual arrangement that Hull told Jonas the association recommended when Whitcomb was promoted. Hull said he “expressed reservations” about the arrangement but that Safford agreed to it.
Even the officers who didn’t profess a personal affection for Whitcomb acknowledged that, for most of his career, he had been a fair and supportive leader in the department.
One officer described him as “well-respected, reliable, well-liked” before also describing him as “unpredictable in mood or temperament,” which several officers interviewed said had become more pronounced in the months before Whitcomb’s departure.
At times it appeared Whitcomb’s power in the department was at odds with Hull’s, according to the investigation.
Before his retirement this summer, only one other member of the department had spent more years as a Stowe officer than Whitcomb, and he said he heard Whitcomb “undermining” the chief in the squad room, and once heard him tell the chief to “shut the f–k up and get out of my office.”
Whitcomb, who was going through a divorce when the subordinate officer joined the department, told Jonas they were simply “best friends” who had supported each other through difficult emotional times.
The subordinate told Jonas that the relationship was entirely consensual, that she and Whitcomb had “depended on each other through hard times” and that she knew Whitcomb harbored feelings she could not reciprocate for a variety of reasons, notably due to his status as her superior officer.
She also indicated she felt nothing but support from Whitcomb, who in turn needed her emotionally.
“I feel guilty because I am not available to him,” the officer said. “He is the most caring person to his staff.”
Neither Whitcomb nor the subordinate officer indicated anything physical had happened between them. When Jonas asked Whitcomb directly if he and the subordinate officer were sexually intimate, he refused to answer.
Fellow officers take notice
Both Whitcomb and the subordinate officer claimed that while they spent a great deal of time together outside of work, they kept their interactions at work strictly professional. Although both could recall moments that others might have perceived as favoritism, Whitcomb said he never treated her differently than any other officer.
But their close relationship was obvious to everyone, and their interactions at work were heavily scrutinized. As head of the police association, Whitcomb advocated for her to receive a pay raise before she graduated from the Vermont Police Academy. Hull initially declined that request, but Whitcomb successfully advocated for the raise directly to the town.
When the subordinate was given a Chevy Tahoe while another got a Ford Explorer, officers took note. When new gun holsters were ordered after the subordinate officer commented on the fit of hers, officers took note. When the subordinate officer accompanied Whitcomb to the Lamoille County Special Investigations Unit over another young officer who joined the force around the same time, officers took note.
Whitcomb discounted those perceptions of favoritism, telling Jonas they were things he would do for any officer.
A specific moment that stuck in the minds of Hull and other officers was the day when the subordinate complained of sore feet after a running event, and Whitcomb fetched a pot of hot water so she could soak her feet.
“I can’t tell you how mad I was,” Hull told Jonas. “I left. I thought to myself, ‘What are you doing?’”
Whitcomb said he was honest with Hull about the relationship from the beginning and accused him of “covering his ass” during the investigative process. Hull acknowledged that Whitcomb came to him to express his feelings about the subordinate, but said he also issued a stern warning.
“It’s OK if you are friends but if anything more happens it’s not going to be good for you. Think long and hard about it,” Hull said he told Whitcomb.
As the relationship continued, Whitcomb and the subordinate officer began to spend more time in public together and were increasingly spotted together at locations like Woodland Baking and Coffee in Stowe.
When Safford saw Whitcomb and the officer dining at Trapp Family Lodge last Easter, Whitcomb gave Hull a heads up. One officer interviewed said Safford had told Hull to address Whitcomb’s inappropriate relationship.
Several officers told Jonas they were subjected to uncomfortable moments where Whitcomb was overly vulnerable about his relationship with the subordinate officer. They tried to express their discomfort. One fellow officer told him to “get his head out of his ass.”
“His disconnect is so grand, he can’t even see it,” one officer told Jonas. “He has changed so much over this time period. He lost focus on work and perception because the sun rises and sets on and how (the subordinate officer) is doing.”
And when a fellow officer saw their vehicles parked together at a Mt. Mansfield trailhead, that was apparently the incident that sparked the investigation.
A payout in exchange for retirement
Following Whitcomb’s grievance about his punishment, the town reached a settlement with the former officer.
Whitcomb received a payout of over $100,000, combination of three-months of pay and unused, accrued paid leave and time off. Former fire chief and part-time police officer Kyle Walker received a similar amount after he was fired from the police force and later from the fire department in 2021 after he was accused of sexually assaulting a woman while on-duty as a police officer.
In turn, Whitcomb agreed to retire. Both parties agreed not to talk about the matter, and Whitcomb agreed not to disparage the police department or its officers in any way.
The subordinate officer did not receive any punishment, according to Safford, because she did not violate any department or town regulations.
Whitcomb could not be reached for comment for this article. Safford did not respond to a request for comment on behalf of the town and police department.
