BRUNSWICK
A Brunswick police officer has now resigned from the police department after he was arrested last week on the charge of attempting to transfer obscene material to a minor following a federal investigation.
U.S. Attorney Thomas E. Delahanty II announced Wednesday that Garrett G. Brosnan, 25, of Bath, was arrested Tuesday and charged in U.S. District Court with the criminal complaint.
Delahanty’s office stated that, according to court records, on two occasions earlier this month, Brosnan sent obscene material to an individual who he believed to be a 14-year-old girl. In fact, the recipient of the material was an agent with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations.
Brunswick Police Chief Richard Rizzo said Wednesday that Brosnan had been placed on administrative leave pending an internal investigation.
Saturday, however, Rizzo issued a press release announcing that Brosnan resigned from the police department effective immediately.
Brosnan is no longer a town employee and therefore no longer on administrative leave or the subject of an internal investigation, Rizzo told The Times Record.
According to an affidavit from Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent Douglas McDonnell, their investigation stemmed from a complaint filed with the Flagstaff Police Department in Arizona.
The affidavit states that in October 2015, a 13-year-old girl had a five-day online conversation with a man identifying himself as a 19-year-old male, believed now to be Brosnan. The conversation was discovered by the girl’s parents, and her father alerted Flagstaff police on Jan. 15.
Brosnan was scheduled to make an initial appearance in the U.S. District Court in Portland on Wednesday afternoon. He faces up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
Last week, Rizzo called the criminal complaint against Brosnan a shock.
“The allegations, if true, are extremely concerning, disappointing, and are not in accordance with the high moral standards that I expect of my officers,” he said.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less