Samet O. Gulu

Samet O. Gulu

Samet O. Gulu
Badge #20301, White Male
Police Officer at 34th Precinct since February 2024
Also served at Narcotics Borough Bronx, Field Training Unit, Police Service Area 3
Service started July 2015, made $147,000 last year, Tax #958663

Substantiated Allegations:
Abuse of Authority: Entry of Premises
Abuse of Authority: Property damaged

Lawsuit Settlements:
$60,000   Colon, Edwin, et al. vs City of New York, et al., 2017 EDNY EDNY 17CV05470
View Details

Complaints

3 Complaints
6 Allegations
2 Substantiated
1 Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
1 Substantiated (Formalized Training)
1 Complainant Uncooperative
1 Unable to Determine
2 Unfounded

Complaint #202502913, March 2025
Allegation: Discourtesy: Action
Complainant: Hispanic Male
CCRB Conclusion: Complainant Uncooperative
additional details

Complaint #202411105, November 2024
Allegation: Abuse of Authority: Refusal to process civilian complaint
Complainant: Dominican Male, 35-39
CCRB Conclusion: Unable to Determine
additional details

Complaint #202306583, July 2023
Allegation: Abuse of Authority: Entry of Premises
Complainant: Age 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Formalized Training)
Allegation: Offensive Language: Disability
Complainant: Hispanic, 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Unfounded
Allegation: Abuse of Authority: Property damaged
Complainant: Hispanic, 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
Allegation: Discourtesy: Word
Complainant: Hispanic, 45-49
CCRB Conclusion: Unfounded
NYPD Conclusion: No Disciplinary Action-DUP
Penalty: No penalty
additional details

Complaint #202502913, March 2025
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Discourtesy: Action Hispanic Male Complainant Uncooperative
additional details
Complaint #202411105, November 2024
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Abuse of Authority: Refusal to process civilian complaint Dominican Male, 35-39 Unable to Determine
additional details
Complaint #202306583, July 2023
Allegation Complainant CCRB Conclusion
Abuse of Authority: Entry of Premises Age 45-49 Substantiated (Formalized Training)
Offensive Language: Disability Hispanic, 45-49 Unfounded
Abuse of Authority: Property damaged Hispanic, 45-49 Substantiated (Command Discipline A)
Discourtesy: Word Hispanic, 45-49 Unfounded
NYPD Conclusion: No Disciplinary Action-DUP
Penalty: No penalty
additional details

Conclusion Meanings:

'Substantiated': The misconduct occurred and it violated the rules. The NYPD has discretion over what, if any, discipline is imposed.
'Unable to Determine': The alleged conduct was investigated but could not determine both that the conduct occurred and that it broke the rules.
'Unfounded': Evidence suggests that the event or alleged conduct did not occur.

Further details on conclusions.


Lawsuits

Named in 2 known lawsuits, $60,000 total settlements.

Douglas, Charles, et al. vs City of Ny, et al.
Case # 153606/2021, Supreme Court - New York, April 15, 2021
Complaint
Description: Charles Douglas: On May 31, 2020, at around 11:30 PM, Plaintiff Douglas and his three friends arrived in Union Square, where a group protesting police brutality in the wake of George Floyd’s death had just departed. Plaintiff and his friends stood on the street to observe when Defendant Officer John Doe #1 approached them and told them to "Go away". Plaintiff and his friends complied. As Plaintiff walked away Defendant Doe #1 pushed him. Plaintiff asked not to be pushed. After this comment, Defendant Doe ordered Defendant Doe #2-7 to arrest him. The defendants forced Plaintiff to the ground. Defendant Doe #2 put Plaintiff in handcuffs. Plaintiff was then taken several blocks away and placed on the sidewalk wit...

Colon, Edwin, et al. vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 17CV05470, U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY, September 25, 2017, ended July 16, 2018
$60,000 Settlement
Complaint
Description: Defendant Officers arrived at 794 Flushing Ave and screamed, with profanity, to be let into the building. The officers eventually broke into the building and rushed up the stairs towards the Plaintiffs' apartment. Three of the Plaintiffs were handcuffed and placed in a police vehicle, while the fourth was struck by the officers and not allowed to return to her home. A warrant-less search of the home was conducted and no illegal substances were discovered. Eventually, all four Plaintiffs were taken to the precinct and placed in holding cells. They were all charged with OGA and all of the cases were dismissed.

Other Documents