A special legislative committee in Vermont recommended against impeachment of Franklin County Sheriff John Grismore on Tuesday. Grismore was charged with assault for kicking a shackled prisoner. The committee, while not pursuing impeachment, urged Grismore to resign for the good of the people of Franklin County. House Speaker Jill Krowinski emphasized that although the committee found Grismore’s actions unacceptable, they did not meet the high bar for impeachment. Grismore, who was elected sheriff in November 2022, had previously been fired for the same incident that led to his assault charge.
Grismore, who had won both the Republican and Democratic nominations in the primary, was the only candidate on the ballot for sheriff. Despite facing backlash and investigations, Grismore believed that the committee’s decision not to pursue impeachment was a vindication of his actions. The state police were investigating the finances of the Franklin County Sheriff’s Department and Grismore just before he took office in February 2023. The Vermont Criminal Justice Council had found that he violated the state’s use of force policy and permanently lost his law enforcement certification.
The special legislative committee emphasized the importance of a sheriff being able to fulfill law enforcement duties and receive ongoing law enforcement training, which is not available to a decertified officer like Grismore. They also stressed the need for a sheriff to uphold the highest standards of honesty, integrity, conduct, and service, which Grismore failed to demonstrate. The committee’s report released on Tuesday highlighted Grismore’s lack of adherence to these standards and his continued insistence that his use of force was appropriate.
While Grismore did not immediately respond to requests for comment, he had previously pleaded not guilty to the assault charge stemming from the incident with the shackled prisoner. The committee’s resolution to recommend Grismore’s resignation for the good of the people of Franklin County reflects their belief that his continued presence in office is detrimental to the community. Despite Grismore’s election victory, the committee’s findings and recommendations suggest that his actions do not align with the ethical standards expected of an elected official.
The situation involving Grismore highlights the complex and challenging nature of holding public officials accountable for their actions. The committee’s decision not to pursue impeachment but to recommend resignation indicates a delicate balance between ensuring ethical conduct and respecting the electoral process. Moving forward, the implications of this case may prompt a broader discussion about the responsibilities and expectations of individuals entrusted with positions of power and authority in local government. Ultimately, the outcome of this recommendation may have a lasting impact on how allegations of misconduct by elected officials are addressed in the future.
