Here is a summary of lawyer Michael Marks' recommendations based on the disciplinary hearing on police Chief Joseph Solomon:

The Patriots game incident

Several officers testified Solomon was yelling obscenities, appeared red-faced and irrational when he came into the station Aug. 24, 2007, and found them in a squad room watching a preseason Patriots football game. Solomon testified he was disappointed and upset, but never raised his voice.

Marks found in favor of the city, saying five officers testified differently and "the chief emerges as profane, verbally abusive and out of control" and called it a "wild, overreaction to a relatively minor incident."

Sgt. Larry Phillips

Sgt. Larry Phillips, a 24-year veteran of the department with an unblemished employment record, was one of those punished in the Patriots incident. Solomon placed Phillips on paid leave and ordered him to undergo a "fitness for duty evaluation," including an interview with a social worker. Phillips was not provided a copy of the results.

However, Solomon copied his investigation report into the incident to three private attorneys, and testimony indicates "personal, medical and psychological history of Sgt. Phillips was included."

Marks wrote "the dissemination of this information is a serious lapse of judgment on the part of Chief Solomon."

The FBI

Phillips' suspension came after the officer turned to the FBI to report a stolen property case involving Solomon's former brother-in-law James Caron, who is not named in the report.

Phillips testified he was ordered by Lt. Michael Wnek not to charge Caron criminally and Phillips said he assumed the order came from Solomon. Concerned about the directive, Phillips contacted the FBI about the case. In August 2007, Phillips learned from the FBI that Caron had been called to testify before a federal grand jury.

Solomon says he was told of the Caron investigation, but never intervened. He testified he found out his brother-in-law had been called to testify after putting Phillips on leave.

The hearing officer found the city could not prove Solomon intervened in the criminal investigation. However, Marks did state Solomon failed to notify his boss, the mayor, of the potential conflict of interest.

More importantly, the hearing officer found that Solomon's behavior toward Phillips "directly relates to the grand jury investigation in which Phillips was involved."

38 Bearmeadow St.

The city alleges Solomon ordered officers to travel to his sister's 38 Bearmeadow St. home on nearly 300 occasions. Phillips testified officers were ordered to install surveillance equipment in Solomon's sister's home. The camera was mounted on a telephone pole in the driveway and a wireless receiver and monitor was placed in her home.

Wnek, who also testified on this issue, described the area as a country setting, but was not an area for gangs or drug-dealing.

Solomon claimed there was drug and other criminal activity in the area and his attorney argued Solomon had no knowledge of the camera installation or the property checks.

"The notion that a chief, universally described as a twenty-four-hour, seven-day-a-week employee would not know of police activity at ... the home of his sister, in my view is not credible," Marks stated in his report.

Merrimack Marine

Since 2000, the Methuen Police Department had maintained, stored and repaired its marine equipment at Merrimack Marine Supplies owned by Solomon's sister and brother-in-law. Solomon filed paperwork disclosing a possible conflict of interest with former Mayor Sharon Pollard.

However, Marks wrote Solomon failed to file the paperwork with Mayor William Manzi and that the expenditures made to Solomon's sister's business were a violation of state law.

Detective Walter Gus Flanagan

Detective Walter Gus Flanagan, a 32-year veteran of the force, testified about a meeting between himself, Solomon, Deputy Chief Joseph Alaimo, Alaimo's father, Michael Alaimo, and Wnek at Solomon's home. Flanagan was involved in a case involving counterfeit money and testified he was ordered by Joseph Alaimo to "tell my father everything he asks you." Michael Alaimo, also a former police officer, was working as a private investigator at the time. Flanagan said he felt threatened and intimidated.

Flanagan testified to two subsequent meetings with Solomon, one in the station with Joseph Alaimo present, and the second in November 2004 in a federal office. At the first meeting, Flanagan said he was accused by Solomon of making trouble for him and Joseph Alaimo and the accusation was in the "context of a federal investigation which was ongoing."

At the next meeting, Flanagan said Solomon accused him of gathering information on him and turning it over to federal investigators as well as spreading "vile rumors" about both Joseph and Michael Alaimo.

Flanagan testified while he was not directly threatened by Solomon, he felt "the chief did nothing to prevent the threats and intimidation or to take corrective action against those directly involved."

In his report, Marks found a disparity on the dates of the above meetings and some contradicting testimony as to who was present. Marks said because of the conflicting testimony, the city did not meet the burden of proof, but also stated, "I do not find Flanagan's testimony incredible on this or any other subject about which he was questioned."

As part of his decision to fire Solomon, Manzi overturned Marks' ruling on this charge.

"In my view, it's absurd for the mayor to have done that," said Solomon's lawyer, Andrew Gambaccini.

The grant money

The U.S. Department of Justice is demanding repayment of $170,000, saying the grant money was misspent on supervisors "including Solomon, receiving compensation for overtime with little supporting documentation to support funds paid."

Investigators subpoenaed records on the grant spending in October 2006. Solomon and his attorneys met with federal investigators in March 2007, "without knowledge of the city solicitor and held without his attendance."

Testimony was given at Solomon's hearing from auditors hired by the city to look at department books. It shows the system "was unreliable and could not provide assurance that the hours entered ... were actually hours worked."

It showed patrolmen's time sheets were detailed while the supervisors' time cards were not. While supervisors were not supposed to enter their own time cards, "Chief Solomon would enter his own time, and occasionally Deputy Chief Alaimo or others would enter Solomon's time." It further showed supervisors also entered some of their own time cards.

"Additional investigation revealed that certain individuals were paid overtime when on vacation, sick or personal leave," the report states.

Solomon justified supervisors' time cards as less than detailed by "drawing a distinction between management functions and tasks required by patrol officers."

Marks wrote Solomon "was not persuasive" and ruled in favor of the city.

> >