Terminated Shelton Cop Case To Be Reconsidered

SHELTON, CT — A former Shelton police officer's termination may stand after a judge ordered the case sent back to a labor arbitration panel.

Daniel Judkins was fired by the city in 2017 after an investigation into Facebook posts it deemed racist and sexist.

One post on Judkins Facebook account advocated for a judge to be disbarred and hung. Another called former President Barack Obama, “...an anti american muslim piece of [expletive] president.” Some shared posts included the N-word.

Judkins appealed the firing and a state arbitration panel ruled in April 2019 that Judkins would instead be able to serve a 19-month suspension without pay. He was to be reinstated effective January 2019 with back pay and benefits as long as he wrote a letter of apology for the Facebook posts.

Judkins never returned to his position, according to the Shelton Herald.

“[Judkins’s] Facebook posts involve racially offensive language and issues, and can be interpreted to mock minorities, gang members, criminal defendants, Muslims, disabled persons, and certain other groups,” the arbitration panel wrote in its decision.

However, the panel also wrote that cases similar to Judkins’s involved lengthy suspensions instead of termination.

“In short, his background indicates that he is a competent officer and worth giving an opportunity to demonstrate, as he has testified, that the Facebook posts do not accurately reflect his true character,” the arbitration panel wrote in its decision.

The city filed a lawsuit and alleged that the arbitration panel unfairly excluded some Facebook posts from their hearings. The city also alleged in the lawsuit that the arbitration board’s award was in violation of public policy that prohibits officers from conduct that could jeopardize their credibility.

“...the board freely considered mitigating factors in reaching its conclusion to reinstate Judkins, including his nearly ten-year employment with the police department, his ‘good record’, and status as a military reservist,” Pierson wrote in his decision. “Thus the board selectively admitted relevant and material evidence that supported its conclusion to sustain the grievance, while excluding relevant and material evidence that favored the plaintiff’s decision to terminate Judkins.”