Skip to main content

FORMER NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICER SENTENCED TO 25 YEARS

Emmanuel Tavarez, a former member of the New York City Police Department, was sentenced today to 25 years of imprisonment by United States District Judge Sandra L. Townes at the federal courthouse in Brooklyn. On April 25, 2012, Tavarez pleaded guilty to robbery conspiracy, cocaine and heroin trafficking conspiracy, and firearm charges.

The sentence was announced by Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

Tavarez was a member of a violent robbery crew responsible for more than 100 robberies of narcotics traffickers in the New York metropolitan area and elsewhere that netted more than 250 kilograms of cocaine and $1 million in drug proceeds. Beginning in approximately January 2001, crew members posed as law enforcement officers, staged fake arrests of the traffickers and then forcibly seized the traffickers’ contraband. Members of the crew restrained victims with handcuffs, rope or duct tape and often brandished firearms and physically assaulted victims. Crew members sold the stolen drugs and divided the proceeds amongst themselves. Tavarez participated in at least eight separate robberies and attempted robberies while employed as an NYPD police officer. During these robberies and attempted robberies, Tavarez acted as a lookout and, on at least one occasion, entered a private residence with other members of the robbery crew where he brandished a firearm.

Ms. Lynch extended her grateful appreciation to the Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), and the New York City Police Department – the agencies responsible for leading the government’s investigation – and thanked the New York State Police, the Bridgeport Police Department, and the Philadelphia Police Department for their assistance.

The government’s case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Stephen J. Meyer, Sylvia S. Shweder and Alexander A. Solomon.

The Defendant:



Name: EMMANUEL TAVAREZ
Age: 33

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...