FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Delinda N. Giraldo alleges that after she rejected supervisory sexual attention, discipline and retaliation followed; at the same time, Lieutenant Quathisha Epps’s “coerced” sexual video allegedly became NYPD workplace fodder—and after Giraldo transferred to escape the environment, another NYPD employee grabbed her buttock
NEW YORK, N.Y. — August 20, 2026 — Eric Sanders, Esq., The Sanders Firm, P.C. has filed a wide-ranging civil-rights lawsuit on behalf of New York City Police Officer Delinda N. Giraldo, a Colombian Latina woman with more than twelve years of service, alleging that she was subjected to sexual harassment, sex discrimination, race, ethnicity and national-origin discrimination, a hostile work environment, retaliation, selective discipline, and gender-motivated violence inside the New York City Police Department.
The lawsuit names THE CITY OF NEW YORK; Police Commissioner JESSICA S. TISCH; former Chief of Department JEFFREY B. MADDREY; Internal Affairs Bureau Chief EDWARD A. THOMPSON; IAB Executive Officer JOSEPH A. DIBARTOLOMEO; PSA 3 commanding officer ELTON D. COHN; Lieutenant ALEXANDRU O. ANGHEL; Lieutenant ANTHONY A. BRUNO; Sergeant FERNANDO DOMINGUEZ; Sergeant ATICKUL ISLAM; Police Officer MOHAMMAD ABDELFATTAH; and PSA 7 Detective ELIZABETH OLIVERO.
At the center of the complaint is a simple but disturbing allegation: Giraldo claims that when she rejected unwanted sexual attention from supervisors, her working life changed.
The complaint alleges that the problem began at Housing Police Service Area 3, where commanding officer ELTON D. COHN directed unwanted sexual attention toward Giraldo shortly after assuming command. Giraldo did not reciprocate. She distanced herself, avoided unnecessary interaction, and refused to participate in the sexualized dynamic.
According to the lawsuit, that rejection did not end the matter. It changed the form of it.
Giraldo alleges that she thereafter became the subject of increased scrutiny, public discussion of disciplinary matters, repeated Command Disciplines, unfavorable assignment decisions, professional undermining, and ultimately a prolonged midnight assignment. One NYPD supervisor allegedly told her directly that she was being targeted because she had “shut [COHN] down” and warned that COHN’s “minion[s]” would look for opportunities to “hammer” her.
The complaint alleges that Giraldo then encountered a second pattern of unwanted sexualized conduct while assigned to the High-Tech Unit under defendant FERNANDO DOMINGUEZ.
According to Giraldo, DOMINGUEZ repeatedly used his supervisory position to create access and proximity, including selecting her to drive him in NYPD vehicles and then introducing graphic sexual and intimate subject matter into conversations she could not simply walk away from. The lawsuit alleges that DOMINGUEZ discussed sexual experiences, virginity, vaginal anatomy, and other deeply personal matters while Giraldo was performing compulsory work assignments.
Other officers allegedly noticed his fixation.
One reportedly told Giraldo that DOMINGUEZ “likes you, but doesn’t know how to show it.” Another allegedly compared his behavior to “that kid on the playground who picks on the girl he likes.” A third warned Giraldo that DOMINGUEZ could become fixated on women and manipulate or create stories about them.
Then, according to the complaint, came the shift.
Giraldo alleges that when she refused to reciprocate the attention or participate in the personal and sexualized relationship DOMINGUEZ was attempting to cultivate, his behavior turned cold. The complaint alleges that he began discussing her discipline with coworkers, manufacturing workplace conflict, making false claims concerning her work, attempting to turn embarrassing body-worn-camera footage into group-chat entertainment, and attacking her professional reputation.
According to the complaint, defendants ANTHONY A. BRUNO and ATICKUL ISLAM supplied another part of that alleged pressure through selective enforcement. BRUNO allegedly issued Command Disciplines concerning Giraldo’s hair and uniform appearance while comparable conduct by other officers went undisciplined. ISLAM allegedly subjected Giraldo to body-worn-camera scrutiny even though supervisors acknowledged that such footage was not uniformly reviewed across officers. Giraldo alleges that ordinary disciplinary mechanisms were being used selectively after she rejected unwanted sexual attention.
The lawsuit alleges that these were not disconnected workplace disputes. Giraldo claims they formed a continuing pattern in which unwanted sexual attention and supervisory grooming were followed by hostility, selective enforcement, professional undermining, and retaliation when she refused to participate. In that account, the ordinary tools of police supervision—assignments, discipline, compliance review, tours, and workplace reputation—became the mechanisms through which rejection carried professional consequences.
But the lawsuit reaches beyond Giraldo’s treatment alone.
It alleges that PSA 3 operated within a broader sexually charged workplace culture in which female NYPD officers could become sexual objects, their complaints could be ridiculed, and sexually explicit material could become workplace entertainment.
A central example is Lieutenant Quathisha Epps’s “coerced” sexual video.
According to the complaint, Epps provided the video only to then-Chief of Department JEFFREY B. MADDREY in the context of allegations that MADDREY used his extraordinary command authority to subject her to “coercive” sexual conduct. Giraldo alleges that because MADDREY was the sole recipient before the video entered NYPD circulation, he caused, enabled, permitted, participated in, or was the source of its dissemination.
By the time the video reached PSA 3, the lawsuit alleges, it had become sexual workplace fodder.
