{"active":true,"first_name":"Victor","last_name":"Paribello","race":"White","gender":"Male","rank":"LT CD","command":{"command":"M ASCS","assignment_date":"2022-10-13","id":"874"},"taxid":"930906","complaint_ids":[201304066,200709742,200708778,200508593,200503869,200503304,200307176],"command_history":[{"command":"M SVS"},{"command":"068 PCT","id":"68pct"},{"command":"P S B","id":"488"},{"command":"067 PCT","id":"67pct"},{"command":"PBBS AC"},{"command":"DB BSVS"}],"appt_date":"2002-07-01","age":48,"middle_initial":"A","shield_no_history":[6656,4516,2613],"lawsuits":[{"name":"Broomes, Livingstone vs City of Ny, et al.","start_date":"2022-05-17","payout_amount":0,"disposition":"","docket":"22CV02807","court":"U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY","summary":"On May 3, 2011, Plaintiff was arrested for the alleged rape of \"A.\" after Detective Paribello's investigation. Plaintiff and \"A\" were known to both be mentally disabled. A was interviewed by Detective Paribello in May 2011. After the interview in which A stated she was raped to Detective Paribello, A disclosed to her aunt that she only told Detective Paribello she had been raped because she had been told she was not supposed to have sex and as a result thought that she might have been beaten if she told the truth that her relationship with Plaintiff was consensual. Detective Paribello interviewed Plaintiff after his arrest, and did not inform the prosecution of Plaintiff's disability despite that it was \"obvious.\" Paribello also did not inform KCDAO that he ultimately believed that A was not raped. Paribello falsely arrested Plaintiff on charges of rape. \nOn May 26, 2011, Bellevue Hospital examined Plaintiff while he was in custody prior to his guilty plea and found that he was mentally disabled and that he had dementia. The hospital did not inform the DA, the court, or Plaintiff's defense counsel. \nIt is alleged that Plaintiff and A are equally mentally disabled. The DA argued that A was incapable of consenting to a sexual relationship, and did not acknowledge that such argument would mean that Plaintiff was equally incapable of providing consent given their similar levels of disability, and thus, neither could be charged. At trial, A stated she wanted to \"say something,\" which led the DA to remove her form the remove, and did not grant her the opportunity to add to her testimoney as she wanted. It is possible that the information she wanted to add was the potentially exculpatory information that she saw her relationship with Plaintiff as consensual. KCDAO continued to prosecute Plaintiff despite all of this. On March 15, 2012 KCDAO further accepted Plaintiff's guilty plea despite that he did not seem to understand what a guilty plea meant, and he continued to maintain his innocence. On March 26, 2012 Plaintiff was sentenced to four years incarceration and ten years of post-release supervision. Plaintiff was released from prison on September 26, 2014.\nOn May 23 2019, the court granted the motion to vacate Plaintiff's conviction because he was innocent given the similar levels of disability and because his guilty plea was unknowing and involuntary.","documents":[{"url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.479935/gov.uscourts.nyed.479935.32.0.pdf","type":"complaint"}],"url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63595776/broomes-v-city-of-new-york/"},{"name":"Stewart, Sianna vs City of New York, et al.","start_date":"2018-09-04","disposition_date":"2019-07-01","payout_amount":16250,"disposition":"Settlement","docket":"18CV04841","court":"U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY","officer_name":"Paribello, Victor","summary":"On October 25, 2017, plaintiff was sitting in a Zipcar rented by a friend when defendant officers approached the car and ordered everyone to exit. Plaintiff was handcuffed and subjected to an illegal search. She was falsely arrested and charged with possession of a forged instrument, unauthorized use of a vehicle and possession of marihuana. All charges were dismissed. \nIn November 2017, defendant police officers again illegally searched and then arrested plaintiff. Though defendant police officers all knew that plaintiff had not committed any offense, they still transported her to the precinct for processing. Ultimately, the prosecutors declined to prosecute.","documents":[{"url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.421555/gov.uscourts.nyed.421555.13.0.pdf","type":"complaint"}],"url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7745294/stewart-v-the-city-of-new-york/"}],"image":"https://www.50-a.org/images/officer/LLSH-victor-paribello.jpg","payroll":{"salary":"154751","regular":"148859","overtime":"64260","other":"20186","total":"233305"},"news":[{"url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-the-nypd-special-victims-unit-victims-tell-their-stories-1525780801","title":"Inside the NYPD Special Victims Unit: Victims Tell Their Stories ","source":"Wall Street Journal","date":"2018-05-08"}],"id":"LLSH","url":"https://www.50-a.org/officer/LLSH"}