NYPD Lawyer Forged Emails, Lied To Courts, Withheld Information From Lawsuit Plaintiffs

from the service-these-particular-employers-expect dept

The NYPD has long been a stalwart opponent of transparency and accountability. It has spent years trying to rebrand as a national security agency, drafting on former mayor Rudy Giuliani’s unearned reputation as the post-9/11 savior of New York City.

Journalists have noted the NYPD is even more secretive than the CIA and NSA, two agencies whose secrets have only been revealed by leakers. Not even its own oversight can crack this extremely thick blue line that separates the NYPD from everyone else. And its own union has stated the public deserves the silence and opacity it gets because, without it, New York City would become a hellhole overseen by the criminal element.

Rick Pinto, writing for Hell Gate, says at least one member of the thin blue line between transparency, accountability, and (apparently) compliance with court orders has (finally) been kicked to the curb by New York City’s Law Department.

Last week, in an effort to avoid sanctions for failing to turn over evidence, Dara Weiss, the NYPD’s lead lawyer in the cases, was found to have lied to the federal judge and to have forged multiple documents, mocking up fake copies of an email that she had claimed to send, but never had.

Weiss, an 18-year veteran of the New York City Law Department, which represents the City of New York and its agencies in lawsuits, was fired on Friday, according to court documents.

One down, but oh so many to go. Dara Weiss managed to make herself an unavoidable target for removal by brazenly defying court orders and, in the case examined by Pinto, forging emails in an attempt to claim she had actually complied with a court order.

This firing follows months of misconduct by the NY Law Department lawyer. She had been sanctioned five times in recent months by New York courts for refusing to turn over evidence and information requested by plaintiffs in civil rights lawsuits against the NYPD.

The final straw appears to have been an email Weiss forged in response to discovery requests targeting communications sent in response to former Sergeants Benevolent Association president Ed Mullins’ racist tweets. Weiss was ordered to turn over this information by March 3 by Judge Gabriel Gorenstein. Instead of handing over this information, Weiss apparently chose to forge an email showing she had already released this to the plaintiffs.

Gorenstein threatened the NYPD and its lawyers with sanctions for ignoring this order. Weiss tried to avoid this by sending a letter to the judge on April 26, claiming she had sent the info to the plaintiffs. As proof, she offered a PDF screenshot of an email she claimed to have sent to the plaintiffs disclosing the information the court had ordered her to hand over.

What she didn’t do was provide the original email, which plaintiffs claimed they had never received.

This perplexed the dozens of plaintiffs’ lawyers Weiss was claiming to have sent an email to—none of them had received it. That day, Rickner pressed Weiss in emails for evidence that she had indeed offered to meet. On the morning of the next day, April 27, she responded by sending them a PDF file she claimed was a copy of the email. Presumably confused why Weiss would send a PDF as proof she had sent an email, plaintiffs’ lawyers wrote back, asking her to “forward the actual email, as an attachment, so it has the metadata intact.”

Weiss wrote back that afternoon, this time including what she claimed was the text of the email, though not as an attachment with original metadata. But there were peculiar discrepancies between that email text and the PDF that Weiss said she had generated from the email, according to a letter Rickner later wrote to the court. For one thing, an email address was misspelled in the PDF, but appeared correctly in the second email.

The plaintiffs’ forensic expert pressed Weiss for the original email in order to examine the metadata. Weiss then claimed to have forgotten to send the original email, which explained why the plaintiffs hadn’t seen it. She called this an “error” but still refused to hand over copies of the draft email so the metadata could be examined.

The forensic expert arrived at this conclusion:

“Saying the email had been sent, when it had not been, was almost certainly not an accident.”

If this analysis is correct (and there’s nothing indicating it isn’t), Weiss not only lied to counsel representing those suing the NYPD, but also lied to the federal court itself. After the New York City Law Department’s request to meet with the judge in private to discuss this issue was rebuffed by the court, the Law Department did the next best thing: it fired the lying lawyer.

“This Office takes this matter very seriously and does not tolerate such conduct under any circumstances,” Miller wrote. “As a result, this attorney’s employment has been terminated. We sincerely apologize to the Court and all the parties for the inconvenience this has caused.”

