Conclusion Meanings:
'Exonerated': or 'Within NYPD Guidelines' - the alleged conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.
'Substantiated': The alleged conduct occurred and it violated the rules. The NYPD has discretion over what, if any, discipline is imposed.
'Unsubstantiated': or 'Unable to Determine' - CCRB has fully investigated but could not affirmatively conclude both that the conduct occurred and that it broke the rules.
Further details on conclusion definitions.
Named in 4 known lawsuits, $75,000 total settlements.
Rawls, Tashwan By Mng Yon-Rawls, Shawnita vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 15CV07582,
U.S. District Court - Southern District NY, November 4, 2015, ended August 20, 2018
Zero Disposition
Complaint,
Amended Complaint
Description: Defendant Officers unlawfully entered Plaintiff's home, interrogated him, arrested him, and transported him to the 46th Precinct. Plaintiff was charged with 265.01-b(1); 265.03(3); 265.01(1); 10-131; 265.37; 10-131(1)(3)and 265.02(8), which were later dismissed.
Mcelligott, Jennifer vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 15CV07107,
U.S. District Court - Southern District NY, September 11, 2015, ended December 1, 2017
Zero Disposition
Complaint
Description: Defendant Officer Donnelly forcibly entered Plaintiff's apartment and assaulted her. Plaintiff alleges that Officer was excessively drunk. Officer Donnelly was arrested and charged with Assault in the 3rd Degree, Criminal Trespass in the 2nd Degree, and Criminal Mischief in the Fourth Degree.
Williams, Tyreik vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 15CV03123,
U.S. District Court - Southern District NY, May 14, 2015, ended June 7, 2016
$75,000 Settlement
Complaint,
Stipulation
Description: Plaintiff was waiting in an unfamiliar apartment for his girlfriend to finish cutting the resident's hair, when Officers came and searched the apartment and told Plaintiff they only needed to take him in for questioning. Officers then took him to the 46th Precinct and charged him with 265.03(3), 265.01-b(1),265.02(08), 265.01(a), 265.37, AS 10-131(i)(3), and 10-131(i)(6) because he didn't succumb to the Officer's bribes for information on more guns. Charges eventually dismissed
Delossantos, Jeffrey vs Bohr, Sgt. Frank, et al.
Case # 12CV08622,
U.S. District Court - Southern District NY, May 2, 2013, ended July 29, 2013
Zero Disposition
Complaint