| Advertisement |
NEW YORK, Jan. 12 (UPI) -- New York City police officers accused of using chokeholds -- which are banned in the department -- in the past five years have faced inconsistent disciplinary measures for doing so, an NYPD inspector general report found. An investigation by the office of NYPD Inspector General Philip K. Eure was launched into NYPD officers' use of chokeholds in response to the death of Eric Garner after he was placed in a chokehold by officer Daniel Pantaleo.
Advertisement
Garner's death sparked public outcry over the perceived use of harsh -- and sometimes deadly -- tactics by police.
Chokeholds were banned from use by the NYPD in 1993, but the report released Monday found police were accused of using the tactic 1,100 times between 2009 and 2014, and that number is increasing.
The investigation looked at 10 instances in which the NYPD's Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) found these allegations to be substantiated and recommended action. In nine of the 10 cases, the review board recommended administrative charges, the most serious punishment in which an officer faces trial and if found guilty faces termination. In one case, the review board recommended command discipline, which results in the forfeiture of vacation days.
The least severe recommendation, instructions, in which an officer is retrained on policy, was not recommended in any of the cases.
In the first seven substantiated cases, those recommendations were made to the NYPD's Department Advocate's Office (DAO).
"CCRB recommended administrative charges in six of the seven cases referred to DAO, but DAO did not pursue administrative charges in any of them. Instead, DAO ... proposed instructions in four cases, command discipline in one case, and no discipline whatsoever in one case," the CCRB report said. "Thus, none of the substantiated chokehold cases reviewed and handled by DAO ever went to trial on administrative charges before a NYPD trial commissioner."
Since 2013, the CCRB's Administrative Prosecution Unit (APU) has handled recommendations by the review board, and in the three chokehold cases since this policy change went into effect, one trial is pending, one resulted in a not guilty finding and in a third, the unit declined to prosecute the allegation.
Ultimately, though, discipline is up to the discretion of the police commissioner, who could decline to enforce discipline at all. The inspector general report found the police commissioner imposed a less severe penalty or no penalty at all in the six chokehold cases he made a determination about.
Since 2013, the commissioner has required to publicly give an explanation for deviating from the CCRB's recommendation.
"Such decision-making must be grounded in reason and should not be arbitrary," the report said. "However, it appears that in none of the six cases at issue did the police commissioner furnish any explanation for his disciplinary decisions, or more specifically, his reasons for rejecting and undercutting the disciplinary recommendations of CCRB."
The inspector general's report also found that when police officers used chokeholds, they were too quick to do so. It was often the "first act of physical force in response to verbal resistance."