That ends Weiss’s 18-year career at the NYC Law Department, during which she handled more than 80 civil rights cases involving the NYPD. But this isn’t her only misconduct. As mentioned above, she has been sanctioned multiple times by courts, including being sanctioned and fined for withholding documents from a plaintiff who was beaten while being detained on Rikers Island.

The good news is the NYPD has one less liar representing its rank-and-file liars. The downside is the New York City Law Department considers this termination to be the end of the line. It apparently has no interest in examining Weiss’s past efforts to see how often she ignored court orders, hid information from plaintiffs, or otherwise abused her position to give some of the most powerful people in New York City a leg up during civil rights litigation.

Much like other government agencies, the Law Department apparently feels riding to the rescue to do the unavoidable after years of apparent malfeasance is a form of accountability. It really isn’t. It’s nothing more than doing the right thing because doing the wrong thing is no longer an option.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “NYPD Lawyer Forged Emails, Lied To Courts, Withheld Information From Lawsuit Plaintiffs”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Naughty Autie says:

So now every case this lawyer ever handled has to be re-examined and may be reversed. That’s what happens when you employ every crooked trick in your arsenal to win: you just end up losing not only the cases at hand, but even some (or even all) of those you’ve won in the past. What’s the betting future lawyers in the New York City Law Department don’t learn any valuable lessons from this, though.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:


So now every case this lawyer ever handled has to be re-examined and may be reversed. That’s what happens when you employ every crooked trick in your arsenal to win

That’s what should happen anyway but unless the article missed something the department seems entirely satisfied merely ditching the individual via firing them and considering that the end of the matter.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Lawyers

but, but this crook was a professional, highly educated, state licensed Officer of the Court — a LAWYER.

the public holds lawyers in very high esteem and would never suspect a crooked-lawyer in any circumstances (not)

o’course, the public consistently holds a very low opinion of lawyers’ generally.
Gallup Polling shows only 16% of Americans have a HIGH opinion of lawyer honesty and ethics.
(only politicians & car salesmen got lower trust ratings)

how do you suppose Americans got such a dismal general opinion of lawyers?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Rich (profile) says:


Why aren’t these people in prison?

There are people right now in prison for smoking weed, a reasonably victimless crime.

This lawyer in this article broke enough laws to demonstrate it was not a new thing. There are many more violations yet undiscovered, nevermind the criminal acts protected and enabled by this person. So much of the corruption and police abuse of power could be eliminated if people who work for the government were also in danger of going to prison for breaking the law. Lie to the court? Prison. Falsify police reports to justify beating the pulp out of senior citizens? Prison. Make up evidence? Prison. Withhold evidence? Prison. Imagine were put in prison. Police lied to get a warrant? Prison. Lawyers withheld evidence? Prison.

As far as any of those who think it’s unfair to hold police, or other government officials, to a higher standard, you may eat my shit. As long as we are expected to respect their authority over us, they should in turn expect us to be within our rights to ensure their authority is excersised honestly.

Much like an airline pilot who is responsible for the safety of all of the passengers who have placed their trust in in the pilot’s training and experience is held to a higher standard than anyone else in the plane, so the police, prosecutors, and whoever else holds the lives and futures of those who trust in their collective training and experience. If you think that is somehow a ridiculous idea, or really can’t understand that wanting to hold a position of power might mean some additional oversight, then you might want to consider moving to a more oppressive country, where a strong regime with an iron fist would make more sense to you.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anon says:

Re: At the very least...

At the very least I would hope this person would be permanently disbarred. This was no momentary lapse or one bad choice. This was a pattern of deceiving the courts. They cannot be trusted to ever behave like a lawyer should.

Samuel Pepys says:

Meanwhile in New York

“Buffalo shooting: Ten dead in racially motivated attack at New York state store” https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61452958

I imagine that if the shooter had been black, shooting up a white neighborhood, then there wouldn’t have been a “tense standoff” resulting in the shooter being taken into custody alive, “the suspect surrendered his weapon after a tense stand-off and was taken into custody. He later appeared in court charged with first degree murder.”

Something more lethal involving 5000-6000 rounds of ammunition would have been deployed.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...