Substantiated Allegations:
Abuse of Authority: Improper use of body-worn camera
Abuse of Authority: Improper use of body-worn camera
Steven Duch
Badge #22409,
Asian Male
Police Officer at 43rd Precinct since September 2019
Service
started July 2008,
made $177,000 last year,
Tax #946958
Lawsuit Settlements:
$22,500 Garcia, Miguel vs City of New York, et al., 2014 SDNY SDNY 14CV02888
View Details
$22,500 Garcia, Miguel vs City of New York, et al., 2014 SDNY SDNY 14CV02888
View Details
Complaints
1
Complaint
2
Allegations
1
Substantiated
1
Substantiated (Formalized Training)
1
Within NYPD Guidelines
Complaint #202307826,
August 2023
additional details
| Allegation: | Force: Physical force |
|---|---|
| Complainant: | Puerto Rican Male, 25-29 |
| CCRB Conclusion: | Within NYPD Guidelines |
| Allegation: | Abuse of Authority: Improper use of body-worn camera |
| Complainant: | Male, 25-29 |
| CCRB Conclusion: | Substantiated (Formalized Training) |
| Penalty: | Formalized Training |
| Complaint #202307826, August 2023 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Allegation | Complainant | CCRB Conclusion |
| Force: Physical force | Puerto Rican Male, 25-29 | Within NYPD Guidelines |
| Abuse of Authority: Improper use of body-worn camera | Male, 25-29 | Substantiated (Formalized Training) |
| Penalty: Formalized Training | ||
| additional details | ||
Conclusion Meanings:
'Substantiated': The misconduct occurred and it violated the rules. The NYPD has discretion over what, if any, discipline is imposed.
'Within NYPD Guidelines': The conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.
Further details on conclusions.
Lawsuits
Garcia, Miguel vs City of New York, et al.Case # 14CV02888, U.S. District Court - Southern District NY, April 23, 2014, ended December 15, 2014
$22,500 Settlement
Complaint
Description: On February 13, 2014, at approximately 6:00 p.m., defendant NYPD officers Sahidullah and Duch, accompanied by plaintiff's former roommate, entered plaintiff's apartment without a warrant; the officers told plaintiff that the roommate had accused plaintiff of refusing to return the roommate's property. Plaintiff responses that the roommate had caused considerable damage to the apartment, so he retained the roommate's property to try and get compensation. Plaintiff agreed to come to the precinct the following day to file a complaint against the roommate. Approximately three hours later, several more officers came to the apartment with the roommate, and despite plaintiff's protests, the officers and the roommat...