New York AG Accused of Anti-Police Bias in Handling of Officer-Involved Deaths

New York Attorney General Letitia James is facing criticism for the pace and perceived bias of her office's investigations into police-involved deaths, with accusers claiming her approach leaves officers uncertain and could compromise public safety.

One recent case highlighted involves the Dec. 19, 2025, shooting in Rochester where Officer Nicole Amatore killed suspect Eric Davis after he had wounded two other officers and a civilian. Despite the incident lasting only 61 seconds and being captured on body cameras, James' Office of Special Investigation has not completed its probe after nine months. Amatore was later honored with the state's highest law-enforcement award for her actions.

Critics, including Republican challenger Saritha Komatireddy, argue that James, described as an "ideologically driven anti-police politician," is intentionally delaying these investigations. This practice, they contend, leaves officers in a state of prolonged uncertainty, impacting their careers and potentially reducing police force effectiveness.

The Attorney General's Office's annual report indicates an average of 16 months to complete investigations into police-caused deaths, with some cases dating back to 2022. The report detailed 41 investigative reports on deaths ranging from shootings to in-custody incidents.

Examples cited include the March 8, 2024, case of Djamshed Nematov, who attacked officers with a knife. James' office took 2½ years to conclude the report, stating it could not prove the officers were wrong. In another instance, a state trooper's response to a domestic violence situation on Sept. 28, 2025, in Chemung County resulted in the death of Nathan Novakowski, who was threatening his mother with scissors. Seven months after the 87-second incident, the office issued a preliminary report stating it "could not disprove that the officer was justified," with the final report still pending over a year later.

The phrasing used in these reports, which often state that criminal charges are not warranted but that this does not mean "no wrongdoing has occurred," is seen by critics as a way to avoid exonerating officers, implying inherent guilt in split-second, life-or-death decisions. This approach, critics argue, fails to provide clear guidance to officers and erodes their confidence in the investigative process. The prolonged nature of these investigations, some suggest, may even be the intended punishment, regardless of the ultimate findings.