A now-former Rutland City police officer is facing allegations from law enforcement authorities that he violated the state-mandated Fair and Impartial Policing Policy and in a separate incident falsified a police report.

In one instance, a state panel overseeing law enforcement in Vermont is set to hold a hearing regarding allegations that Nicholas Fontana improperly asked people in a vehicle for identification and muted his body-worn camera during the encounter.

In the other instance, the Rutland County state’s attorney last month formally called Fontana’s credibility into question after an internal investigation found that Fontana mishandled a reported assault case. 

Fontana is the second member of the Rutland City Police Department accused in recent months of violating the anti-bias policy. 

The Vermont Criminal Justice Council in June issued a written warning to another member of the department — Cpl. Tyler Tavares — as part of a stipulated agreement. Tavares was accused of violating the policy by contacting federal authorities to get immigration details about people in a traffic stop.

Now, the council has set a hearing for September for Fontana over his alleged role in a traffic stop in 2025 when he worked as a Rutland City police officer.

It’s not clear from filings in both cases whether the allegations against Tavares and Fontana stemmed from the same traffic stop, though circumstances described in the records appear similar.

Christopher Brickell, executive director of the Vermont Criminal Justice Council, referred a question Thursday about whether both cases involved the same traffic stop to Christopher Perkett, the council’s associate general counsel. Perkett was out of the office and not available for comment.

Neither Rutland City Police Chief Matthew Prouty nor Fontana, who resigned from the department this year, could be reached Thursday for comment.

According to the hearing notice in Fontana’s case, he arrived at the scene of a traffic stop by Tavares “on or about” Sept. 22, 2025, and activated his body-worn camera.

During the traffic stop, the notice stated, Fontana “intentionally muted” the camera for large portions of the stop, including when he interacted with people in the vehicle.

He also requested identification from the passengers and did not tell them they were not required to provide this information, according to the notice. 

According to the Fair and Impartial Policing Policy, the hearing notice stated, “Absent reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity, Rutland City Police Department employees shall not require that passengers in motor vehicles provide identification or other documents. If requesting such documents, Rutland City Police Department employees will state that passengers are not required to provide them.”

The hearing notice said Fontana also faces an allegation that he violated the Rutland City Police Department’s body-worn camera policy.

The notice said Fontana faces a range of sanctions if the council affirms the allegations against him, from a written warning to a revocation of his police certification in Vermont.

In the other set of allegations against Fontana, the results of an internal investigation prompted Rutland County State’s Attorney Ian Sullivan to write what is known as a Brady letter. Sullivan wrote in that letter June 11 that the internal investigation concluded that Fontana “intentionally falsified” police department records, neglected duties by not following through on a reported assault and had “willfully discarded or destroyed” a witness statement.

Brady letters are filed when an officer’s credibility is called into question and can often effectively end a law enforcement career. That’s because prosecutors may decide not to take cases the officer had investigated due to the credibility concerns raised in the letter.

In his letter, Sullivan wrote that the investigation found that Fontana created a police report that said a witness had not provided a statement.

“This was false,” Sullivan wrote in his letter. “In reality, the witness had provided a written statement to Nicholas Fontana approximately three weeks before he authored the false report.”

Sullivan, in an email Thursday, wrote that the reported assault had since been assigned to another Rutland City police officer, who is investigating.