Defendants ALEXANDRU O. ANGHEL and MOHAMMAD ABDELFATTAH allegedly discussed Lieutenant Quathisha Epps’s “coerced” sexual video inside the PSA 3 Special Operations office in Giraldo’s presence, referred to Epps as a “fucking liar” and “fucking whore,” said the video was “for Maddrey,” mocked her sexual-harassment allegations, and claimed that she complained because she had been caught stealing time. According to the lawsuit, the exchange transformed intimate sexual material tied to Epps’s allegations into workplace entertainment while simultaneously attacking her credibility as a female officer who had accused one of the NYPD’s most powerful executives of sexual misconduct.
The lawsuit also places responsibility at the highest levels of NYPD command and internal accountability. Giraldo alleges that Commissioner TISCH, IAB Chief THOMPSON, and IAB Executive Officer DIBARTOLOMEO possessed the command, investigative, and disciplinary authority to determine how Epps’s “coerced” sexual video escaped its intended recipient, who distributed it, who continued circulating it, and why it was being openly discussed inside NYPD commands. Yet, according to the complaint, the video remained workplace sexual fodder. What should have triggered an aggressive integrity and sexual-misconduct response instead became another illustration of the very culture Giraldo says made female officers distrust the Department’s internal accountability system.
For Giraldo, the message was unmistakable: a female officer who became associated with sexual misconduct by a powerful male official could see her body circulate, her credibility attacked, and her complaint transformed into gossip.
The complaint further alleges that by the time Giraldo sought to leave PSA 3, the effects were substantial. She had spent approximately one year on the midnight tour, suffered serious sleep disruption, anxiety, exhaustion, counseling needs, reliance on prescription sleep medication, housing instability, and a profound loss of confidence in the Department’s willingness to protect female officers who resist or report sexualized misconduct.
Giraldo transferred to PSA 7 in May 2026 hoping to get away from that environment.
According to the lawsuit, she did not.
On August 19, 2026, defendant ELIZABETH OLIVERO allegedly approached Giraldo inside PSA 7 and intentionally grabbed her left buttock.
The complaint alleges that OLIVERO laughed and immediately admitted what she had done. When Giraldo walked away, OLIVERO allegedly followed her and said, “Oh my God, I thought you was gonna fuck me up! That’s why I said it was me.”
Giraldo immediately reported the grabbing to another officer. According to the complaint, she was told, in substance, that “that’s what she does,” that “no one says anything,” and that “that’s just how she is.” For Giraldo, that response was almost as revealing as the grabbing itself: it suggested that OLIVERO’s alleged behavior was already known inside the workplace and had been normalized through silence.
For Giraldo, the PSA 7 incident brought the case full circle. She had transferred from PSA 3 after more than a year of alleged sexual grooming, objectification, retaliatory discipline, professional punishment, and a workplace culture that taught her not to trust the Department’s internal response to sexual misconduct. Three months later, inside another NYPD command, another member of service allegedly walked up behind her and grabbed her buttock—and Giraldo was then told that this was simply “what she does” and that “no one says anything.”
The lawsuit alleges that OLIVERO’s conduct constituted Forcible Touching under New York Penal Law § 130.52 and gender-motivated violence under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law.
“What Officer Giraldo alleges happened here is exactly why women inside powerful institutions stop trusting internal systems,” said Eric Sanders, Esq., founder of The Sanders Firm, P.C. “She says she rejected unwanted sexual attention from supervisors and then watched discipline, assignments, tours, compliance review, and workplace reputation turn against her. She transferred commands trying to get away from it. Three months later, another NYPD employee allegedly walked up behind her and grabbed her buttock. And when she reported it, she was allegedly told, ‘that’s what she does’ and ‘no one says anything.’ At some point, this stops being a story about individual bad behavior and becomes a question about what the institution has normalized.”
Sanders continued: “A police supervisor has extraordinary power over a subordinate officer’s daily life and career. Rank determines assignments, tours, overtime, discipline, opportunities, recommendations, and reputation. That power cannot become a means of testing sexual boundaries and then punishing the employee who refuses to play along. And an Internal Affairs Bureau that can investigate virtually every aspect of an officer’s life cannot become mysteriously powerless when a coerced sexual video involving a female member of service is circulating through NYPD commands.”
The complaint asserts claims under the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law. It seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages where permitted, attorneys’ fees and costs, declaratory and injunctive relief, correction of retaliatory employment records, restoration of employment opportunities, and measures designed to prevent further sexual harassment, retaliation, sexual boundary violations, and dissemination of coerced or nonconsensual sexual material within the NYPD.
Giraldo has demanded a jury trial.
The allegations have not yet been adjudicated, and the defendants will have an opportunity to answer them in court.
About The Sanders Firm, P.C.
The Sanders Firm, P.C. is a New York-based law firm focused on civil rights, immigration, employment discrimination, police misconduct, and other high-stakes matters. Its founder and president, Eric Sanders, Esq., is a retired NYPD officer who brings a rare inside perspective to the intersection of government power, public institutions, enforcement discretion, and constitutional accountability.
For more than twenty years, Sanders has counseled thousands of clients and handled complex matters involving police use of force, sexual harassment, retaliation, systemic discrimination, immigration consequences, and related civil-rights violations. He is widely recognized as a leading New York civil-rights attorney and a prominent voice on evidence-based policing, institutional accountability, equal justice, and rights-based immigration advocacy.
Media Contact
Eric Sanders, Esq.
The Sanders Firm, P.C.
30 Wall Street, 8th Floor
New York, New York 10005
(212) 652-2782
###
Read the Verified Complaint
