Fifteenth Annual Report - New York City
The City of New YorkCommission to Combat Police CorruptionFifteenth Annual Reportof the CommissionSeptember 2013CommissionersMichael F. Armstrong, ChairVernon S. BroderickKathy Hirata ChinDeborah E. LandisJames D. ZirinExecutive DirectorMarnie L. BlitDeputy Executive DirectorMaria C. Sciortino
PREFACEThis is the last Annual Report that the Commission will render to the current administration.We express our thanks to Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, andInternal Affairs Bureau Chief Charles Campisi, for their continuous support of our efforts to assistin the process of combatting corruption in the NYPD.We are convinced that the Commission plays an important institutional role in monitoring andaugmenting the Department’s anti-corruption program by providing independent but not hostileoversight. Our task has been greatly facilitated because we have been fortunate to work with aPolice Commissioner who does not tolerate corruption and with a Mayor who committed himself toback our independent judgments regarding what we choose to examine, and who saw to it that wehave the resources we need to perform our responsibilities. We have also benefited greatly fromworking with an Internal Affairs Bureau directed and staffed by dedicated and skilled individualswilling to let the chips fall where they may in the unpleasant task of policing fellow officers.While a certain amount of corruption is inevitable in any major police force, the vast majorityof NYPD officers we have encountered are honest and proud to be so. It appears that the MollenCommission’s observation, in 1994, that widespread organized corruption, tolerated by the policehierarchy, was a thing of the past, still holds true. Those police officers that do stray are subject tosmoothly running and effective machinery to prosecute and punish them. By far and large thesystem is working.
TABLE OF B.SeriousOff- ‐DutyMisconduct.401.Alcohol- ‐RelatedOff- ‐DutyMisconduct.412.Firearm- ‐RelatedOff- ‐DutyMisconduct.45a.Fitness- ‐for- t- s.82COMMISSIONERBIOGRAPHIES.83APPENDIX.85
OVERVIEWThe Commission to Combat Police Corruption (the Commission) was established byExecutive Order No. 18 in 1995 (the Executive Order).1 The Executive Order mandated thatthe Commission monitor the efforts of the New York City Police Department (NYPD or theDepartment) to gather information, investigate allegations, and implement policies designedto deter corruption. It also gave the Commission the responsibility to maintain liaisons withthe community and authorized the Commission to accept complaints or information regardingcorruption, which the Commission would then forward to the NYPD or another agency, asappropriate.2One way the Commission fulfills its mandate is through its review of pending andclosed investigations conducted by the Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB).3 The Commission alsoreviews all closed disciplinary cases involving uniformed members of the service that areprosecuted by the Department Advocate's Office (DAO)4 in the Department's Trial Rooms.The Commission presents its findings from these reviews in its Annual Report. TheCommission also conducts studies on particular units, policies, or systems within theDepartment in order to gauge the effectiveness of the NYPD's efforts to prevent and uncovercorruption. To date, the Commission has published 25 of these studies.1Executive Order No. 18 is included as the Appendix to this report.2Executive Order No. 18, section 2(c) (February 27, 1995).3IAB is the bureau within the Department responsible for investigating allegations of corruption and seriousmisconduct against members of the service.4DAO is the division within the Department responsible for the prosecution of administrative disciplinarycharges against members of the service.Fifteenth Annual Report1
This report, The Fifteenth Annual Report of the Commission, presents the Commission'sfindings based on its review of 118 pending and closed IAB investigations and 791 closeddisciplinary cases.5 It also describes the Commission's ongoing, day-to-day operations.5The Commission staff reviews the IAB investigative files and the Department paperwork it receives inconjunction with the closed Department disciplinary cases. The staff performs an analysis on these cases,which is then reviewed by the Commissioners in connection with their review of the draft of this report. Ifthe Commissioners do not agree with any analysis reported therein, the issue is discussed, and the report isedited to reflect the opinion of a consensus of the Commissioners.Fifteenth Annual Report2
MONITORING IAB INVESTIGATIONSThe Commission staff reviews IAB's pending and closed cases by examining the fullcontents of randomly selected investigative files. These files contain worksheets completed bythe assigned investigator, which describe the investigative steps performed, and attachments thathave been either produced or obtained by the investigator. Attachments can be in the form ofdocuments, photographs, audio recordings, or video recordings. Staff members determinewhether the investigation proceeded expeditiously and whether all necessary investigative stepswere taken. In closed investigations, staff members evaluate whether, given the evidencecollected, a correct disposition was reached with respect to each allegation.6 At the conclusionof each review, the Commission staff has the opportunity to confer with case