NYPD watchdog blasts administrative judge’s decision to suppress closing statements in Kawaski Trawick case
An NYPD watchdog agency slammed a decision by the administrative judge in the Kawaski Trawick departmental trial to suppress the closing statements of two cops accused of killing him.
Administrative law judge Rosemarie Maldonado late Thursday ordered the closing statements in the trial of Officers Brendan Thompson and Herbert Davis to be submitted in writing, rather than heard orally in the NYPD trial room.
“The decision to have written closing arguments instead of oral closing arguments is a tactic to withhold the final statements from the advocates, the public, the members of the press and Kawaski Trawick’s family, all of whom dedicated their time to following this trial,” said Arva Rice, interim chair of the Civilian Complaint Review Board.
“This decision is designed to cover up the misconduct of these two officers and FID’s failure to hold them accountable,” Rice said referring to the Force Investigation Division. The CCRB will continue its mission of transparency and will release the APU’s closing argument to the public at the same time that it is submitted to Deputy Trial Commissioner Maldonado.”
The two officers were slated to testify Friday morning with closing statements to follow. NYPD policy makes any evidence not heard orally in court confidential.
The CCRB plans to post its closing statements to its website within a few weeks when they are submitted to Maldonado.
One of the officers, Thompson, is accused of improperly using a stun gun on Trawick, a 32-year-old mentally ill man, and then shooting him during an April 14, 2019 confrontation in his Bronx home. Both officers are charged with not immediately seeking medical aid.
The CCRB determined they should be fired.
