Litigation

Suffolk County Has a Crime Problem

Only government (prosecutors) can bring criminal charges in criminal courts.  On their own, individuals who believe they have been victimized by criminal conduct can pursue remedy only in the civil courts.  Since 2016, hundreds of individuals have filed lawsuits in New York State Supreme Court and the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of New York alleging unlawful conduct by members of the Suffolk County Police Department, Sheriff’s Office and District Attorney’s Office.  

To be clear, some guilty people do deny their guilt and claim to have been falsely accused.   But also clear are the disturbingly persistent patterns in the lawsuits plaintiffs bring against Suffolk County, plaintiffs who are willing to endure the adversarial and costly process through to the end.  The principal pattern involves allegations of civil rights violations including false arrest/imprisonment, unlawful search and seizure, assault and battery, excessive force, unlawful withholding of exculpatory evidence, and abuse of process.  

Additional concerning patterns involve allegations of negligent hiring, training and supervision and allegations of careless and reckless driving that lead to motor vehicle accidents resulting in serious physical injury and or fatalities.  These patterns merit public scrutiny.  

By virtue of the sheer number of lawsuits and how long it takes to adjudicate them, they represent a problem.  The question is: “how big a problem?”  

• What is the total $ amount of the liability these actions have exposed taxpayers to?

• How much have these actions cost Suffolk taxpayers?

• How much have taxpayers paid to defend against these suits?

• How much have taxpayers paid in negotiated settlements?

• How much have taxpayers paid in court-mandated awards?

SCPD is an administrative arm of Suffolk County and cannot be sued in its individual capacity.  The County self-insures for claims up to $3 million. Claims that exceed $3 million are covered by a catastrophic policy with an outside insurer.  The Ways and Means Committee of the Suffolk County Legislature approves settlement payments by resolution.  When budgeted funds are not sufficient to cover the cost of negotiated settlements, awards and judgments, the County Legislature authorizes the issuance of Suffolk County Serial Bonds to cover the cost.   The County Executive approves the resolutions that authorize settlement and payment.  The legislature’s Public Safety Committee has direct oversight authority over the Police Department, Sheriff’s Office and District Attorney’s Office.

• How much do those bonds cost taxpayers with interest?

• Are those amounts ever charged against the Police Department budget or are they just continually added to the taxpayers’ burden?

• Have the members of the Ways and Means Committee and/or the Public Safety Committee conducted any systemic review of the root causes of the misconduct that repeatedly leads to taxpayers paying to defend complex lawsuits and for costly awards and settlements?

• Does the legislature have a monitoring system in place to track patterns of misconduct?

• What action has the legislature taken to protect the public and taxpayers from officers with records of repeated misconduct?

• How many officers have been involved in more than one lawsuit?

• How many of those involved in cases that resulted in negotiated settlement payments and court-mandated awards have faced Departmental discipline for their conduct?

• What discipline, if any, did they receive?

• If involved officers were not disciplined for their role in such cases, was policy revised to prevent a recurrence of similar conduct?

  • If so, how?

  • If not, why not?

• Why does the county routinely obtain confidentiality orders that bar disclosure of evidence in lawsuits that allege excessive force, false arrests and racial discrimination and, often, permanently bar victims from publicly reporting what happened to them?

• Why do legislative Resolutions that authorize settlement of lawsuits and issuance of Suffolk County Serial Bonds to cover the cost of settlement not expressly stipulate the matter being settled and identify the person(s) who is/are authorized to receive the payment?

• How much political campaign support $$ do the members of the Ways and Means and Public Safety Committees (the oversight authorities) accept from Suffolk County law enforcement organizations (LEOs) that they oversee? Those questions are addressed in greater detail here and here.

Since May 2019, two major lawsuits were initiated against the county that expose taxpayers to more than $50 million in potential liability.  Both were filed by individuals who were exonerated of murder convictions that were allegedly obtained through police and prosecutorial misconduct. 

• Keith Bush served 33 years in prison for a murder that he did not commit.  In October 2021, county executive Bellone approved payment of 16 million taxpayer dollars to settle the lawsuit.

• Shawn Lawrence served six years of a 75 years to life sentence for a murder conviction that was obtained by Suffolk County Assistant District Attorney Glenn Kutzrock, who was terminated for routinely unlawfully withholding crucial evidence from defendants.  No fewer than five murder convictions were vacated following an ensuing review. Kutzrock’s license to practice law was subsequently suspended as a result of his conduct.  
  Lawrence has initiated an action in which he is seeking $20 million from Suffolk County taxpayers. 

