{"active":false,"first_name":"John","last_name":"Keeley","race":"White","gender":"Male","rank":"DT1","command":{"command":"GANG BX"},"shield_no":2443,"ended_date":"2009-04-01","taxid":"891677","lawsuits":[{"name":"Shabazz, Ilyasah as Admin of The Estate of El-Shabazz, Malik, et Al vs Usa, et al.","start_date":"2024-12-06","payout_amount":0,"disposition":"","docket":"24CV08680","court":"U.S. District Court - Southern District NY","summary":"On February 21, 1965, deceased Malcolm X, one of the greatest Black liberation leaders, was assassinated while giving a speech. Prior to his assassination, Malcolm X received several death threats and had reported it to the NYPD Defendants. However, despite knowing otherwise, NYPD Defendants publicly claimed that the previous attempts on Malcolm's life were publicity stunts orchestrated by himself. They refused to intervene and provide adequate protection to him. Malcolm X's request for firearm permit for protection was also never approved. NYPD Defendants also intentionally arrested Malcolm X's bodyguards before the day of speech to leave him more vulnerable. NYPD Defendants had manipulated witnesses and prepared them to provide false identifications, including before the grand jury and trial. The Federal Defendants were inside of the ballroom where Malcolm X was assassinated but they did nothing to intervene the event. Instead of ensuring his protection, the FBI and BOSSI Defendants actively worked to ensure Malcolm X's vulnerability by reducing his hired protection. The FBI Defendants had also provided fake witnesses to identify the killers of Malcolm X.  The complaint also alleged that the FBI and NYPD Defendants' subsequent cover-up, manipulation of witnesses and systemic corruption within the enforcement are violations of Malcolm X's constitutional rights.","documents":[{"url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.631724/gov.uscourts.nysd.631724.1.0_1.pdf","type":"complaint"}],"url":"https://www.courtlistener.comshabazz-v-united-states"},{"name":"Johnson, Helen Greene, as Administrator of The Estate of Islam, Khalil Also Known as Johnson, Thomas Deceased, vs City of Ny, et al.","start_date":"2022-07-21","disposition_date":"2022-12-12","payout_amount":13000000,"disposition":"Settlement","docket":"22CV04112","court":"U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY","summary":"On February 21, 1965, the Plaintiff was at his home in the Bronx while Malcolm X was shot at the Audubon Ballroom in New York City. \n\nDefendants Cavallaro, Conroy, Cusmano, Iacovelli, Keeley, Rushin, Schaetzle, Cilento, Garelik, Reneghan, Robb, and Sullivan were the lead detectives investigating the murder of Malcolm X, and Defendants De Vergee, Taylor, Twomey, Vohs, and Willis assisted with the investigation. All lead and assisting detectives knew about all or some of the exculpatory information, evidence of third-party guilt, and eyewitness-related police misconduct, including bribery of witnesses and improper and unlawful identification procedures.  Defendants Mulligan, Theologes, Bouza, Knapp, and Suarez became aware of exculpatory information and did not share this information with the defense. Defendant Roberts was undercover for the NYPD as a bodyguard on the day of Malcom X's murder and witnesses the murder and shared exculpatory evidence with the NYPD. The NYPD and FBI became aware of exculpatory evidence through multiple sources. Defendants Cavallaro, Clineto, Conroy, Cusmano, De Vergee, Keeley, Schaetzle, Twomey,  Vohs, Willis, Rushin, and Taylor bribed, threatened, and used identification methods known to cause and/or create a substantial risk of false identification with multiple witnesses to coerce false identification of Plaintiff. The training of NYPD and policies, customs, and practices encouraged suppression of exculpatory evidence and did not require employees to document or disclose Brady infomration to defendants, courts, or prosecutors. The NYPD's policies customs, and procedures encouraged and permitted improper, suggestive identification procedures.\n\nOn March 3, 1965, one ore more NYPD detective arrested the Plaintiff at his home for the murder of Malcolm X.\n\nThe NYPD Defendants possessed exculpatory evidence and Brady information that they did not share with Plaintiff's defense. The evidence possessed by the NYPD Defendants corroborated witness testimony that the Plaintiff was not involved in the murder of Malcom X. The prosecution's case rested on eyewitness testimony obtained through the coercion described above. The NYPD Defendants also coerced witnesses to make false identifications and give false testimony against the Plaintiff before the grand jury and trial.\n\nOn April 14, 1966, the Plaintiff was sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial court.\n\nIn December 1977, the Plaintiff filed a motion to vacate his conviction based on newly discovered evidence. Among this evidence was an affidavit from Defendant Roberts regarding Roberts' role as an undercover NYPD officer who witnesses Malcom X's murder and saw the shooters from the front row of the auditorium. This information had been suppressed at the time of the trial. The motion to vacate was denied.\n\nIn January 2020, counsel for Plaintiff began a reinvestigation with the Manhattan District Attorney, which unearthed substantial and compelling new evidence of Plaintiff's innocence. A significant portion of the new evidence had been in NYPD's or FBI's possession soon after Malcolm X's murder and in advance of the trial, but was not disclosed to Plaintiff's defense at any point.\n\nOn November 18, 2021, Plaintiff and the DA filed a motion to vacate based on the newly discovered evidence. The motion was granted.","documents":[{"url":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.482574/gov.uscourts.nyed.482574.1.0.pdf","type":"complaint"}],"url":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63590955/greene-johnson-v-the-city-of-new-york/"}],"id":"RQ28","url":"https://www.50-a.org/officer/RQ28"}