Federal Judge Criticizes NYPD For “Widespread Falsification” of Arrest Reports

One of the most famous federal judges in the country lashed out at the New York Police Department this week, accusing the department of a proven record of “widespread falsification by arresting officers.” The criticism came with Judge Jack Weinstein’s decision not to throw out a lawsuit by two men busted on false narcotics charges, Maximo Colon and his brother Jose Colon. We previously discussed this arrest.

Weinstein noted that “[i]nformal inquiry by [myself] and among the judges of this court, as well as knowledge of cases in other federal and state courts … has revealed anecdotal evidence of repeated, widespread falsification by arresting officers of the New York City Police Department.” He went on to say that “there is some evidence of an attitude among officers that is sufficiently widespread to constitute a custom or policy by the city approving illegal conduct.”

The brothers were arrested last year on false charges of selling cocaine in order to meet arrest quotas. A video shows that they were framed by the officers.

They are suing for $10 million for false arrest.

We have been following this and other cases of alleged false statements by arresting officers, here.

For the full story, click here.

17 thoughts on “Federal Judge Criticizes NYPD For “Widespread Falsification” of Arrest Reports”

  1. No surprise here. There is also a proven widespread falsification of incident reports by the Federal Protective Service, yet thus far only US Attorney Ryan in the N District of California was willing to do anything about (he sent three fabricating officers away for up to two years and was fired by AG Gonzales). US Attorney Rothstein in Maryland insists on looking the other way and the repeated documentation of incidents in his jurisdiction.

  2. foo,

    I will deed to you my entire interest in all of the property that I a seized of in my name and my name alone.


    I was going to throw that in as an incentive. Are you interested in bidding. There is an disclosed reserve as you are probably aware.

    psst. Tom, if you can induce foo, I will share handsomely the fatted calf, that I am seized of today.

  3. I served on a jury once where an elderly woman was excused from serving when, during the judges initial questioning of prospective jurors, she told the judge that she probably shouldn’t be on a jury because she’d been raised to believe that everything a policeman said was true. Her exact words were, “Your Honor, if a policeman says it, I believe it.”

    Later, after the selection was complete, one of my fellow jurors commented, “I gotta’ remember that line next time I’m summoned!”

  4. AY – why are you holding back on that great piece of infrastructure you’ve got title to in NY – isn’t it a bridge or something?

  5. Gosh! No! It can’t be!

    What if judges start finding themselves “shocked, shocked to find that police flat out lying under oath is going on in their courts!”

    For anyone who wonders why OJ Simpson was acquitted in his criminal trial, I strongly suspect that jurors’ wariness of lying cops played a huge part. It’s a “boy who cried wolf” problem – how many convictions are screwed up because jurors don’t trust officers who, in that case, are telling the truth?

  6. I will consider your offer AY as soon as you show me your valid title to all of those properties together with survey records. 🙂

  7. Ok Foo,

    I have some land to sell you. One is near Ocean Front property in Arizona. The other is some wet land near 1600 Pennsylvania,DC. And other items of interest to show. Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny and A full series of All in the Family.

  8. Lawyers never lie. You can’t lie about a legal theory or precedent. Alleged lies about facts should be rebuttable by conflicting evidence. A superior argument is not a lie. Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, lawyers never lie.

  9. COPS lying, you guys are lawyers, it isn’t like it doesn’t happen every day.

    Part of the problem might be the slap on the wrist a suspect gets from the judge and the corruptibility of all aspects of our legal system.

    Do the police do this in a vacuum, not hardly.

    An excuse, no; just a possible explanation. When in Rome do as the Romans do.

  10. This is very heartening. Police falsifying reports strikes at the heart of any fair system of justice. As our police grow more militarized, using tasers as weapons of punishment before trial, as our society increases its police state tactics every day, I am thankful for this judge’s decision.

  11. AY

    I’d venture a guess the amount in the suit relates to $1 for every instance of falsifcation by NYPD. On second thought, make that $.50 per. Do I hear $.01?

  12. I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you! Another example of people picking on the police. Who the hell does this judge think he is? He thinks he has something to do with justice, we don’t need no stinking justice! We need more obedience and respect.

Comments are closed.