investigators ortheir supervisors regarding any questions or concerns.7 Commission staff members report theirfindings and concerns to the Commissioners, as the Annual Report is prepared.In its recent reports, the Commission chiefly has praised IAB investigations and notedthat issues meriting criticism appeared infrequently in isolated instances.8 While theCommission agreed with the overwhelming majority of the actions under review for this report,the Commission found an increase in recurring issues in a small number of the cases it reviewed.Those issues are discussed further in the closed IAB investigation section of this report.96An investigation can result in one of five dispositions, as set forth by the Department. If the disposition is"substantiated," the investigation found that "the accused employee has committed ALL of the alleged acts ofmisconduct." If the disposition is "partially substantiated," the investigation found that the "employee hascommitted PART of the alleged act(s) of misconduct." If the disposition is "unsubstantiated," theinvestigation found "insufficient evidence to clearly prove OR disprove allegations made." If the dispositionis "exonerated," the investigation found the "subject employee(s) clearly NOT INVOLVED in ANYMISCONDUCT. Incident occurred, but was lawful and proper." If the disposition is "unfounded," theinvestigation found that "act(s) complained of DID NOT OCCUR or were NOT COMMITTED BYMEMBERS OF THIS DEPARTMENT." A.G. 322-11, "Official Communication – Preparation."7If these discussions do not sufficiently answer the Commission's concerns, the Commission may meet withIAB's highest tier of management.8See Fourteenth Annual Report of the Commission (Fourteenth Annual Report) (February 2012) at pp. 5, 7,and 9; Thirteenth Annual Report of the Commission (Thirteenth Annual Report) (March 2011) at p. 5; TwelfthAnnual Report of the Commission (Twelfth Annual Report) (February 2010) at pp. 10-16; and EleventhAnnual Report of the Commission (Eleventh Annual Report) (February 2009) at pp. 10-11.9See infra at pp. 5-23.Fifteenth Annual Report3
A.Pending IAB InvestigationsThe Commission examines pending IAB cases to monitor the progress of theseinvestigations so that any recommendations or concerns are communicated to IAB while thecase is still being actively investigated. During the last reporting period,10 the Commissionreviewed 52 pending IAB investigations,11 which represented approximately 6% of IAB’scorruption investigations. This represents only a portion of IAB’s caseload as IAB assessescases as “corruption,” “misconduct,” or “outside Department guidelines.”12A breakdown of the most serious allegation in each case reviewed is n the Fourteenth Annual Report14 the Commission reviewed 63 pendinginvestigations. The most prevalent allegations reviewed, then as now, were those involvingmissing property and criminal association. In the 45 pending investigations reported on in the10For the purposes of its review of IAB investigations, the Commission followed the calendar year of January 1through December 31.11Two of these investigations were also reviewed as part of the Commission's review of closed IABinvestigations after these two cases were completed.12These represent the most common assessments of allegations but are not exhaustive of all possibleassessments.13Often, investigations contained multiple allegations.14February 2012 at p. 6.Fifteenth Annual Report4
Thirteenth Annual Report,15 these were also the most common allegations.To conduct its review, the Commission chose cases randomly from lists of all pendingcases provided by IAB. The only information on the lists from which the selection was madewas the case number and the specific IAB group investigating the case. Therefore, theCommission did not have any information about the nature of the allegation or the subjectofficer when each case was selected. The Commission also continued to review some caseson which reviews were already underway. The Commission selected at least three cases fromalmost every IAB group.16 Twenty-three of these cases were closed during the course of theCommission's review. When a case was closed, a new investigation from the same IABgroup was randomly chosen to replace it for the next review. IAB investigators andsupervisors appeared receptive to the Commission's suggestions regarding the cases reviewed.The Commission did not find systemic issues in these investigations.The Commission will continue to follow the remaining cases that are still pending inthe coming year, and will select new investigations to review to replace the investigations thathave been closed.B.Closed IAB InvestigationsThe Commission reviews closed cases to assess the efficacy of IAB investigations andto make general recommendations that can be applied to future investigations.For this report, the Commission randomly selected cases to review from lists of all theclosed cases that were regularly supplied by IAB. These lists contained only the case number15Thirteenth Annual Report (March 2011) at pp. 2-3.16IAB is divided into 24 investigative groups. These groups are divided based on geography or specialty. TheCommission did not review investigations conducted by Group 2 (the Financial Investigations Unit), Group 7(the Computer Crimes Unit), Group 9 (the group responsible for overnight, call-out investigations), Group 51(the Police Impersonation Unit), Group 52 (the Integrity Testing Unit), Group 55 (the Surveillance Unit), andthe Court Monitoring Unit. With the exception of Group 51, these groups primarily provide investigativesupport to IAB's remaining groups. Most of the cases investigated by Group 51 do not involve uniformedmembers of the service, so the Commission does not conduct file reviews of these investigations. WhileGroup 7 conducts some of its own investigations, these matters generally do not involve allegations ofcorruption or serious misconduct. As Group 2 is carrying its own caseload, the Commission intends toreview some of its cases in the coming year.Fifteenth Annual Report5
