A federal judge has ruled that a Connecticut police lieutenant who arrested a volunteer firefighter serving as his department’s Public Information Officer is entitled to qualified immunity in a lawsuit arising from the firefighter’s 2021 arrest for posting photographs from a motor vehicle accident scene on Facebook. The ruling stems from the long-running dispute we have covered in several previous posts involving Chesterfield Fire Company PIO Steven Frischling and the Montville Police Department.  

Frischling filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Montville Police Lieutenant David Radford, Connecticut State Police Sergeant Albert Gosselin, and the Town of Montville, alleging false arrest, malicious prosecution, failure to intervene, and related state-law claims after criminal charges against him were dismissed in 2023.  

The underlying incident occurred on February 7, 2021, when Frischling responded as the Chesterfield Fire Company Public Information Officer to a motor vehicle accident in Montville. According to the court, the Chesterfield Fire Company had created the PIO position in 2019 and adopted written duties that included photographing incident scenes, preparing public information, managing the department’s social media, and documenting incidents for recruiting, training, and archival purposes. The written policy also required that “[a]ll images must meet or exceed HIPAA photographic guidelines for release and further dissemination.”  

While operating at the accident scene wearing a jacket identifying him as “Chesterfield Fire PIO,” Frischling photographed the incident. Later that day, he posted a narrative describing the response on the department’s Facebook page along with four photographs, including one showing firefighters extricating an occupant from a vehicle and another depicting personnel loading a patient onto a stretcher. The accompanying post noted that “[i]mages may have a digital blur to obscure portions of a patient’s identity and their license plate.”  

Lieutenant Radford investigated whether the Facebook post violated Connecticut General Statutes § 53-341c, which prohibits first responders, “other than in the performance of his or her duties,” from knowingly taking or disseminating photographs of accident or crime victims without consent. During the investigation, Radford learned from the injured driver’s daughter, who held her father’s power of attorney, that neither the victim nor the family had consented to publication of the photographs. He later met with Frischling and Chesterfield Fire Chief Keith Truex, who advised him that Frischling had been acting within his assigned PIO duties when he took and posted the photographs. After the meeting, Frischling also emailed Radford directing his attention to the statutory language exempting conduct performed “in the performance of his or her duties.”  

Despite that information, Radford sought an arrest warrant charging Frischling with two counts of violating § 53-341c. The warrant application was reviewed by an assistant state’s attorney, signed by a Superior Court judge, and Frischling was arrested on March 9, 2021. The criminal charges were dismissed two years later.  

In the civil case, Frischling argued that Radford’s warrant application omitted critical facts, including the written description of the PIO position, Chief Truex’s statement that Frischling had been performing his official duties, the fact that the photographs were posted on the department’s official Facebook page rather than Frischling’s personal account, and other information bearing on whether the photographs actually depicted identifiable victims. He contended that those omissions invalidated the probable cause determination supporting the arrest warrant.  

Judge Michael P. Shea declined to decide whether probable cause actually existed. Instead, he concluded that Lieutenant Radford was protected by qualified immunity because the statute had never been interpreted by any reported court decision and reasonable officers could disagree about its meaning.  

The court noted that no reported judicial decisions had construed Connecticut General Statutes § 53-341c since its enactment in 2011. As a result, there was no clearly established law that would have informed a reasonable officer whether the statute’s exception for conduct performed “in the performance of his or her duties” included a fire department public information officer assigned to photograph emergency scenes and post images on social media.  

Judge Shea observed that Radford’s interpretation—that the statutory exception did not necessarily encompass photographing accident victims for publication on Facebook simply because a local fire department assigned those responsibilities to a PIO—was not “obviously” incorrect. The opinion also noted that the statute’s apparent purpose was protecting the dignity and privacy of accident victims and that arresting a first responder for posting images without consent was consistent with that purpose. The court expressly stated, however, that it was not deciding which interpretation of the statute was correct, only that the law was unsettled enough to entitle Radford to qualified immunity.  

Because the federal false arrest and malicious prosecution claims failed on qualified immunity grounds, the court also granted summary judgment to Sergeant Gosselin on the failure-to-intervene claim, which depended on the underlying Fourth Amendment claims. Having dismissed the federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Frischling’s remaining state-law claims, dismissing them without prejudice. As a result, the Town of Montville’s summary judgment motion was denied as moot.  

Here are links to our prior coverage:

• Court Dismisses Police Officer From Connecticut Malicious Prosecution Suit
• Connecticut PIO Sues Police for False Arrest and Malicious Prosecution
• Digital Imagery Charges Dismissed Against Connecticut PIO
• Connecticut Firefighter Charged Criminally With Phototaking At Incident Scene

Here is a copy of the decision: