In November 2020, the Office of the State’s Attorney announced the arrest of long-time University of Connecticut police officer Peter Zavickas on charges of stalking, computer crimes, and harassment. The arrest and press release were picked up by media across the state, and Zavickas, who had an exemplary record as a police officer, was terminated from his job at UConn. 

Added into the mix was Zavickas’ wife, who was also an employee of the UConn police department, and also arrested for participating in the alleged crimes with her husband.

Less widely reported was that three years later, in 2023, all charges were dropped against Zavickas and his wife. 

Not reported at all, was that in 2023 Zavickas also won his job back through an arbitration decision that told a cringe-worthy story about an alleged romantic relationship between the chief of police and a subordinate, a police union at odds with their management, “inappropriate actions” taken by Zavickas, and lackluster investigations by UConn, which may have made the situation worse.

According to the arbitration decision, in 2019 rumors began to circulate among UConn police officers that UConn Chief of Police and Associate Vice President of University Safety Hans Rhynhart was involved in a romantic relationship with a woman working in Human Resources, whose job overlapped with the police department. The university requires employees to report knowledge of violations of university policies and regulations, which would include a romantic relationship with a subordinate employee. 

Zavickas investigated the rumors to submit evidence to the university’s Office of Institutional Equity (OIE), which investigates possible violations of policy.

“Before reporting his concerns to authorities in the Police Department, the grievant observed some of the comings and goings of both parties. He monitored the campus video and observed them directly on and off campus. He also took photographs of their cars when parked at off-campus locations where he viewed them on multiple occasions,” the arbitration decision says. “He provided a detailed report of his observations of them meeting in off-campus locations. He encouraged the OIE to take a close look at the Chief’s state phone.”

Zavickas submitted an anonymous report to OIE in June of 2019, and OIE investigator Alexa J.P. Lindauer asked that he share any additional information. Lindauer followed up by interviewing Rhynhart and the subordinate – both of whom were married and denied the allegations. The subordinate said the only time she met with Rhyhart off campus was to deliver him some beer for his birthday. 

Lindauer then interviewed Rhyhart’s close associate, Deputy Chief Andrew Fournier, who testified that he’d never seen anything inappropriate between the two. OIE then closed its investigation concluding there was no inappropriate relationship, but never told Zavickas of its conclusions and never provided him with a copy of their report until he filed an FOI request in 2022, two years after his arrest.

According to the arbitration decision, Zavickas kept monitoring the situation and his police chief, unaware that OIE had closed its case, or had even investigated.

In August of 2020, an anonymous letter circulated within the UConn police department calling for a “no confidence vote” against Rhynhart; that same month, Zavickas sent an anonymous letter to UConn police department branches outlining his allegations of an inappropriate relationship, along with photographs of Rhynhart and the subordinate’s cars together at off-campus locations.

UConn police management believed both letters were from the same person. While Zavickas admitted to authoring the second letter, there is no evidence he wrote or coordinated with whoever circulated the no confidence letter. Either way, management undertook an investigation to find the letter writer and focused on the affair allegations. Based on the photographs taken of Rhynhart’s vehicle that showed the photographer’s window-washing nozzles, they determined the make and model of the car and tied it back to Zavickas.

Then, in October 2020, Zavickas sent an anonymous letter with photographs to both Rhynhart’s wife and UConn’s president. Shortly thereafter, he was arrested for stalking, using the police camera system and COLLECT system inappropriately, and harassment — with much media attention. He was put on administrative leave and subsequently fired, along with his wife.

The Connecticut Police and Fire Union (CPFU), however, filed a grievance against Zavickas’ termination, arguing there was no just cause. Rarely can Connecticut government agencies outright fire someone without going through a process, and the union argued UConn hadn’t taken the proper steps. The matter went to arbitrator Sarah Cannon Holden in 2023 as the charges against Zavickas and his wife were quietly dropped. 

During the arbitration hearings, the State argued Zavickas stalked Rhynhart and the subordinate, causing fear of harm, used police resources to surveil them, and ultimately sent anonymous letters to family members. The State also argued, oddly, that UConn’s requirement that employees report policy violations “does not apply to police officers who are not supervisors.”

“The State argued that the only reasonable outcome of the grievant’s actions was termination,” Holden wrote. “The grievant engaged in a classic case of stalking and harassing. The public is aware of these activities as they were widely covered in the press. There has been serious impact on the children of Rhynhart and [REDACTED]. It would be against public policy to return the grievant back in position with police power.”

The union, on the other hand, argued Zavickas was acting according to procedure in reporting what he observed, documenting an alleged inappropriate relationship per university policy, and supplying evidence to back up the allegation. 

