HOULTON, Maine — A Maine State Police officer convicted Monday of drunken driving after coming to work in her cruiser remains on administrative leave without pay.
Stephen McCausland, spokesman for the Department of Public Safety, said Thursday that Sgt. Julie Bergan, a 24-year veteran of the department, remains on unpaid leave and he did not know when her status might change.
At this point, Bergan will be unable to operate her cruiser or any motorized vehicle since she has lost her license for 90 days.
Bergan was sentenced Monday evening by District Court Judge Bernard O’Mara. The judgment came after Bergan’s attorney, Michael Harman of Millinocket, unsuccessfully challenged the administration and results of field sobriety and Intoxilyzer tests conducted on Bergan on June 28 shortly after she showed up for work at the barracks in Houlton.
Besides losing her license for 90 days, she was fined $500. Bergan avoided the jail time recommended by Aroostook County District Attorney Todd Collins but was ordered to take part in a first offender OUI alternative sentencing program in Penobscot County.
In court on Monday, Bergan indicated that she had four drinks the night before, two glasses of white wine and two glasses of red wine, the last of which was consumed at 9 p.m.
But more than three hours after she reported for work at 9 a.m., Bergan’s blood alcohol content tested at 0.15. Under Maine law, people may be issued an OUI summons when they are found driving a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content of 0.08 percent or more.
Several witnesses testified during the trial, and most indicated that it was unfortunate they were involved in a situation where they had to testify against their colleague.
Testimony on Monday revealed that Bergan came to work out of character, speaking loudly, exhibiting odd facial movement and acting unsafely with Glenni, a German shepherd trained to be aggressive.
Trooper Chad Fuller said that Bergan was holding the dog’s choke collar as he tried to get away, petting him, repeating words and also kissing the dog’s head.
Fuller put the dog in his car and then called his lieutenant. He told her attorney that he didn’t want to jump to conclusions, but he was troubled by her behavior.
“I assumed she wouldn’t have come to work if she was drunk,” he said.
Acting Lt. John Cote testified about how Bergan appeared unsteady on her feet and had droopy eyes and Trooper Tim Saucier said her mannerisms that morning didn’t seem right and he smelled alcohol on her breath. It was Saucier who later was asked to perform the field sobriety and Intoxilyzer tests on Bergan.
Bergan said in court Monday that she knew she had a problem with alcohol and was getting help. She said that she stopped drinking after she was charged with OUI.
WIth last year’s salary over $89,000 she should be able to weather this pretty well.
a chance to junk your comment twice….Thanks!
I’m sure she is already on SSI-Disability….I imagine she is severely ‘depressed’ from this development and is now disabled
thank god for ponzi schemes to fall back on!
I’ll drink to that.
Sure if she lives a $35k a year lifestyle she’d be fine, but if she lives up to what she makes which most people do it won’t be as easy…..$89k isn’t a huge salary.
did ya see the price of liquor lately?
It would be huge for me!
With a salary last year of over $89,000, she should be able to weather this pretty easily.
I’ll bet she is still getting her benefits, like health Insurance.
Acadia ain”t cheap!!
Most likley she is however she is paying in towards those benefits they are not provided totally free.
“In court on Monday, Bergan indicated that she had four drinks the
night before, two glasses of white wine and two glasses of red wine, the
last of which was consumed at 9 p.m.
But more than three hours after she reported for work at 9 a.m., Bergan’s blood alcohol content tested at 0.15.”
What a total load of BS! There is absolutely NO WAY for someone to have four drinks and then blow a 0.15 FIFTEEN HOURS later!
She needs to be fired. Her friends are keeping her on active status so that she can collect 25 year benefits. The BDN should publish the name and tenure of the State Police Officer who is allowing this to go on.
It noted who was in charge of the Barracks.. sooo now what? write a dirty letter to them preaching about something you’re mostly unfamiliar with?
WLBZ reports that Bergen has been demoted to Trooper and will return to work at the Houlton Barracks on Monday. She will not be allowed to operated a cruiser or other MSP vehicles for 90 days.
