After getting engaged to a firefighter in October last year (2024), a police officer, whose fiancé filed a restraining order against her, was shot.
A North Andover police officer discharged a firearm at a new mom and off-duty police officer from the same department named Kelsey Fitzsimmons. According to investigators, Fitzsimmons was shot in her home on Phillips Brooks Road on June 30, 2025, after being served a court order. Netizens have weighed in on the matter.
Netizen comment about the North Andover Police Department (NAPD) case, posted on July 1, 2025. | Source: Facebook/Boston 25 News
According to Essex County District Attorney (DA) Paul Tucker, the chain of events began just after 6 p.m. on Monday evening when three North Andover police officers — including a supervisor — arrived at the Phillips Brooks Road residence to serve Fitzsimmons a court-approved restraining order.
Fitzsimmons, who was on administrative leave at the time, was being escorted by one of the officers when, according to DA Tucker, “an armed confrontation took place.” In response, one of the officers discharged their department-issued firearm, striking and wounding Fitzsimmons.
Emergency aid was immediately rendered at the scene before she was flown via medical rescue helicopter to a Boston-area hospital. By Tuesday morning, authorities confirmed she was in stable condition.
Tucker declined to disclose where Fitzsimmons was shot, the status of her mental health, and whether she had been armed at the time of the incident. The Essex District Attorney’s Office and the Massachusetts State Police Detective Unit are conducting the investigation.
“The very granular details, we’re waiting to speak on until we get the interviews back from our state police detectives who are speaking with the North Andover officers that were involved,” divulged the DA, who also stipulated that it is unknown for how long Fitzsimmons will be treated.
The officer who fired the shot has not been publicly identified, though officials confirmed he has served with the department for over 20 years.
Court records reveal that Fitzsimmons, who is in her 20s, has been with the North Andover Police Department (NAPD) for about a year and a half and filed to regain her service weapon during her leave, gave birth in February 2025.
The following month, local police and EMTs were called to her home for what was described as a “mental health episode.” She was then hospitalized for 12 hours and diagnosed with postpartum depression.
As a result, she voluntarily surrendered her service weapon. By June, however, she had been medically cleared to return to work, and her license to carry was reinstated.
The restraining order that led to the confrontation was filed by Fitzsimmons’ fiancé, Justin Aylaian, a firefighter she had gotten engaged to in October 2024. In the filing, he alleged that Fitzsimmons had struck him and made threats to take their baby away. Aylaian also expressed fears for their four-month-old child’s safety and requested sole custody.
A handwritten note in the court documents warned that Fitzsimmons might not react calmly to being served the order.
When asked whether the officers were at the residence to retrieve any weapons, Tucker confirmed that such action was standard procedure under Massachusetts General Law 209A. It was also emphasized that serving restraining orders, even on fellow officers, carries significant risk.
Speaking on the situation, NAPD Chief Charles Gray added that the department was focused on supporting all personnel involved and continuing to monitor the matter. He also declined to discuss specifics regarding Fitzsimmons’ request to have her weapon returned during her leave, labeling it a “personnel matter.”
Additionally, Chief Gray noted that North Andover police do not currently use body-worn cameras. As questions swirl, transparency remains limited.
“There are lots of interviews to be done. There are lots of pieces to be put together. There is [sic] lots of things that remain unanswered,” Tucker stated, acknowledging the complexity of the investigation. Meanwhile, mental health experts, such as law enforcement clinician Jeff Zeizel, have stressed the importance of psychological support for all involved.
The incident has ignited a wave of discussion online, with many questioning the details of the shooting and the department’s operating procedures.
Essex County District Attorney (DA) Paul Tucker speaking alongside a police officer at a press conference in Methuen, Massachusetts on June 16, 2024. | Source: Getty Images
A common point of concern surrounded the absence of body-worn cameras within the NAPD. “Very strange how the NAPD don’t wear body cameras 🧐,” noted one netizen, while another echoed, “Why doesn’t NAPD use body cams?”
The sentiment was reiterated with increasing skepticism, as one person asked, “Where’s the cop cam?” and another questioned, “And the officer who shot her didn’t have a body cam????” Suspicion over the department’s approach to the restraining order service was also prevalent.
“Took 3 officers to deliver a restraining order to a female??? Something a little fishy here!” opined one commenter. Someone else reiterated, “It takes 3 people to deliver 1 restraing [sic] order? It’s odd. Something’s not right.”
Similarly, a fellow spectator commented, “So 3 officers went to serve a possibly dangerous coworker and neither of the 3 had body cameras…not 1 of them🤔 interesting.” Emotions ranged from confusion to unease, as people grappled with the lack of clarity.
“Was she threatening to the other officer? Something doesn’t seem right. Shot In her own home, which should be a place of peace and protection. Very sad [sic],” remarked one individual. Summing up the broader public demand for transparency, someone else penned, “What is the real story? What happened?”
As details surrounding the shooting continue to unfold, many are watching closely — hoping for answers, and for accountability.
