City ordered to rehire cop over whose actions it paid $1.4 million to settle a lawsuit

Boston Magazine reports an arbitrator ruled the jail guard who accused Williams of choking him during an argument over a 2009 North End traffic incident was drunk at the time, lied about the incident and that if Williams got "aggressive," he had good reason to.

Last year, Boston paid Michael O'Brien $1.4 million to settle his lawsuit, which he filed a month after BPD fired Williams over the incident.

This is the second time the city has been ordered to rehire Williams - BPD fired him for allegedly lying during the investigation into the 1995 police beating of undercover cop Michael Cox.



    Free tagging: 


    I don't get it

    If Williams was fired for lying in a report, and now the arbitrator has determined he wasn't lying and should be re-hired, does this mean that Williams' partner now has to be fired?

    Clearly one of the two was lying, since both of their stories can't be true. Since there is a one-strike policy for lying in a report it follows that one of the two must be fired, right?

    Every suspect has a motive to

    Every suspect has a motive to allege police misconduct. Just like every cop has a motive to allege suspect misconduct.

    Who are these independent arbitrators, and what checks and balances are there on the decisions they make?