According to the NYS Comptroller, in 2018 Suffolk County had an operating deficit of about $26.5 million and a general fund deficit of $285 million.  The Suffolk County Comptroller is responsible for issuing the bonds that pay for settlements and awards. In an interview with Newsday, Comptroller John Kennedy said:  “Are we able to keep on adding these continual judgments? Absolutely not . . . When these judgments roll along, we have to forgo the opportunity to invest in the brick and mortar of actual government” such as parks improvements and upkeep with aging county buildings. “We, in essence, put them on the credit card.” 

NYS Deputy Comptroller Elliott Auerbach offered Newsday the following perspective:

"For municipalities in significant fiscal stress, including Suffolk County, they often don't have money to fall back on if something unexpected arises."  Suffolk’s high-stress ranking shows “a limited ability to cover revenue shortfalls, cost overruns, unexpected legal costs or something unplanned."

County Executive Steve Bellone reportedly acknowledged to Newsday: “There is a corruption tax that is associated with this kind of conduct . . . It's unfortunate. It's terrible. And if you want to prevent it in the future it's important that the truth come out.” Regrettably, what the County Executive says and his administration does are two very different things. His administration vigorously obtains and enforces confidentiality orders that prevent evidence from seeing the light of day and prevent victims from letting the public know what happened to them.  The following excerpt from one such order reveals the administration’s commitment to law enforcement ‘confidentiality’ over the public interest and First Amendment rights: 

“Nothing herein shall be deemed to permit the provision of confidential documents, or the disclosure of the contents of confidential documents, to any member of the press, media, print, broadcast, cable, satellite or internet; or to any person or entity purporting to be working in the public interest. It is understood that any such provision or disclosure is a violation of this Order, the First Amendment rights of the recipients, notwithstanding.” 

The County Executive authorizes the payments.  It is his responsibility to be familiar with the provisions of the agreements and underlying orders.  He can safely presume that few Suffolk County taxpayers have read the pleadings in these cases.  That leaves him free to publicly decry the “corruption tax” these practices impose and acknowledge the need for transparency to prevent them from recurring while, behind the scenes, his administration spares no effort to deny transparency regardless of the adverse impact on the public interest and First Amendment rights.   

The County Executive’s rhetoric is the height of cynicism, if not outright hypocrisy.  He made clear how well he grasped the adverse impact of these practices when he publicly acknowledged:  “… if you want to prevent it in the future it's important that the truth come out,” yet his administration vigorously and methodically employs confidentiality orders to prevent the truth from coming out.  
How does he get to have it both ways? How does he get to retain public trust and support while his administration acts so consistently and deliberately against the public interest?

See Newsday analysis: Nassau, Suffolk conceal court records of alleged police misconduct.

These lawsuits are brought in the name of and are paid for by Suffolk’s residents.  The answers to these open questions are a compelling public interest.  

Elected officials are supposed to govern with the informed consent of the governed.

• It is high time for transparency. The public has a right to know what it is paying for as well as why.

• It is time for elected officials to prioritize transparency and the First Amendment rights of their constituents, to whom they are accountable, over law enforcement’s desire for ‘confidentiality’ that shields them from accountability.

• It is time for the legislature to write Resolutions so that the people who are paying for them can read them and understand who they are paying and what they are paying them for.

• It is time for the county to report fully to the public on lawsuits on a regular basis.  

Woefully Inadequate Transparency

Tracking down relevant lawsuit information on the Legislature’s website, like meeting minutes and self-explanatory Resolutions, involves all of the mystery and unexpected twists, turns and anxiety of an Indiana Jones movie with none of the entertainment value.
Few residents who have the usual basket of responsibilities of life on Long Island have the time or the skill that it takes to hunt down the relevant information that is scattered throughout the website. It’s like a high-tech Easter egg hunt.
It shouldn’t be that difficult. It should be just as easy as the Legislators make it to get to their campaign websites and make a donation.
There is no summary litigation data by category and by year, such as suits filed, suits pending, settlements, judgments/awards, settlement payments, Bonds issued, insurance claims made, insurance claims settled.

History is instructive. Blanket confidentiality (read: secrecy) and unlimited access to public funds is a recipe for mischief and abuse.

This isn’t complicated. Elected officials who do not feel obligated to inform those they govern quite simply do not deserve and should not receive their consent to continue governing.

Our purpose here is to begin the process of shining light into these otherwise dark recesses of County governance to help voters fulfill their role in providing informed consent.

Noteworthy settlements / awards

Other Notable Pending Lawsuits - Allegations of Disturbing Acts