How to Read an Investigation Report

About Final Summary Reports

At the conclusion of every PAB investigation, we produce a Final Summary Report detailing our analysis of the evidence gathered and a summary of our findings and recommendations.

This section is the introduction to PAB’s legal authority to investigate and the key features of its investigation reports.

Introduction

Pursuant to § 18-11 of the Charter of the City of Rochester, and in the interest of public accountability, the Police Accountability Board has made the following investigative report public. It has been redacted so as not to disclose the identities of the officers and civilians involved.

Pursuant to Rochester Police Locust Club, Inc. v. City of Rochester, 41 N.Y.3d 156 (2023), Rochester Police Officers can only be disciplined by the Rochester Police Department. Accordingly, where a finding of police misconduct has been sustained by the Board, the PAB issues disciplinary recommendations to the Chief based on our Disciplinary Matrix.

The final Board decision as to the PAB determination of misconduct and recommended discipline are followed by the investigatory report prepared by PAB staff.

Board Decision

Public Tracking Number (PTN): 2022-0068

Date of Panel Review: 21-Nov-2024 1:00 PM (EST)

Board Members Present:

Case Findings:

Allegations 1,2,3 and 4: Exonerated

Disciplinary Recommendation: N/A.

Dissenting Opinion/Comment: N/A.

This section is the summary of board decisions, including dates, reviewing board members, and outcomes.
This section provides the definitions of terms used for board decisions regarding allegations.

Definitions

Exonerated: A finding at the conclusion of an investigation that either the alleged act did not occur, or that although the act at issue occurred, the subject officer’s actions were lawful and proper and within the scope of the subject officer’s authority under police department guidelines.

Not Sustained: A finding at the conclusion of an investigation that there is insufficient evidence to establish whether an act of misconduct occurred.

Sustained: A finding at the conclusion of an investigation by a preponderance of the evidence that the subject officer committed the act charged in the allegation and that it amounted to misconduct.

Closed: Vote to close the case.

Allegations

Allegation # 1:

Officer 1 violated RPD Rules and Regulation 4.6 by providing false statements, lacking a legitimate basis for initiating the traffic stop on a black 2022 Mitsubishi.

• Does the Board Agree with the Findings of Fact?Yes

• Does the Board Agree with the Substantiated Evidence of Misconduct?N/A

• Does the Board Agree with the Proposed Disciplinary Action?N/A

This section outlines the allegations against the officers, along with the board members’ decisions on factual findings and recommended disciplinary actions.
This section marks the beginning of the detailed investigation report conducted by PAB investigators.

Closing Report

Statement of Authority

Article XVIII of the Rochester City Charter defines the authority and duties of the Police Accountability Board. Pursuant to § 18-1, “The Police Accountability Board shall be the mechanism to investigate such complaints of police misconduct and to review and assess Rochester Police Department patterns, practices, policies, and procedure...The Police Accountability Board shall provide a nonexclusive alternative to civil litigation.”

This section outlines PAB’s legal authority to investigate police misconduct.
This section presents the executive summary of the complaint details and factual findings of the alleged incidents, based on records, information, and testimonies collected through the police department, relevant agencies and organizations, and individuals. For public release, the original report has been revised to anonymize officers' names and redact identifying information of involved individuals including witnesses and complainants.

Executive Summary

The following event took place on December 7, 2022 at or near 601 Woodbine Ave, Rochester NY 14619 at approximately 1:35AM. On April 11, 2023, Complainant 1 submitted a report with the RPD Professional Standards Section (PSS) regarding an alleged improper procedure during a traffic stop that took place on or near 601 Woodbine Ave, Rochester NY 14619 on December 7, 2022. RPD notified the Police Accountability Board (PAB) on April 19, 2023.

Involved Officers

Officer # Officer Name Officer Rank IBM/Employee # Date of Appointment Sex Race/Ethnicity
Officer 1 testing testing testing testing testing testing
Officer 2 testing testing testing testing testing testing
This table lists the police officers involved in the incident, including information such as names, ranks, identification numbers, which have been redacted for public release.
This table lists the individuals involved, including complainants and witnesses, with their information redacted for public release.

Involved Individuals

Designation Name Age Sex Race/Ethnicity
Complainant 1 testing 41 M Black
Witness 1 testing 33 M -
Witness 2 testing - M -

Allegations

1 Officer 1 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
2 Officer 2 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
3 Officer 1 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
This table lists the allegations investigated by PAB, sorted by officers, and provides details on how and which laws and rules were possibly violated.
This section outlines the investigation process, detailing how the PAB investigator collected information and evidence, as well as the procedures followed on specific dates.

Investigation

Complainant 1 filed a report with RPD Professional Standards Section (PSS) on April 11, 2023.

RPD notified the Police Accountability Board (PAB) on April 19, 2023. On April 19, 2023, the Police Accountability Board received notification of PSS Investigation along with case package. File case package Sent 4-19-23 includes; supporting deposition for tickets #1, and ticket #2, statement of correction, uniform traffic ticket, ECD job card, complaint form and audio, complainant advisement statements (stenograph), Body worn camera footage from three (3) different officers; Officer 1, Officer 2 and Officer 3 and external correspondence.

