Originally published in Washington Square News on March 6th 2025 (written by Steven Wang)
Since 2000, there have been 180,700 New York City Police Department misconduct complaints that included 59,244 separate incidents and 35,435 officers. Out of 50 million police interactions each year, 1 million involved a threat or use of force. However, in 74% of complaints where the Civilian Complaint Review Board recommended disciplinary actions, the NYPD either chose to impose a lesser disciplinary measure or none at all. Only one percent of officers — roughly 1,530 out of 180,700 — received severe disciplinary action such as suspension, probation or termination. Police departments across the country benefit from a system that is designed to help them evade punishment for violating the law, and understanding these loopholes is a crucial step in closing them.
Many police departments, including the NYPD, have powerful unions that protect officers from prosecution by negotiating work agreements that make it difficult to discipline those who violate the law. Their contracts often include provisions that require the destruction of disciplinary records, limited civilian oversight and restrictions on questioning officers alleged of misconduct. This makes it nearly impossible to discipline officers, even in cases of excessive force or wrongdoing.
Supervisors tasked with enforcing accountability measures are unlikely to take actions against their colleagues. A recent court-appointed monitor, Mylan Denerstein, reported that 25% of stop-and-frisk policies are unlawful searches, yet internal supervisors flagged just 1% of these incidents as problematic. Many neglected to review body camera footage and incorrectly reported that lawful frisks had occurred when they had not. Even when instances of illegal searches are reported, only the police commissioner has final authority over disciplinary actions. This level of unilateral control can easily lead to corruption and covering up misconduct.
Beyond internal protections, there are legal initiatives that further thwart justice, namely qualified immunity. Qualified immunity is a doctrine that shields police officers and other government officials from civil lawsuits unless they violated “clearly established law.” In practice this means that an officer cannot be sued for misconduct unless a court has ruled on an officer’s precise actions previously on a case that is circumstantially identical. Qualified immunity was used to shield the officers who killed Eric Garner from civil liability, despite video evidence of NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo — who had been investigated for misconduct at least eight times in the five years prior — placing Garner in a chokehold and using deadly force. While the chokehold Pantaleo used was illegal, the court ruled that since no prior case had identical circumstances, Pantaleo therefore could not have “clearly” known his actions were illegal. While qualified immunity is not applicable in cases involving potentially criminal behavior like unlawfully shooting a suspect, oftentimes, forceful overreaches of power can be written off as a necessity of the job. This reduces the incentive for officers to operate within the law, if they know they likely won’t be tried in civil court.
One of the most insidious yet untouched forms of police misconduct is the abuse of plea deals — taking advantage of specific legislation to preclude defendants from their appellate rights as a condition of the plea bargain. A plea bargain resolves about 90% of cases without going to trial. In cases involving police abuse, officers use coercion and intimidation to extract a guilty plea; therefore, defendants sign away their right to challenge the validity of their arrest or unjust actions by the officer.
Many defendants unknowingly sign away their right to contest these unlawful actions, resulting in officers avoiding being tried in court or convicted. This was also used in the Garner case where Ramsey Orta, who filmed Garner’s murder, was unlawfully arrested by the NYPD. Authorities offered Orta a plea deal that prevented him from challenging the officer’s conduct, effectively silencing him — a common tactic used on victims of police abuse. Additionally, the blue wall of silence, which refers to an unwritten code among police to refuse to report misconduct or testify against other officers, prevents fair trials.
Recent legislation sponsored by New York state Sen. Jamaal Bailey seeks to restore the right of plaintiffs to challenge the validity of orders which may deny their motion. This would make it so evidence-suppressing motions are reviewed regardless of whether defendants waive their right to appeal. If passed, this bill would allow appellate courts to review wrongful convictions and corrupt police practices, making sure people who take plea deals will still be investigated thoroughly. Since an estimated 90% of criminal cases end in plea deals, this change would help prevent police abuses going uninvestigated.
Police officers should be using their power to protect the people — not protect themselves from liability. Lapses in justice like these not only rightfully erode public trust in law enforcement, but allow these rampant patterns of abuse to continue.
A criminal with a badge is still a criminal.
Nothing angers me more is innocent people being jailed. These injustices are evil.
Cops shouldn’t be immune, if anything they should be held to a higher standard.
Their job is to protect and serve so they should uphold that to the highest degree.
Qualified immunity is basically justifying crimes against humanity.
Qualified immunity is one of the biggest scams in this country. If no other profession gets that kind of protection, why should cops?
Because their job is “dangerous” but some police officers do def abuse that power..
Imagine how many times this has happened and not been filmed or reported.
I’ve watched a lot of videos where cops disrespect people and break laws when their body cam is on so I can’t even imagine how they must treat others when its off
isn’t it mandatory to have body cams on at all times
in nyc I think they are required to wear and have them on for all interactions in public unless privacy is a concern
also even if they didn’t have it on they probably won’t face any consequences
The problem with this is that they will say something like, We will investigate ourselves and find we did nothing wrong.
So let me get this straight. Only 1% of officers face real discipline? And we’re supposed to believe the system holds them accountable?
Exactly. 99% of them get away with it. Imagine if any other profession had this kind of immunity. If doctors, teachers, or even bus drivers messed up like this, they’d be fired instantly.
The plea deal abuse is something people don’t talk about enough. Cops and prosecutors work together to bully people into signing away their rights. It’s disgusting.
right… it’s crazy that 90% of cases end in plea deals they just want convictions, no matter how they get them.
I used to think police unions were just about fair wages and benefits, but the more I learn, the more I see that their real job is covering up misconduct.
I was always pro-union, but police unions are a completely different beast. They fight for the right to break the law without consequences… if only it was more fair
So the guy who filmed the police murdering Eric Garner got arrested and silenced, but the cops who actually killed him walked free??????
Yup. And Pantaleo wasn’t even a first-time offender. He had eight prior complaints. Imagine how many cops with records just as bad are still walking around today.
Civilian review boards? Ignored. Internal oversight? Doesn’t exist. The police commissioner? Just another cop covering for his own.
they shouldn’t be allowed to review themselves if they’re going to be bias smh
I’m tired of seeing stories about police brutality and knowing nothing will happen. No justice, no accountability, just another name on a list.
They tell us to “comply and file a complaint” if a cop mistreats us, but then we see stats like these showing that complaints don’t lead to anything. What’s the point?
Just for them to cover it up and for us to get a temporary sense of relief until we realize that our complaint doesn’t do much
I do think that the “investigator” that found “no wrong-doing” should be charged as well. Clear cover-up, and corruption.
As is the case for most of these internal reviews. I don’t know why they even bother wasting their time with them.
Exactly why an INTERNAL review should not be done. The review should be processed by an independent group or individual, therefore there is no buddy buddy cover up going on
People like me from Europe can’t understand why police have so much power in U.S
I’ve been watching a lot of police videos and sadly the media portrays them as all bad but not all of them are
agree but this is the thing with media they want to highlight all the bad things
I read an article on this website about subway crimes and this is the same thing. The media points out all the bad crimes on subway even though it happens only a few time and people feel unsafe every day because they think its a lot more common than it actually is
“We have investigated ourselves and found no wrong doing”.
perfect way to sum it up LOL