Figure 8


B.             Certain Factors and Phases in the Disciplinary Process Cause Unnecessary Delay in Disciplinary Case Adjudication

The Panel notes that more specific and comprehensive data relating to the timing of NYPD’s disciplinary cases were not readily available. For example, the Panel could not obtain data showing the time for different stages of DAO’s trial preparation or settlement negotiation (such as the time for review by the Department Advocate). It should also be noted that the data that the NYPD provided to the Panel were generated specifically for the Panel’s review; they are not contemporaneously maintained or available in the ordinary course of the NYPD’s business, which makes it difficult for the Department to self-monitor the progression of disciplinary cases and ensure that it minimizes undue delay.

The available data and the Panel’s interviews show that the Department has made significant progress in the timely processing of disciplinary cases over the past few years. In particular, DCT has substantially reduced trial time. In addition, the CCPC’s reviews of IAB investigations indicate substantial improvement in the timeframe for its completion of investigations. Nonetheless, the timeframes remain troublingly long. As discussed below, there are steps that could be taken to expedite the disciplinary process.