BS for sure!!
Unless she weighs fewer than 12&1/2 pounds.
that’s probably why she pled guilty
Pled is not a word it is pleaded.
one more year please, She has worked hard all this time, give her a chance
Another case of, “I’m here to ENFORCE the law, not to obey it.”
She needs to be terminated for being a dumbass.
What an embarrassment to the State Police.
She doesn’t deserve consideration to be part of that unit.
She should be fired! But, unfortunately, the unions say that if she admits to having a problem and is getting help then the state has to support that. Ugh, Unions have their pros and cons but in this case it’s a definite con. If the state decides to fire her anyway and the unions come after them the state will end up paying tons of money to her and that will be tons of tax payer money. Politics in this business are ridiculous.
That is total hagwash. (and that is not a misspelling) there is NO union contract ANYWHERE which disallows the firing, with cause, of a member who commits a criminal act. She drove drunk, she should be gone.
I believe Brick is correct. If she claims that she has an active addiction to alcohol, she would fall under the banner of an American with a Disability act and she could not be fired if she sought treatment.
Yes, I believe anything considered a medical ailment or disability would have to be treated a bit differently.
No actually the ADA SPECIFICALLY does not exempt people with disabilities from criminal prosecution.
Try losing your license for being drunk while a “Teamster” hauling hazardous materials and find out if you keep a job.
When someone is “terminated” for cause, they are not “terminated” because they are an alcoholic. That would not be permissible under A.D.A. but if they are terminated because their “disability” prevents them from doing their job, that would be a justified termination. An employee (disabled or otherwise) can ALWAYS be terminated for committing a criminal act on the job. For instance an employer would be within their rights firing a kleptomaniac who stole company property.
ALSO there is nothing in this story, or previous stories to suggest that this woman has an “addiction.”
You are correct, she can be criminally prosecuted (which she was) for OUI. But losing her job because of this IS in fact protected by the ADA if she claims she actively suffers from an addiction. Active addicts ARE covered by the ADA!!! GO figure!
The point is she can not be fired for being an alcoholic, she CAN be fired for committing a criminal act in the workplace. If your scenario were correct, she couldn’t be prosecuted.
Children with disabilities are tossed out of school all the time. (See Light v Parkway) They are tossed out due to their propensity to be a danger to self or others (which is not protected under ADA)
This Cop DEFINITELY poses a danger to self or others. She can (and should) be fired.
By all rights, they just let that ex chief of police off on oui and numerous hunting charges….. I guess its past practice now, so why not let her go too??
Addiction is an equal opportunity affliction. I personally feel badly for this woman. Her addiction got so out of control that it impacted her job. She has been a Trooper for 24 years, I believe that to mean that her job is incredibly important to her and something she is passionate about. It is a shame that addiction would rob her of that. I for one, hope she is able to get some help and pick herself back up. We are all capable of doing things we NEVER thought we would. She needs to face some consequences but I don’t believe they need to be life shattering ones.
She made the “life-shattering” choice. If she had hit and killed someone while drunk, taxpayers would be out of pocket, and someone’s whole family would have been “shattered.”
Sorry no tears for this drunk.
If she had that on her record when she was being considered as a potential hire I’m sure she would have been excused from consideration. So now that she has the badge why should it be different?
Have one for the prosecution…………$500. fine?
This is a person needing help……………I hope she gets it…………..I do believe in 2nd chances……………..if she gets one, I hope she makes good use of it. I have a relative who is an alcoholic……………….when he is not drinking, he is a good person…………i would like to think the same goes for this officer…………
I’m sorry but,
The only honorable thing to do here is for her to resign.
Anything less than that is self serving.
A person convicted of oui who has a license to inspect cars will loose this licence as long as he doesen’t have a drivers license. I guess that if your the State Police officer that takes his license gets a oui will only have to walk a little while and looses nothing. Maybe the state police administration should rethink this as you don’t need a drivers license to inspect a car.