Editor-at-large Eric Umansky answers our questions about today’s investigation.
Your story today is about the NYPD commissioner’s retention authority. How does it work?
So in New York City, a civilian oversight board investigates alleged police misconduct and prosecutes officers in disciplinary trials. When the commissioner “retains” a case, he literally takes it away from the civilian oversight board, so there’s no trial, no public questioning of officers.
The commissioner can still impose punishment. But he often doesn’t. And when he does give out a penalty, it’s almost always light, rarely more than the loss of a few vacation days.
Why is retention allowed?
TLDR: because the NYPD demanded it. A decade ago, the City Council moved to give the city’s police oversight agency the power to prosecute officers for misconduct. The NYPD, which had always been in charge of discipline for officers, fought back and insisted on a trap door: retention.
Last year you wrote about the failed promise of police body cameras. Can you talk about the role of video evidence in this story?
Footage from these cases is typically not publicly available. I was able to get some videos from the victims, who are not named in investigations; I had to track them down. The footage shows instances of police brutality — Tasering, baton strikes and more — that the civilian oversight board concluded were likely crimes before the commissioner intervened.