Madison police Officer Bernard Durgin Jr. holds his head in his hand as he waits for the Police Commission’s ruling Friday afternoon. Durgin left before the termination decision was handed down. (Peter Hvizdak/Register photo)

MADISON — Suspended police Officer Bernard Durgin Jr. was fired Friday after the Police Commission upheld 50 administrative charges against him — a number so great that it took an attorney more than an hour to read all the counts into the record.

Arrested three times since his suspension in August, Durgin was the second officer fired by the commission in as many days and the third in the past year.

“Frankly, this is a man who should not be a police officer and certainly shouldn’t be a Madison police officer,” Police Commission Chairman Emile Geisenheimer said of Durgin.

Durgin was suspended without pay after he allegedly flashed his badge in New Haven in August in an effort to prevent a friend and fellow Poor Boyz motorcycle club member from being arrested. On the night of the “violent” altercation, Durgin had called in sick to work, Police Department attorney William Clendenen Jr. said.

Durgin has been arrested in recent months for allegedly using the law enforcement database to get information about ex-girlfriends and other women; for worker’s compensation fraud; and for threatening and intimidating witnesses involved in investigating his alleged misconduct. Those cases are pending in Superior Court.

At a hearing earlier this month, Sgt. Trent Fox testified that Durgin and three unnamed officers consorted with prostitutes and felons at several locations throughout Madison.

On Thursday, Sgt. Timothy Heiden was fired after the commission ruled he had interfered with a state police investigation and failed to supervise officers on his shift.

Officer Joseph Gambardella, who along with Durgin worked under Heiden’s supervision, was arrested over the past year for allegedly stealing from two Madison businesses and the town gas pumps. His case is also pending in Superior Court. He was fired last summer.

Heiden was terminated despite testimony from all witnesses that he did not participate in the scandals that have plagued the department.

“For the whole department it’s difficult obviously,” Geisenheimer said. “For the commissioners, it’s extremely difficult. No one likes to fire people and it’s difficult to take this kind of action ... (but) it’s something we’ve just got to do, and while it’s not fun and it’s very serious, it’s something we do with a certain amount of vigor. We’ve got to clean this department up. I think the message has been sent very clearly to the department and future officers over the past few days.”

During Heiden’s hearing, Lt. Allen Gerard testified that he was made aware of Durgin’s meetings with women and convicted felon Albert LeClaire in late 2006, but was advised by a town attorney to deal with the charges against Gambardella before pursuing the Durgin allegations.

On Thursday, the department brought administrative charges against Officer Matthew Sterling for allegedly associating with a known felon, frequenting strip clubs and massage parlors — a “prohibited activity” for which Durgin was also charged — and failing to report knowing that New Haven prostitutes were brought to Madison to “hang out” with officers as they worked midnight shifts.

Sterling’s hearing, expected to be conducted in closed session, is scheduled to begin Tuesday.

Durgin’s closed hearing at police headquarters lasted about four hours Friday, and police commissioners deliberated for about 15 minutes before unanimously sustaining all charges.

The commission voted to terminate Durgin four times — once for each of the four sets of charges.

Durgin was not in the room when the ruling was reached. Although he sat through the hearing, he left attorney Michael Brady to act on his behalf.

Friday’s hearing was bracketed by Police Commission meetings conducted in executive session to discuss “legal strategy and personnel issues” with Clendenen, he said.

After he was fired Thursday, Heiden said he would immediately appeal to the state Labor Board and that additional litigation would be filed.