FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Mayor Eric Adams, Chief Maddrey, and Chief Iglesias Accused of Ratifying Constitutional Violations After Reviewing Body Camera Footage
NEW YORK, NY — Today, April 15, 2025, New York civil rights attorney Eric Sanders of The Sanders Firm, P.C. has filed a federal civil rights complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of Messrs. Benjamin A. Trye, Alister Alexander, Wilfred R. Trye, and Harold B. Thomas against multiple officers of the New York City Police Department (NYPD), as well as high-ranking City officials including Mayor Eric L. Adams, former NYPD Chief of Department Jeffrey B. Maddrey, and former Internal Affairs Chief Miguel A. Iglesias. The suit arises from a December 7, 2024, incident in Queens County and alleges systemic racial profiling, excessive force, false arrest, and deliberate municipal inaction.
Incident Overview: A Pattern, Not an Aberration
In the early hours of December 7, 2024, four unarmed Black men—Benjamin A. Trye (driver), Alister Alexander, Wilfred R. Trye, and Harold B. Thomas—were subjected to an unlawful and racially charged stop by officers of the New York City Police Department’s 114th Precinct while traveling through an industrial corridor of Queens, according to the federal complaint. The justification offered for the stop was an alleged violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 375(12-a)(2) for excessively tinted windows. However, no tint meter substantiated the claim, violating state law and NYPD policy.
As indicated in the complaint, the officers instead relied solely on subjective visual estimation—a method long criticized for enabling racial profiling—and quickly escalated the encounter into a violent and constitutionally suspect use of force. Mr. Harold B. Thomas, seated in the rear passenger area, was forcibly dragged from the vehicle and thrown to the ground. While restrained, according to the complaint, he was repeatedly punched by Officers Brian A. Guzman and Anthony N. Riccardi. Supervisory officers, including Lieutenant Andrew C. Dickson and former Sergeant Eumir M. Ferrer, stood nearby and took no action to prevent the assault or provide medical aid.
Simultaneously, Mr. Benjamin A. Trye was handcuffed with excessive force, resulting in pain and possible nerve injury. Despite committing no offense, as indicated in the complaint, he was later issued a post-arrest summons for the alleged tint violation—again, without any supporting tint meter measurement. Both Trye and Thomas were allegedly unlawfully detained at the 114th Precinct, and Thomas was subsequently held at Queens Central Booking for several hours. Meanwhile, Mr. Thomas was charged with Obstructing Governmental Administration and Resisting Arrest. These charges were ultimately dismissed via an Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal (ACD), entered without his consent.
As indicated in the complaint, before Mr. Benjamin A. Trye and Mr. Thomas were arrested, Mr. Alister Alexander, who was attempting to record the incident on his cell phone, was retaliated against. Officers shined flashlights into his eyes and obstructed his view, while others either deactivated or failed to activate their body-worn cameras, further undermining transparency and compliance with NYPD protocol.
Later that day, retired Detective First Grade Harold Thomas, Sr.—father of Plaintiff Thomas—allegedly contacted Mayor Eric L. Adams, Chief of Department Jeffrey B. Maddrey, and Chief of Internal Affairs Miguel A. Iglesias. According to the complaint, these top City officials acknowledged that Messrs. Benjamin A. Trye, Alexander, Trye, and Thomas had committed no crime and had personally reviewed body-worn camera footage confirming as much. Yet none of them acted. No arrests were voided, no discipline was imposed, and no referrals were made to prosecutorial authorities. As the complaint indicates, Messrs. Benjamin A. Trye, Alexander, Trye, and Thomas contend that this deliberate failure to intervene amounts to official ratifying unlawful conduct.
Messrs. Benjamin A. Trye, Alexander, Trye, and Thomas further allege that the traffic stop and violent arrest were motivated by racial bias, a claim allegedly supported by both direct and circumstantial evidence in line with the framework outlined in Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., 429 U.S. 252 (1977). The complaint cites the stark racial disparities in NYPD traffic enforcement, well-documented histories of misconduct by the officers involved, and the deviation from established legal procedures—all of which, according to them, form a compelling inference of discriminatory intent.