(which also identified the year the allegation was received) and the IAB group thatinvestigated the case. During 2012, the Commission selected 4 cases from each IABinvestigative group17 and reviewed a total of 68 cases18 (or approximately 6% of IAB’scorruption investigations).19The following is the breakdown of the most significant allegations in the 68 rimes22510353325550510152025As was previously noted in the Thirteenth21 and Fourteenth Annual Reports,22 the twomost common allegations reported against Department members in the closed cases reviewedcontinued to be missing property and criminal association.23 In prior audits of closed cases,the Commission observed occurrences of certain issues in IAB’s investigations that appearedsporadically and, therefore, did not merit comment in the Commission’s reports. Instead,these issues were addressed through discussions between the Commission and IAB17Id.18Two of these cases were also reviewed during the pending case review.19See supra at p. 4. Five of the cases reviewed by the Commission were assessed as misconduct cases. Thesecases were not included when calculating the percentage of corruption cases reviewed.20See supra at p. 4, fn. 13.21Thirteenth Annual Report (March 2011) at p. 4.22Fourteenth Annual Report (February 2012) at p. 8.23The Commission audited 60 closed investigations in its Thirteenth Annual Report and 64 closedinvestigations
Fifteenth Annual Report ! 2 This report, The Fifteenth Annual Report of the Commission, presents the Commission's findings based on its review of 118 pending and closed IAB investigations and 791 closed disciplinary cases.5 It also describes the Commission's ongoing, day-to-day operations. 5 The Commission staff reviews the IAB investigative files and the Department paperwork it receives in
New York Buffalo 14210 New York Buffalo 14211 New York Buffalo 14212 New York Buffalo 14215 New York Buffalo 14217 New York Buffalo 14218 New York Buffalo 14222 New York Buffalo 14227 New York Burlington Flats 13315 New York Calcium 13616 New York Canajoharie 13317 New York Canaseraga 14822 New York Candor 13743 New York Cape Vincent 13618 New York Carthage 13619 New York Castleton 12033 New .
N Earth Science Reference Tables — 2001 Edition 3 Generalized Bedrock Geology of New York State modified from GEOLOGICAL SURVEY NEW YORK STATE MUSEUM 1989 N i a g a r R i v e r GEOLOGICAL PERIODS AND ERAS IN NEW YORK CRETACEOUS, TERTIARY, PLEISTOCENE (Epoch) weakly consolidated to unconsolidated gravels, sands, and clays File Size: 960KBPage Count: 15Explore furtherEarth Science Reference Tables (ESRT) New York State .www.nysmigrant.orgNew York State Science Reference Tables (Refrence Tables)newyorkscienceteacher.comEarth Science - New York Regents January 2006 Exam .www.syvum.comEarth Science - New York Regents January 2006 Exam .www.syvum.comEarth Science Textbook Chapter PDFs - Boiling Springs High .smsdhs.ss13.sharpschool.comRecommended to you b
and Rapporteur for the Fifteenth Regular Session at its Fourteenth Regular Session in 2013. The Chair of the Fifteenth Regular Session was Mr Amar Tahiri (Morocco). Mr Kailash C. Bansal (India), Ms Paula Rassi Brasil (Brazil), Ms Christine Dawson (United States of America), Ms Elzbieta Martyniuk
– 22.5% must be paid by the fifteenth day of the fourth month of their taxable year. – 45% must be paid by the fifteenth day of the sixth month of their taxable year. – 67.5% percent must be paid by the fifteenth day of the ninth month of their taxable year. – 90% must be paid by the
CITY OF NEW YORK, BRONX, KINGS, NEW YORK, QUEENS, AND RICHMOND COUNTIES, NEW YORK 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of Study This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) revises and updates a previous FIS/Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of New York, which incorporates all of Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, and Richmond counties, New York, this alsoFile Size: 1MB
Garden Lofts Hoboken,New York Soho Mews 311 West Broadway, New York 8 Union Square South, New York 129 Lafayette St., New York The Orion Building 350 West 42nd St., New York Altair 20 15 West 20th St., New York Altair 18 32 West 18th St., New York The Barbizon 63rd St. & Lexington Ave., New York T
New York 65024 : Active . 648 : 108 . 0 : 4 . 19 : 1 . 0 : 324 . 1,104 New York New York 65024 Inactive 27 8 0 0 0 0 0 12 47 New York New York 65024 Total 675 116 0 4 19 1 0 336 1,151 New York : New York 65025 . Active
The publication of the ISO 14001 standard for environmental management systems (EMS) has proved to be very successful, as it is now implemented in more than 159 countries and has provided organizations with a powerful management tool to improve their environmental performance. More than 324 000 organizations have been certified worldwide against ISO 14001 at the end of 2014, which is an .
