Conclusion Meanings:
'Exonerated': or 'Within NYPD Guidelines' - the alleged conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.
'Substantiated': The alleged conduct occurred and it violated the rules. The NYPD has discretion over what, if any, discipline is imposed.
'Unfounded': Evidence suggests that the event or alleged conduct did not occur.
'Unsubstantiated': or 'Unable to Determine' - CCRB has fully investigated but could not affirmatively conclude both that the conduct occurred and that it broke the rules.
'Within NYPD Guidelines': The alleged conduct occurred but did not violate the NYPD's own rules, which often give officers significant discretion.
Further details on conclusion definitions.
Named in 2 known lawsuits.
Toppin, Henisha, et Al Vs. City of New York, et al.
Case # 23CV09584,
U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY, March 21, 2024
Complaint
Description: On January 1, 2021, plaintiffs Henisha Toppin, Shjayia Jones and J.T. (Henisha Toppin’s 10-year-old son), were subjected to false arrest, false imprisonment and detention, illegal taking of property, loss of parental rights, assault and battery and use of excessive force, for acts of which plaintiffs were innocent. On the incident date, Plaintiffs were having a New Year’s Eve celebration at Toppin’s mother’s home in Brooklyn. At approximately 3:00 a.m., Several police officers arrived at the location and knocked on the door. When no one inside answered the door, police officers remained on scene and refused to leave. At approximately 5:00 a.m., the all three plaintiffs exited the location and were arrested and...
Burrowes, Stephen vs City of New York, et al.
Case # 15CV05097,
U.S. District Court - Eastern District NY, September 28, 2015, ended May 9, 2016
Zero Disposition
Amended Complaint,
Complaint
Description: Plaintiff was driving to pick his daughter up from school, which was allowed with his restricted license, when defendant officers pulled him over, arrested him, and charged him with 511.01 which was later dismissed by the DA.