As the complaint indicates, this incident is far from being an isolated occurrence, reflecting systemic failures deeply embedded within the NYPD. The Floyd Monitor’s 23rd Report found that Black residents made up nearly 30% of NYPD vehicle stops in Q4 2024—despite comprising just 22.7% of the city’s population—while white residents accounted for over a third of the population but were stopped less than 18% of the time. Moreover, supervisors routinely approved deficient stop reports and allowed officers with long misconduct records to operate in frontline enforcement roles without accountability.
In this context, as alleged, the December 7, 2024, events are not merely troubling—they are tragically predictable. They mirror the same patterns of racialized policing and institutional inaction that contributed to the deaths and injuries of other New Yorkers, including Eric Garner, Delrawn Small, Kawaski Trawick, Dounya Zayer, and, more recently, Jaylin Ryan, according to the complaint. Like those cases, this encounter began with a minor pretext, escalated without justification, and was followed by silence at the highest levels of City leadership.
Post-Incident Ratification by City Leadership
What unfolded after the December 7 incident was as telling as the violence itself. Within hours of the unlawful arrest and alleged assault, Mr. Thomas’s parents—both longtime, now retired NYPD veterans—reached out to the highest levels of city government. Retired Detective First Grade Harold Thomas, Sr., and retired Detective Second Grade Ila Thomas made direct contact with Mayor Eric L. Adams, NYPD Chief of Department Jeffrey B. Maddrey, and Chief of Internal Affairs Miguel A. Iglesias.
According to the federal complaint, each official acknowledged having reviewed body-worn camera footage from the incident. Each confirmed, at least privately, that Messrs. Benjamin A. Trye, Alexander, Trye, and Thomas had not committed any crime. Despite this, none of the officials took meaningful corrective action. The arrests were not voided. The officers involved were not disciplined. No internal or external investigations were launched. No referrals were made to the Queens District Attorney’s Office or federal authorities. The City remained silent.
The complaint asserts that this inaction constitutes more than just bureaucratic passivity—it represents deliberate indifference and official ratification of unconstitutional conduct. Messrs. Benjamin A. Trye, Alexander, Trye, and Thomas argue that the decision to do nothing in the face of clear evidence transformed what might have been an individual act of misconduct into a systemic constitutional failure.
NYPD Statistical Data Reveal Racial Disparities
The allegations in the lawsuit are not occurring in a vacuum. They are consistent with—and supported by—publicly available NYPD data revealing persistent racial disparities in traffic enforcement. According to NYPD’s Q4 2024 vehicle stop statistics:
Although black residents comprised only 22.7% of the city’s population, they accounted for 29.8% of all traffic stops.
By contrast, white residents constituted 35.9% of the population but were the subject of just 17.8% of such stops.
Hispanic residents represented 28.4% of the population and were stopped at a proportional rate of 29%.
Asian residents, comprising 14.6% of the population, were stopped at a slightly lower rate of 12.3%.
The complaint alleges that this pattern of racial disparity in enforcement reflects a longstanding institutional problem within the NYPD. These disparities are not simply numerical—they represent the lived experiences of communities subjected to disproportionate suspicion, detention, and violence. When stops are initiated not based on behavior but on race and location, the legal framework collapses into systemic bias.
Floyd Monitor’s 23rd Report: Systemic Failures Within the NYPD
Further, allegedly bolstering the complaint’s claims is the 23rd Report from the court-appointed monitor in Floyd v. City of New York, tracking NYPD stop-and-frisk practices since the landmark litigation declared them unconstitutional in 2013. The findings of the most recent report are alarming:
Only 75% of NYPD Neighborhood Safety Team (NST) stops were deemed lawful, compared to 92% of stops by regular patrol officers.
Just 54% of NST searches were supported by legal justification, meaning nearly half were unconstitutional.
An overwhelming 95% of documented stops and 93% of corresponding body-worn camera footage involved Black or Latino individuals.
