By DAMIEN FISHER, InDepthNH.org

LITCHFIELD – Fired and criminally prosecuted for sexually harassing a subordinate officer, former Litchfield Police Chief Ben Sargent scored a victory as the New Hampshire Supreme Court overturned his misdemeanor conviction.

Sargent was convicted last year on one count of official oppression for improperly using his official authority for his own benefit, in that he sexually harassed a female officer. Sargent was placed on leave and then fired after he reportedly spent a drunken New Year’s Eve in 2021 sending repeated texts to Litchfield Officer Taylor Dezotell proclaiming his love for her, according to court records.

New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella expressed disappointment in the decision.

“We are deeply disappointed, but we will continue our work to hold public officials accountable when and where appropriate,” Formella said in a statement.

Sargent’s lawyer Eric Wilson said: “Ben is extremely pleased with the Court’s consideration and determination, and he looks forward to moving on with his life.”

The majority, in the split decision issued Wednesday, ruled Sargent’s actions never rose to being sexual harassment since his texts were never explicitly sexual. Further, the court ruled he did not “benefit” from his texts in a manner consistent with the official oppression law. Sargent was not seeking money, and never directly asked for a sexual favor. Instead, according to the records, he expressed his desire for a relationship with Dezotell.

“To conclude otherwise would invite the conclusion that RSA 643:1 criminalizes virtually any empathetic, interpersonal conversation which could be the basis for seeking a momentary personal benefit,” the majority ruled.

The majority opinion was written by Justice Patrick Donovan, with justices James Bassett and Melissa Countway concurring. Currently placed on administrative leave Justice Anna Barbara Hantz Marconi did not vote on the case.

Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald, the sole dissenter, said his fellow justices are rewriting the official oppression law but coming up with new definitions of “benefit.” 

“The legislature has defined the ‘outer limit’ of when conduct done ‘with a purpose to benefit himself’ is criminalized: if the defendant ‘knowingly commits an unauthorized act which purports to be an act of his office’ or ‘knowingly refrains from performing a duty imposed on him by law or clearly inherent in the nature of his office,’” MacDonald wrote. “The statute contains no further constraints. By departing from the straightforward definition of ‘benefit’ — one that we have previously applied under an analogous criminal statute — the majority effectively rewrites RSA 643:1. That is not our role.”

Litchfield Town Administrator Kimberly Kleiner declined to comment when reached Wednesday.

The spiral that ended with Sargent getting fired and prosecuted started Dec. 31, 2021, at 7:08 p.m. when he and Dezotell had four phone conversations and two text exchanges over the next day. Sargent’s heavy drinking and emotional distress also led to an incident where he reportedly drove drunk with a pistol in his mouth, resulting in a wellness check by his own officers at one point.

Dezotell reported that Sargent asked her about hearing he was driving around town with a gun in his mouth.

“Sargent explained (to Dezotell) that he was experiencing a lot of stress and that he had been drinking over the holidays and that his wife was not happy with him,” Scott Gilbert, an investigator at the Attorney General’s Office, wrote in the affidavit.

“Sargent stated that he felt everyone was betraying him and that he was worried Dezotell would betray him too,” Gilbert wrote.

According to Dezotell, Sargent continued to say that his wife was not happy with him, that he had a “Taylor problem” and that he had a “crush” on Dezotell, who tried to change the topic.

Dezotell repeatedly asked him what a Taylor problem meant and he eventually said it meant he loved her, the affidavit said.

Sargent told her to bring wine to his home after her next call and he would tell her about “his feelings” toward her in person, she told Gilbert. She told him she couldn’t buy wine in uniform.

“When speaking with Attorney Saint-Marc, Sargent acknowledged making knowing and purposeful comments to Dezotell but disputed the purpose of his comments. Sargent generally denied expressing romantic or sexual interest in Dezotell during their conversations…” Gilbert wrote.

When Dezotell mentioned her husband and son in one call saying they were “good,” Sargent said, “Well that f—- up my shit because I’m getting a divorce.”

The fourth phone call was Jan. 1, 2022, at 12:50 p.m. in which, according to Dezotell, Sargent still sounded intoxicated, Gilbert wrote.

“Her move to the night schedule was discussed. Dezotell described being ‘bummed’ but understood. Sargent told her she should have come to him in advance as he could have helped her,” the affidavit said.

In the fourth phone call Dezotell said Sargent told her the Taylor problem definition: “It means I love you.” When Dezotell attempted to redirect the conversation, Sargent said he knows he’s “short and fat,” the affidavit said.

Sargent was fined the maximum amount of $1,200, plus $280 as a penalty assessment following his conviction.