A defiant Franklin County Sheriff John Grismore on Monday appeared before the Vermont House panel weighing whether to impeach him and denounced its investigation as a disgrace.

The elected official, who was caught on video kicking a detained man in the groin twice, painted himself as a victim of an anti-police media frenzy that is demoralizing officers and fueling a crime wave destroying the state. He has refused to resign, even though other Vermont sheriffs have urged him to.

It was the first time Grismore had testified before the seven-member committee exploring his ouster from elected office, something that has only happened three times in Vermont history.



Grismore insisted his testimony be given publicly, as opposed to the closed-door hearings that have dominated the inquiry to date. He did so, he said, because he has nothing to hide and does not think there was anything wrong with the way he kicked the shackled detainee in August 2022, before he was elected sheriff.

“I am ready to answer your questions because I am unbowed, unafraid, and I have nothing about which to have fear or shame,” Grismore told the panel in his opening remarks.

Others have come to very different conclusions about Grismore’s conduct, which was caught on video and has been widely reported in the media and condemned by lawmakers.
The Vermont Criminal Justice Council last Wednesday voted 14-1 to decertify Grismore as a law enforcement officer in the state due to what they concluded was excessive use of force. The vote effectively restricts Grismore to administrative duties.

Then, shortly before Grismore’s testimony on Monday, the Vermont Sheriffs' Association called on him to resign to restore trust to the office.

Windham County Sheriff Mark Anderson, president of the association, said Grismore has shown a lack of leadership that has eroded public trust in law enforcement in the county.

“Sheriff Grismore continues to defend his actions ostentatiously, with no remorse, reflection or opportunity to consider alternative resolutions,” Anderson said at a press conference in the Statehouse.

Anderson and other sheriffs testified before the committee on Monday, laying out in detail the complex role that sheriffs' departments serve in the state and the somewhat complex way in which they are funded.

Some of those complexities would emerge later when lawmakers questioned Grismore, focusing not only on his use of force but on financial matters he was not entirely able to explain.

Grismore testified that, not long after joining the department as a bookkeeper in 2019, he was promoted to lieutenant and had significant additional administrative and patrol duties, as well.
“It grew into quite a diverse and expansive role,” he told the committee.

This dual role saw him getting two paychecks. For his work as the department’s bookkeeper, he was paid by Franklin County. For his law enforcement work as a lieutenant and later a captain, he was paid by the sheriff's department, he testified.

In addition to getting two paychecks, he was writing checks to himself for thousands of dollars in his role as bookkeeper.

The money was retirement compensation that he and Roger Langevin, the previous sheriff, established outside of the Vermont State Employees' Retirement System, Grismore testified. He said he had raised concerns about how underfunded the state pension system was and was interested in exploring other options.



He and Langevin agreed to stop making some retirement contributions to Grismore’s state pension fund and instead made payments directly to him, he said.
This was a “test” of whether it was possible to create a 401k-style retirement system for the department, Grismore said.

Langevin, who testified before the committee earlier on Monday partly behind closed doors, was fully aware of the financial arrangement, Grismore said.

“He approved everything that took place,” Grismore testified.


Tim Doherty, an attorney representing what is formally known as the House Special Committee on Impeachment Inquiry, submitted into evidence a check that Grismore, as bookkeeper, issued to himself for $4,744.02 in December 2021.

Grismore testified that his signature was the only one required on checks issued by the department at the time. He didn’t recall how many times he wrote checks to himself for retirement contributions. Doherty asked if $16,000 sounded about right.

“I don’t want to answer a question I’m not prepared to answer,” Grismore said.
The department has since been informed by state pension officials that diverting those contributions from the pension funds is not allowed, and the department has had to pay another $16,000 to the fund, Doherty explained.

Doherty asked whether Grismore agreed that this meant he had been “doubly compensated” toward his retirement. Grismore said he was not sure but would be happy to return to testify again after reviewing all the facts.

Grismore also had difficulty explaining how his previous base pay of $23 per hour as bookkeeper for the department translated into a $63.42 overtime pay rate when he served as an officer.
Lawmakers peppered Grismore with questions about whether his actions had in any way impaired or harmed the department’s reputation or operations. He repeatedly said he felt they did not.

His loss of certification didn’t matter because “99 percent” of the job is administrative, he said. The public has offered “unwavering support” for him, he said, by virtue of his election even after video of the kick was released publicly.


“We’re going to continue to carry the shield for all the other police officers that could be victimized by a process similar to this,” he said.