Ex-police commissioner sues New York City and Eric Adams over alleged NYPD corruption
Tom Donlon, who served for two months last year as New York's top cop, filed the 251-page claim in federal court on Wednesday. In it, among other explosive claims, he says he attempted to establish internal oversight into corruption at the NYPD, and 'uncovered systemic corruption and criminal conduct being perpetrated by the NYPD's leadership', but after he warned Adams he was sidelined.
He also claimed that the police department falsely arrested his wife in a 'coordinated humiliation' and then leaked the arrest to the press.
'This lawsuit is not a personal grievance; it is a statement against a corrupt system that betrays the public, silences truth, and punishes integrity,' Donlon said in a statement emailed to the Guardian.
Four others lawsuits were filed by former top police officials last week, which made similar claims about Adams's involvement in NYPD corruption.
Donlon resigned in 2024 just weeks after taking the job, after his home was searched by federal agents in a separate investigation. A career FBI counter-terror expert who investigated the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Donlon also served for a time as New York's director of office of homeland security, and then CEO of a private security firm, before he was tapped to lead the NYPD in September 2024.
In his brief tenure, Donlon now claims that he discovered Adams and NYPD officials were involved in a wide variety of illegal behavior, including 'wire fraud, mail fraud, honest services fraud, obstruction of justice and retaliation against whistleblowers' and 'engaged in outright malfeasance by using the NYPD to consolidate political power, obstruct justice, and punish dissent'.
A City Hall spokesperson, Kayla Mamelak Altus, said to City & State: 'These are baseless accusations from a disgruntled former employee who – when given the opportunity to lead the greatest police department in the world – proved himself to be ineffective. We will respond in court, where we are confident these absurd claims will be disproven.'
Donlon claims that his efforts to establish internal NYPD oversight were 'sabotaged'. He gives examples including that his meetings were cancelled, his communications were spied on, he was excluded from decision making, and alleges that his official police commissioner's stamp was used to forge internal documents.
The alleged corruption, Donlon claims, was used to promote unqualified, politically connected cops and 'triggered a massive, unlawful transfer of public wealth – millions of dollars in unearned salary increases, overtime eligibility, pension enhancements, and post-retirement benefits'.
Donlon says that after he warned Adams of his findings he was sidelined. His wife, he claims, was placed under false arrest and subjected to a full-body and personal effects search. After she was released, a reporter from the New York Post called him for comment – 'a media leak that could only have come from inside the NYPD', the lawsuit claims.
Donlon's allegations come as Adams is mounting a campaign as an independent candidate to retain his position as mayor. Adams switched political parties after a series of scandals, including a since-abandoned federal corruption prosecution, and skipped the New York City mayoral Democratic primary race last month, which was won by Zohran Mamdani.
Last year, Donlon briefly served as interim police commissioner after Edward Caban resigned amid a federal investigation into potential corruption in the NYPD. About two months later Donlon stepped down and was moved to the office of the deputy mayor for public safety – a job that itself came to an end in May of this year when he was pushed out.
Earlier this year, four deputy mayors resigned over concerns that Adams had reached a quid pro quo with the Trump administration to get tough on illegal immigration in exchange for getting his federal corruption charges dropped.
Barely a week into Donlon's tenure as NYPD police commissioner, his home was raided by the FBI, who seized classified documents that he said had come into his possession 20 years earlier. Very little information was released about the raid or the nature of the documents.
'At a certain point, we all would walk out of the movie theater because the script was just too fantastical, incredulous, and unbelievable for real-life,' Jumaane Williams, the city's public advocate, noted in a social media post at the time.