The union also argued that OIE’s investigation was superficial, raising a number of difficult questions that were never answered by OIE. CPFU also argued that, according to law, stalking is intended to cause fear and distress, but that neither Rhynhart, nor the subordinate, knew they were being watched until OIE launched its inquiry. The union contended that Zavickas was terminated without progressive discipline, prior enforcement, due process, or equal treatment. 

In October of 2023, Holden sided with the union and overturned Zavickas’ termination, saying the university terminated Zavickas without just cause, but also raising questions about the university’s role in the matter. 

Holden faulted UConn officials for conducting a shallow investigation into Zavickas’ initial complaint, noting OIE never determined the working relationship between Rhynhart and the subordinate; never questioned why the subordinate continued to come into her office, which was adjacent to Rhynart’s, during COVID when she wasn’t supposed to; and for not communicating its findings with Zavickas, who continued his own investigation thinking his complaint had been ignored.

“The grievant made assumptions about the OIE report believing that nothing was being done inasmuch as he had no report, and could see no change in behavior after the report,” the arbitrator wrote. “The grievant’s dissatisfaction led him to undertake inappropriate actions that led the department first to place him on paid administrative leave and then to terminate him.”

The arbitrator also took issue with the Internal Administrative review of Zavickas’ actions, stating that it used “unnecessarily inflammatory language,” that made Zavickas appear to be a threat, and that no one had ever been disciplined for “time spent on the Genetec system or for taking a photograph of someone’s car.”

“Whether his accusations were correct or not I find that the grievant believed that his allegations were true,” Holden wrote. “There was no evidence that the grievant had any intent other than bringing to light a Policy violation. A vigorous early investigation could have resolved this.”

The arbitrator also faulted OIE on another follow-up investigation initiated by Rhynhart, when he filed a complaint against Zavickas with OIE for the alleged stalking: “I find this investigation, like the first OIE investigation, lacked vigor or interest in addressing any of the grievant’s anonymous allegations.”

Holden, however, did fault Zavickas for taking the matter too far, particularly contacting Rhyhart’s family via anonymous letter, saying he “stepped way over the line.”

“The grievant was fully aware of the proper process for an anonymous report; he had already done it with OIE,” Honden wrote. “Though he was not satisfied, it was not up to him to continue the investigation and certainly not up to him to involve Rhynhart’s wife.”

Arbitrator Holden ultimately determined that Zavickas should be returned to his position in the police department without being awarded back pay due to his own actions, and that his discipline should be “reduced to a time served suspension.”

“The overwhelming message at the hearing was that Zavickas was a good police officer and a friend to many. I find that a charge that the grievant was stalking Rhynhart and [REDACTED] is unsubstantiated,” Holden wrote. “The purpose was to uncover what the grievant believed was an amorous relationship that violated Police Department policy. Had there initially been a vigorous investigation much of this might have been avoided.”

Reached for comment, UConn spokeswoman Stephanie Reitz said the university “stands by its actions with respect to Mr. Zavickas’s employment, including OIE’s determination that his actions violated University policy and that the allegations against former Chief Rhynhart were unfounded.”

“It is important to note that the Arbitrator determined that Mr. Zavickas engaged in serious misconduct in the course of his employment,” Reitz wrote. “Separately from UConn, the State’s Attorney’s Office sought an arrest warrant in 2020 for stalking and computer crimes based on its investigation, and a Superior Court judge reviewed those findings and signed the warrant.”

Reitz also points out that the Connecticut Police Officer Standards and Training Council decertified Zavickas for “misconduct,” in April of 2024. State payroll records show Zavickas transferred from UConn police to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services as a building and grounds patrol officer, a position under the same NP-5 bargaining unit.

Rhynhart retired in 2022 but UConn has continued to employ him as Associate Vice President of University Safety on a limited basis, which puts him in a position of power over not only the police department but all emergency services across university campuses under an expansion of the AVP position in 2017. During the incident with Zavickas, Rhyhart was working simultaneously as police chief and AVP.

Rhynhart’s deputy chief at the time of Zavickas’ arrest, Andrew Fournier — who told OIE that he’d only observed a working relationship between Rhynhart and the subordinate — went on to split the role of police chief with Magdalena Silver until a new UConn police chief was selected. Fournier has since retired but has also returned to work for UConn on a limited basis as a retiree, according to state open records.

Rhynhart sent an email message to UConn safety employees on August 29 informing them he has been “working with University leadership to begin the process of refilling the Chief Safety Officer/Associate Vice President of University Safety position,” and saying he expects the process to take “4-12” months and will continue to serve during that time.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.