RANDOLPH, Mass. -- Fire chiefs often vent their frustration over budget cuts and understaffing, but is the right time to do that at the scene of a deadly fire?
Two years ago the Randolph fire chief was suspended by the board of selectmen for making what the board ruled was "inappropriate" remarks at the scene of a fire where two boys died.
Half-brothers Emmanuel Labranche, 17, and Valensky Duguaran, 10, were trapped in their bedroom when a fast-moving fire swept through their home in May 2007.
I was there that morning when Chief Charles Foley voiced his frustrations over his department being understaffed. In response to a question about whether those boys could have been saved by more firefighters responding he said he couldn't promise that but the operation would have been more enhanced by additional staffing.
The board's opinion was that Chief Charles Foley's remarks were "unprofessional and misleading" and they criticized him for using the media as a forum to express his frustrations. He was suspended for three weeks without pay.
Foley sued over his suspension saying his First Amendment rights had been violated. But a federal judge just tossed out the case. U.S District Court Judge Patti Saris granted the town's motion to dismiss the trial saying that Foley was not speaking as a private citizen, he was speaking as a town employee when he made his comments.
Foley's attorney vows to appeal, telling The Patriot Ledger the ruling sets "an awful precedent" The attorney believes the ruling will have "a chilling effect on public officials speaking out on issues of public concern."
The judge said if Foley made those remarks at a town meeting or even at "a different time or place" other than the fire scene, the ruling would have been different.
Republished with permission of WBZ-TV.