The Guardian has contacted Adams's office for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus," the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find non-government funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost," Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. "It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day." John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were cancelled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard," she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Man charged with killing a top Minnesota House Democrat is expected to plead not guilty
The man charged with killing the top Democrat in the Minnesota House and her husband, and wounding a state senator and his wife, is expected to plead not guilty when he's arraigned in federal court on Thursday, his attorney said. Vance Boelter, 58, of Green Isle, Minnesota, was indicted July 15 on six counts of murder, stalking and firearms violations. The murder charges could carry the federal death penalty, though prosecutors say that decision is several months away. As they announced the indictment, prosecutors released a rambling handwritten letter they say Boelter wrote to FBI Director Kash Patel in which he confessed to the June 14 shootings of Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark. However, the letter doesn't make clear why he targeted the Hortmans or Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, who survived. Boelter's federal defender, Manny Atwal, said at the time that the weighty charges did not come as a surprise, but she has not commented on the substance of the allegations or any defense strategies. The hearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge Dulce Foster will also serve as a case management conference. She plans to issue a revised schedule with deadlines afterward, potentially including a trial date. Prosecutors have moved to designate the proceedings as a 'complex case' so that standard speedy trial requirements won't apply, saying both sides will need plenty of time to review the voluminous evidence. 'The investigation of this case arose out of the largest manhunt in Minnesota's history," they wrote. "Accordingly, the discovery to be produced by the government will include a substantial amount of investigative material and reports from more than a dozen different law enforcement agencies at the federal, state, and local levels.' They said the evidence will include potentially thousands of hours of video footage, tens of thousands of pages of responses to dozens of grand jury subpoenas, and data from numerous electronic devices seized during the investigation. Boelter's motivations remain murky. Friends have described him as an evangelical Christian with politically conservative views who had been struggling to find work. Authorities said Boelter made long lists of politicians in Minnesota and other states — all or mostly Democrats. In a series of cryptic notes to The New York Times through his jail's electronic messaging service, Boelter suggested his actions were partly rooted in the Christian commandment to love one's neighbor. 'Because I love my neighbors prior to June 14th I conducted a 2 year long undercover investigation,' he wrote. In messages published earlier by the New York Post, Boelter insisted the shootings had nothing to do with his opposition to abortion or his support for President Donald Trump, but he declined to elaborate. 'There is little evidence showing why he turned to political violence and extremism,' the acting U.S. attorney for Minnesota, Joe Thompson, told reporters last month. He also reiterated that prosecutors consider Hortman's killing a 'political assassination.' Prosecutors say Boelter was disguised as a police officer and driving a fake squad car early June 14 when he went to the Hoffmans' home in the Minneapolis suburb of Champlin. He shot the senator nine times, and his wife eight times, officials said. Boelter later went to the Hortmans' home in nearby Brooklyn Park and killed both of them, authorities said. Their dog was so gravely injured that he had to be euthanized. Boelter surrendered the next night.
Daily Mail
10 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump's final tariffs doomsday is HERE as Americans brace for price hikes on favorite everyday items
President Donald Trump 's tariffs on over 60 countries go into effect at midnight after 18 weeks of tough negotiations following his dramatic 'Liberation Day' tariff threats in April. Last week, he gave a last-minute extension to some countries that were still working on a deal with the United States. But now doomsday is finally here. Tariffs on over 60 countries range up to as high as 50 percent - for those considered to have 'unfair' trading policies with the U.S. Trump recently slapped a 50 percent tariff on most Brazilian goods after Brazil 's president continues to defy the president's demands to end a 'witch hunt' prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro. The executive order, however, exempted some Brazil exports from the tariffs such as aircraft, pig iron, precious metals, wood pulp, energy, orange juice, and fertilizer. Major Brazilian exports such as beef and coffee were not exempted. One major country facing steep tariffs is India, after the president on Wednesday implemented an additional 25 percent tariff that will go into effect on August 27, after the United States already set a 25 percent tariff on the country on August 1. The president said the decision to level additional tariffs was due to India purchasing Russian oil, which he told CNBC on Tuesday was 'fueling the war machine' as Russian President Vladimir Putin continues his war in Ukraine. Mexico was granted a 90-day extension as officials continue to negotiate. But the president imposed a 35 percent tariff on Canada. Imported goods from Canada that fall under the USMCA trade deal, however, are not affected by the additional tariffs. Other countries that have yet to make a trade deal with the United States include Switzerland, South Africa, Brunei, Cambodia, Bolivia, Ecuador, Iceland, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, Turkey, Norway, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. The United States and China agreed to extend trade talks to August 12, following successful negotiations in July with American and Chinese officials in Stockholm. Ahead of sharp deadlines in August, Trump made major strides with his negotiations in late July after announcing trade deals with the United Kingdom and the European Union. Trump boasted of agreements with European officials that secured billions of dollars of investments into the United States. A $550 billion trade deal with Japan was also set earlier in July. The additional tariff hikes on some countries threaten to raise the cost of everyday goods such as food and produce, clothing, automobiles and parts, steel, copper, aluminum, and electronics. Many American importers are eating the costs of tariffs rather than pass them on to the consumer, but warn that they will not be able to continue long term. The United States has collected $152 billion in gross revenue for the calendar year so far as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has predicted that tariff revenue could generate as much as $300 billion by the year's end. President Trump defended his tariffs in an interview on CNBC on Tuesday, declaring that people in the United States 'love the tariffs.' 'They love their country, and they love that foreign countries aren't ripping us off. For years, they ripped us off. Friend and foe,' he said. 'And the friend was worse.'
