NYPD inspector facing termination over George Floyd protest ‘stomp’ caught on video

A Brooklyn NYPD inspector is facing termination after being caught on video allegedly “stomping” on the head and shoulders of a George Floyd protester in 2020.

The Civilian Complaint Review Board substantiated excessive use-of-force charges against Inspector James Palumbo after the watchdog organization identified him as the NYPD “white shirt” caught on a 15-second video stepping on a protester in a fetal position while being beaten by three other cops with batons.

A video of the attack, which took place on Fourth Ave. near Atlantic Ave. in downtown Brooklyn during a protest at Barclays Center on June 2, 2020, was featured in a New York Times article on NYPD abuse and misconduct during the George Floyd protests that summer.

Defending himself at his NYPD department trial at police headquarters, Palumbo said that the man on the ground, identified as Brian Biaz, was resisting arrest. The 22-year NYPD veteran said he was trying to pull the other cops off of Biaz and he put his foot on the man’s shoulder blade “to control him.”

“He was trying to get up. He had his head off the ground,” testified Palumbo, who was assigned to the Internal Affairs Bureau before becoming an Operations Commander at Patrol Borough Brooklyn South. “I felt a foot on the shoulder was a reasonable use of force to deescalate the situation.”

Cops were monitoring a protest at Barclays when a report came over that a group of people were looting a nearby Modell’s Sporting Goods store. Biaz tried to block and distract cops from getting to the Modell’s and ran off when officers set their sights on him, police said.

The video posted by the Times shows Biaz falling to the ground as he runs away from three cops with helmets and batons. A few seconds later, Palumbo races over and twice lowers his foot on his prone body.

CCRB prosecutor Fredy Kaplan said Polumbo “stomped” on Biaz’s shoulder and head, but the inspector described his action as a “step.” He said he did it twice because he lost his balance trying to pull the other cops off Biaz, he said.

His attorney, Lou La Pietra, said the CCRB presented no witnesses to back the allegations and Biaz showed no injuries in his booking photo nor in body-worn camera footage taken moments after his arrest.

In that footage, Biaz is seen laughing with the officers surrounding him.

“It is impossible for him to look the way he does [if he was stomped],” La Pietra said. “There’s not a mark on him. He’s cherubic.”

During his opening remarks, La Pietra held up a ridge-soled NYPD-issued boot to demonstrate the markings Baiz would have had if he had been stomped in the face.

“An impact with a police boot is going to leave a mark,” La Pietra said.

Biaz filed a CCRB complaint but did not testify for the agency on the advice of his attorney, who is suing the city on his behalf.

Palumbo was identified as the NYPD commander in the Times video through other body-worn camera footage, as well as video recovered by the Internal Affairs Bureau, CCRB investigator Benjamin Shelton said.

“We’re really here because of the New York Times video,” said La Pietra, who added that the video was slowed down and enhanced “for the purposes of selling newspapers.”

Kaplan said the video, no matter its origin, showed that Biaz “did not pose a threat to the officers” while he was lying on the ground.

“The fact that you use your foot to step on someone already on the ground when there’s no necessity — that is beyond reasonable force,” he said. “His agenda was ‘I’m going to punish this guy. I’m going to show him you can’t mess with the police.’

“There’s violence in that action,” the prosecutor added. “It’s cruel.”

NYPD Assistant Deputy Commissioner of Trials Paul Gamble, who oversaw the case, said he will review the evidence and make his recommendation to Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell as to whether Palumbo should be fired or not in the coming weeks.

The ultimate decision, however, rests with Sewell, who has a history of overruling disciplinary recommendations from the CCRB and departmental tribunals.