Police oversight board votes on controversial issues related to the Win Rozario shooting, revealing new details about the decision.

The Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) of New York City has recently made a significant decision regarding the controversial shooting of Win Rozario, a 19-year-old who was experiencing a mental health crisis when officers responded to a 911 call. Last week, the board voted 9 to 3 to substantiate allegations of improper use of deadly force against Officers Salvatore Alongi and Matthew Cianfrocco, the outcome of which has sparked widespread debate. The only penalty applicable to the officers, should the Police Commissioner uphold the ruling, is termination from the New York Police Department (NYPD).

The incident occurred on March 27, 2024, in Rozario’s Ozone Park apartment, where he had called for assistance during a mental health episode. After evaluating a multitude of circumstances surrounding the shooting, the board’s vote indicated strong divisions, with nine members, including interim chair Dr. Mohammad Khalid, favoring termination due to the officers’ actions, while three board members—including retired NYPD commanders—disagreed, asserting that the officers acted within departmental guidelines.

Compounding the controversy, the CCRB’s decision marked a rare instance of the board overturning findings made by its own investigators, who had previously determined that the officers were within departmental policy across all sixteen allegations reviewed. The board reached varying conclusions on other aspects of the incident as well, including an initial assessment of Alongi’s use of his Taser, where he was cleared of misconduct, but found accountable for improper use during a subsequent encounter, resulting in a recommendation that he lose 20 vacation days.

The reactions to the vote have been polarized. Advocates for the Rozario family maintain that officers Alongi and Cianfrocco displayed recklessness and failed to adhere to training protocols designed for interactions with individuals in mental distress. Family representatives expressed their disenchantment with the decision-making bodies that influence outcomes in such critical situations, citing a need for accountability and justice.

Moreover, the CCRB’s actions have raised questions about police accountability and oversight within the NYPD, particularly given the rarity of the board’s deviation from its investigators’ conclusions. According to data from the Police Benevolent Association, such overrule incidents constitute mere fractions of the total cases reviewed, highlighting a pattern of deferment to investigative findings.

As the situation unfolds, both the NYPD and the New York State Attorney General’s office are conducting their respective investigations. This continues to maintain a spotlight on police conduct in crises involving mental health, a critical issue for community safety and appropriate law enforcement response methods. The community and the justice system await further developments as calls for accountability resonate amid a backdrop of renewed advocacy for reform in police practices.