New York City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams is demanding an independent probe into the NYPD’s use of social media, after a high-ranking police official said a sitting Council member “hates our city.”
In a statement announcing her request Friday evening, Speaker Adams accused police of “dangerous” and “unethical” behavior on social media, days after Chief of Patrol John Chell railed against Council Member Tiffany Cabán in a post from his departmental account on X. The comments are the latest in a campaign NYPD officials have mounted to respond to criticism and call out officials by name with whom they disagree.
“The recent deployment of official NYPD social media accounts to aggressively target public officials and civilians in our city, use dog whistles that can lead to threats and violence, and convey inaccurate information, is dangerous, unethical and unprofessional,” Adams said on Friday.
Cabán had criticized the arrests of pro-Palestinian protesters at Columbia University and City College this week. Chell said in a post Wednesday that “this is coming from a person who hates our city” and urged the public to get “involved.” Police said the post was “accidentally deleted” and Chell re-posted the message Thursday night.
Speaker Adams said Chell’s posts are “violating city laws that prohibit the use of city resources for political purposes.” She asked the Department of Investigation’s Office of the Inspector General for the NYPD to kick off a probe immediately and report back to the Council on the NYPD’s “policies, practices, and operations related to its use of social media.”
Chell drew condemnation in February when he attacked a judge by name for releasing someone without bail. In a rare nod to the Manhattan DA’s office, he praised DA Alvin Bragg for his handling of the case. It was later revealed Chell had named the wrong judge and the case was not under Bragg’s jurisdiction.
Since then Chell has called out public officials and members of the press for criticizing the NYPD.
Spokespeople for the department and DOI did not immediately respond to requests for comment.