Evidence Reviewed

Evidence Description
ECD Summary of Events This document is a summary of each event card and audio-recorded 911-call created by , provided to the PAB by ECD. The ECD summary spans the landlord-tenant PAB Investigator. Animal Services Report #DOC080624- 08062024130930 Animal Services Report #DOC080624- 08062024130721 Investigative Case Note 1 written by , dispute from April 25, 2022 to September 7, 2022. These files confirm June 8, 2022 and June 10, 2022 as dates of importance regarding the allegations.
Animal Services Report #DOC080624- 08062024130930 Created by an Animal Control Officer on April 6, 2022. Animal Control was called to the address of Cottage Street because to assess the quantity of dogs on the property, the licenses for each dog on the property and the welfare of the dogs.
Animal Services Report #DOC080624- 08062024130721 Created by an Animal Control Officer on May 23, 2022. Animal Control was called to the address of Cottage Street because to assess the quantity of dogs on the property,
This table provides a complete list of evidence reviewed by PAB for the investigation, along with a summary of each item. The Filename column provides the name of the electronically stored evidence as well as a link to it. The reviewing board members have access to it.
This table outlines the evidence that the police department refused to provide to the PAB.

Evidence Denied

Evidence Description
ECD Summary of Events This document is a summary of each event card and audio-recorded 911-call created by , provided to the PAB by ECD. The ECD summary spans the landlord-tenant PAB Investigator. Animal Services Report #DOC080624- 08062024130930 Animal Services Report #DOC080624- 08062024130721 Investigative Case Note 1 written by , dispute from April 25, 2022 to September 7, 2022. These files confirm June 8, 2022 and June 10, 2022 as dates of importance regarding the allegations.
Animal Services Report #DOC080624- 08062024130930 Created by an Animal Control Officer on April 6, 2022. Animal Control was called to the address of Cottage Street because to assess the quantity of dogs on the property, the licenses for each dog on the property and the welfare of the dogs.
Animal Services Report #DOC080624- 08062024130721 Created by an Animal Control Officer on May 23, 2022. Animal Control was called to the address of Cottage Street because to assess the quantity of dogs on the property,

Applicable Rules & Laws

RPD General Order 415

A search is defined as any activity by a government official (including a police officer) that invades any area in which a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. This includes, but is not limited to, a physical ently into an area, location or item; a visual inspection or smveillance into a private area without an actual physical entiy; an audito1y interception or overheai·ing of communications on a communications device, such as a telephone; and viewing data on a computer or similai· device. A search deals with a person's privacy rights and can occur regai·dless of whether any items are actually seized or taken by the police.

U.S. Constitution Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in then· persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no W atTants shall issue, but upon probable cause, suppolied by Oath or affnmation, and pa1ticularly describing the place to be seai·ched, and the persons or things to be seized.

This section provides the federal/state laws, police department rules and regulations, field manual including General Orders and training bulletins, and internal policies relevant to specific allegations related to the complaint.
This section informs readers about the standard PAB uses for its investigations and fact-finding process. PAB applies the “preponderance of evidence” standard, which is higher than the minimum standard mandated by the City Charter.

Standard of Proof

For the purpose of PAB’s investigations, findings must be made pursuant to a “substantial evidence” standard of proof. City Charter 18-5(I)(10). This standard is met when there is enough relevant and credible evidence in the record as a whole that a reasonable person could support the conclusion made. (See 4 CFR §28.61(d)).

Analysis

Allegation 1: Officer 1 violated RPD Rules and Regulation 4.6 by providing false statements, lacking a legitimate basis for initiating the traffic stop on a black 2022 Mitsubishi.

The Body-Worn Camera (BWC) footage captured by Officer 1 begins with exiting patrol vehicle and approaching the driver’s side of the suspect vehicle. At this point, the driver’s window was only slightly open, creating a small gap that made it difficult to assess the interior of the vehicle. Officer 1 requested that the driver roll down window for everyone's safety, as the dusty condition of the windows lacked visibility; however, the driver refused to comply.

This section discusses each allegation and its final outcome, as determined by PAB investigators, outlining the reasoning and supporting evidence behind the investigation’s conclusion. It provides the outcome for each allegation, indicating whether it was sustained or not.
This table summarizes the “Analysis” section above, detailing the investigation outcomes for each allegation and officer.

Recommended Findings

Allegation# Officer Allegation Finding/ Recommendation
1 1 Unlawful Entry (search) Not sustained
2 2 Unlawful Entry (search) Not sustained
3 1 Violation of BWC policy Sustained

Authority

Article XVIII of the Rochester City Charter further requires that the Police Accountability Board create a “written, consistent, progressive and transparent tool or rubric” that “shall include clearly delineated penalty levels with ranges of sanctions which progressively increase based on the gravity of the misconduct and the number of prior sustained complaints.” This disciplinary matrix is a non-binding set of guidelines for the Police Accountability Board’s own recommendations regarding officer misconduct. .
This subsection’s narrative outlines the basis of PAB’s authority to make disciplinary recommendations, along with the Disciplinary Matrix.
This subsection presents the recommended disciplinary actions based on the analysis, the disciplinary matrix, and mitigating factors.

Disciplinary Matrix Appendix

Appendix A

Case details

Date/Time/Location of Incident:

Date/Time of PAB notification:

Involved Member #1:

Involved Member #2:

Involved Individual #1:

Involved Individual #2:

[Name, star#, employee ID#, Date of Appointment, Unit of Assignemnt, gender, race]

[Name, gender, race]

Application Rules
Case Details: A list of case identifiers including the date, time and location of the incident, the date and time PAB was notified of the incident and the involved parties and their personal identifiers (though certain personal information may be redacted pursuant to law

Appendix B

This appendix contains the definitions of PAB's findings and the applicable standard of proof

Appendix B

Definition of PAB's Findings and Standard of Prood

For each Allegation, PAB must make one of the following findings:

1. Sustained - where it is determined the allegation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;

2. Not Sustained - where it is determined there is insufficient evidence to prve the allegations by a preponderance of the evidence

3. Unfounded - where it is determined by clear and convinccing evidence that an allegation is false or not factual; or

Exonerated - where it is deternined by clear and convincing evidence that the conduct described in the allegation occurred, but it is lawful and proper

Appendix C

Transparency and publication categories