Two NYPD officers who drove their SUVs into a crowd of protesters blocking a Brooklyn street at the height of the George Floyd protests in late May 2020 have been cleared of wrongdoing by police commissioner Edward Caban, Civilian Complaint Review Board officials confirmed Friday.
Caban endorsed an NYPD administrative trial judge’s recommendation that officer Andrey Samusev be found not guilty of multiple charges of improper use of force with a vehicle and reversed the same judge’s recommended finding of guilt against officer Daniel Alvarez.
The outcomes were posted early Friday on the website 50-a.org, which combs through public law enforcement databases for information on police disciplinary cases.
The charges were brought by the Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) after an internal NYPD probe exonerated both officers of wrongdoing stemming from the incident on May 30, 2020 in Prospect Heights.
During an administrative trial in December 2022, CCRB prosecutors had sought termination for Samusev and a one-year probation for Alvarez, during which any additional infraction could prompt termination, along with other penalties.
Video of the two SUVs surging into a crowd of protesters who had blocked the path forward with metal barriers and their bodies — as some people threw objects at the vehicles — was one of the most indelible scenes from the weeks of tumultuous protests against police brutality in New York City that spring and summer.
The incident gained national attention amid a flurry of aggressive police responses to the protests after then-Mayor Bill de Blasio initially blamed the protesters for the situation.
“It’s inappropriate for protesters to surround a police vehicle and threaten police officers,” de Blasio said the night of the incident. “That’s wrong on its face, and that hasn’t happened in the history of protests in the city.”
De Blasio’s response was met with widespread criticism from his allies on the left — including a number of close associates — as well as from Queens Congressmember Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
The mayor took a more conciliatory tone a few days later and eventually came to see his initial response as a mistake.
Still, many in the police world defended the actions of the two officers at the time as the only way to escape a dangerous environment.
Then-Commissioner Dermot Shea told
the New York State Attorney General’s Office in the weeks afterward that he didn’t believe the officers’ actions constituted inappropriate force because the vehicles had been “penned in by protesters” and “set upon and attacked.”
The administrative trial judge’s recommendations, which often come with a narrative that explains the decisions, weren’t publicly posted on the NYPD’s website as of late Friday, and the department’s press office didn’t respond to a request for a copy.
Caban’s dismissal of the misconduct charges is among his first high-profile disciplinary actions, but it continues a yearslong trend that predates him of officers who are charged with serious misconduct by the CCRB — including during the 2020 protests — getting light or no discipline from the NYPD.
In a memo explaining his reversal of the recommended decision by administrative judge Rosemarie Maldonado, Caban highlighted the chaos at the scene and Alvarez’s relative inexperience as a police officer in the context of the difficult, split-second decisions that were required.
“Based on the video evidence, I determined it was reasonable for Police Officer Alvarez to leave the location for his safety. What was not reasonable, were the actions of the protestors, who created this extremely hazardous encounter,” Caban wrote in the memo, which was obtained from the CCRB via public disclosure law.
“These were not peaceful protestors,” Caban added. “These individuals were blocking emergency vehicles from performing their job and actively attempting to damage their vehicles and/or injure police officers.”
CCRB Interim Chair Arva Rice noted that the administrative judge agreed with the CCRB’s argument that Alvarez committed misconduct, but that the police commissioner has final say on discipline — stemming from laws that some groups say should be changed.
“This action reinforces the argument that the CCRB should have final disciplinary authority,” she said.
‘Never More Scared’
When the CCRB filed charges against the two officers in April 2022, the agency had determined that Samusev struck four people with his NYPD vehicle and that Alvarez struck one, according to the New York Daily News.
One of the protesters injured by the surging police SUVs, Aaron Ross, told Gothamist at the time that he wanted the officers to be terminated and face criminal charges, but that he feared they’d simply get a slap on the wrist.
“I mean, what’s going to happen to these officers? They’re going to lose a few days of vacation? They’re going to lose pay?” he was quoted as saying.
At the administrative trial later that year, the officers got their first chance to give their version of the story. Alvarez testified that he felt “under attack” with people banging on his vehicle and breaking glass when he pulled up alongside Samusev, and that he simply didn’t know what to do, according to Gothamist.
“I wasn’t prepared for this. We’ve never been trained on this,” he was quoted as saying.
Samusev testified that he had his foot on the brake when he was penned in by protesters, and that when an object hit the vehicle, he flinched — causing it to lurch forward, according to Gothamist.
“I was never more scared for my life,” he told the trial judge. “I thought this was my last day in this world.”
A CCRB prosecutor submitted evidence to contradict Samusev’s claims, calling the acceleration into the crowd intentional, Gothamist reported at the time.
But Maldonado found his explanation convincing, particularly since he had stopped the vehicle after a brief acceleration, and got out of the SUV shortly afterward.
“It is more likely than not that his actions constituted an inadvertent loss of control of the vehicle,” she wrote in her recommendation that he be found not guilty of misconduct.
By contrast, Maldonado raised a number of questions about Alvarez’s judgment that day, including why he continued driving forward even after he could see that protesters weren’t getting out of the way.
She recommended that he be put on dismissal probation for one year and lose 40 vacation days, based in part on his “misguided concept of his responsibilities and obligations as the driver of a police vehicle.”
“This was most clearly illustrated when Respondent Alvarez was asked by his own counsel on direct examination whether he ‘s[aw] his car striking individuals at different times [on the video],” she wrote. “He replied, matter-of-factly, ‘I mean, I would say the individuals came in contact with my car.’”
Michael Martinez, an attorney for Worth, Longworth & London LLP who represented both officers during the administrative trial, didn’t respond to a request for comment.