Despite this, NYPD supervisors approved 99.1% of stop reports as lawful—even when independent audits flagged serious constitutional issues.
Notably, 70% of NST stops were self-initiated, often without oversight, suggesting a broader culture of unsupervised discretion and abuse.
Messrs. Benjamin A. Trye, Alexander, Trye, and Thomas argue that the Floyd Monitor’s findings provide a damning institutional context for the December 7 stop. What happened to them, they contend, was not an isolated act—it was emblematic of a system where unconstitutional conduct is predictable, normalized, and tacitly approved.
Officers’ Histories Reveal Pattern of Misconduct
The complaint also details the troubling disciplinary histories of the individual officers involved, raising serious questions about the NYPD’s commitment to accountability and supervision:
Lieutenant Andrew C. Dickson
Named in at least two federal lawsuits, Dickson was accused of excessive force, including drawing a weapon on unarmed teenagers and engaging in a violent takedown involving kicking and stomping. Internal disciplinary action, if any, has been minimal. Despite the severity of these allegations, Dickson remains in a leadership position and was present at the scene of the December 7 incident as a supervising officer.
Lieutenant (formerly Sergeant) Eumir M. Ferrer
Eumir M. Ferrer, now promoted to Lieutenant, has accumulated a troubling record of 22 misconduct allegations over his NYPD career, six substantiated by oversight authorities. These include findings of unlawful vehicle stops, improper searches, and the issuance of retaliatory summonses. Ferrer has also been named in multiple civil rights lawsuits involving allegations of excessive force and false arrest. In one particularly egregious incident, he allegedly pulled a man from a tow truck and detained him on fabricated grounds. Despite the seriousness of these claims and confirmed policy violations, Ferrer has faced minimal consequences—limited mainly to command discipline and retraining. His recent promotion underscores what Messrs. Benjamin A. Trye, Alexander, Trye, and Thomas describe as a culture of impunity within the NYPD.
Officer Brian A. Guzman
The initiating officer of the December 7 stop, Guzman, has faced at least four official complaints and been named in two civil lawsuits, resulting in settlements totaling $45,000. Allegations against him include the use of force against Black and Hispanic individuals, including an incident where a vehicle was allegedly used as a weapon. None of these complaints resulted in meaningful disciplinary consequences.
Officer Anthony N. Riccardi
Riccardi’s record includes several misconduct complaints, including excessive force, refusal to provide identification under the Right to Know Act, and discourteous conduct during vehicle stops. Although one allegation was substantiated, no significant penalties were imposed. Riccardi remains in uniform and was directly involved in the alleged assault and fabrication of charges against Mr. Thomas.
“These are not isolated actors,” Eric Sanders noted. “Each officer has a documented history of complaints, and each was empowered—rather than restrained—by the NYPD. That’s not just negligence. That’s institutional failure.”
Claims and Remedies Sought
The federal civil rights complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, brings multiple claims against the individual officers, supervisors, and the City of New York. These include:
Violations of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, including unlawful search and seizure, excessive force, fabrication of evidence, equal protection violations, and retaliation for protected activity;
Municipal liability under Monell v. Department of Social Services for the NYPD’s failure to train, supervise, and discipline officers known to engage in misconduct;
Violations of the New York City Human Rights Law (Administrative Code § 8-107(17)) for bias-based profiling and racially discriminatory enforcement;
Requests for declaratory relief, compensatory and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and NYC Admin. Code § 8-502(f), and injunctive relief to ensure oversight and compliance with constitutional standards.
Call to Action
“This case is about more than one night of abuse,” said New York civil rights attorney Eric Sanders. “It is about the architecture of impunity that allows unlawful stops, violent takedowns, and retaliatory arrests to go unpunished. We cannot tolerate a system where misconduct is seen, acknowledged, and ignored by those with the power to act.”
He continued, “Mayor Adams saw the footage. He knew what had happened. And yet, he chose silence. That silence is not just political—it is constitutional.”
Contact Information
The Sanders Firm, P.C.
30 Wall Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10005
Phone: 212-652-2782
###
Read the Federal Complaint