Twelve African American and Latino police officers with the New York City Police Department say that they were instructed to carry out illegal arrests quotas targeting people for being members of “their own minority community.” When they refused, the NYPD reportedly punished them in a variety of ways.
Now, one of those officers has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that he faced retaliation from his fellow officers and higher ups, for complaining about the “racially discriminatory and illegal mandatory enforcement activity.”
Police officer Adhyl Polanco repeatedly found his locker plastered over with pictures of police union president Patrick Lynch, and he was subjected to numerous insults for taking a stand against the illegal quotas, the Brooklyn federal court lawsuit states.
Polanco and 11 other non-Caucasian officers have filed a case in a Manhattan federal court saying that the quotas disproportionately affect them, because they have stated they “are unwilling to perform racially discriminatory and unwarranted enforcement actions against the minority community.”
The top NYPD spokesman says that the twelve are lying and that the department “doesn’t use quotas.”
“There are no numerical enforcement quotas established by the NYPD,” NYPD spokesman Stephen Davis read in a statement.
“Performance evaluations are conducted for all department employees based on an assessment of their duties, responsibilities and specific conditions of their assignments.”
Polanco also says that he was subjected to numerous suspensions, promotion denials and even allegations that he was mentally ill for refusing the illegal quotas.
These punishments included, but were not limited to, “1500 days suspension without pay …over 1500 days on restricted duty psychological hold without cause, no vacation for four years, no overtime for four years” and other punishments.
“In January 2010, Officer Polanco was further retaliated against for his opposition to the racially discriminatory quota practices of the NYPD by being placed on modified assignment transfer out of command and placed on mental watch through 2015,” the suit alleges.
Polanco says this all began the very day that he openly opposed stop-and-frisk strategies.
“The discriminatory actions of the Defendants are ongoing and continue to this day,” the suit concludes.
(Article by M. David and Jackson Marciana)