Plaintiffs complaining of the defendants by their attorneys, respectfully show to this Court and allege as follows:

2. At all times hereinafter mentioned, the defendant, THE CITY OF NEW YORK was a municipal corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

3. Within 90 days after the claim herein arose, on April 30, 1999, a Notice of Claim setting forth the name and post office address of the claimants and of their attorneys, the nature of the claim, the time when, the place where, and the manner in which the claim arose, and the items of damage and injuries claimed to have been sustained so far as then practicable, was served upon the defendant, THE CITY OF NEW YORK.

4. At least 30 days have elapsed since the service of aforesaid Notice of Claim, and adjustment or payment thereof has been neglected or refused.

5. This action is being commenced within one year and 90 days after the happening of the even upon which the claim is based.

6. At all times hereinafter mentioned, the defendant, KENNETH BOSS, was a police officer employed by the CITY OF NEW YORK and was acting within the course and scope of his employment.

7. At all times hereinafter mentioned, the defendant, SEAN CARROLL, was a police officer employed by the CITY OF NEW YORK and was acting within the course and scope of his employment.

8. At all times hereinafter mentioned, the defendant, EDWARD MCMELLON, was a police officer employed by the CITY OF NEW YORK and was acting within the course and scope of his employment.

9. At all times hereinafter mentioned, the defendant, RICHARD MURPHY, was a police officer employed by the CITY OF NEW YORK and was acting within the course and scope of his employment.

10. On February 4, 1999 the plaintiffs' decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, was standing in the vestibule of the building where he lived at 1157 Wheeler Avenue, County of Bronx, City of New York.

11. On February 4, 1999, while the decedent AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, was standing in the vestibule of the aforesaid building, he was approached by the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS.

12. At the time they approached the decedent, the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, were members of the Street Crime Unit of the City of New York Police Department and were acting in the course and scope of their employment by the defendant, THE CITY OF NEW YORK.

13. On February 4, 1999, the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, drew their handguns and fired 41 shots at the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, as he stood in the vestibule of the building where he lived at 1157, County of Bronx, City of New York, striking him 19 times, resulting in his death.

14. The aforesaid occurrence was caused to occur by the negligence of the defendants, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS.

15. The defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, acted in a reckless, wanton and grossly negligent manner and in complete disregard for the rights and safety of the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, in approaching him without reasonable suspicion that he had committed a crime and without any lawful justification, and in firing 41 bullets at him without any justification and in otherwise acting in a reckless, wanton and grossly negligent manner.

16. The defendant, THE CITY OF NEW YORK, was negligent in the training and supervision of the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, and in assigning them to the Street Crimes Unit without adequate training and supervision.

17. By reason of the foregoing, the plaintiffs' decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, sustained fatal injuries as a result of which he died on February 4, 1999.

18. By reason of the foregoing, the plaintiffs' decdent left him surviving, as next of kin, his mother KADIATOU DIALLO and his father, SAIKOU AMADOU DIALLO.

19. By reason of the foregoing, the said next of kin have been damaged.

20. The amounts sought exceed the jurisdictional limits.

21. The plaintiffs demand damages against the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, in the amount of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS

22. It is hereby alleged, pursuant to CPLR 1603, that the foregoing cause of action is exempt from the operation of CPLR 1601, by reason of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR 1602.

23. The plaintiffs repeat, reiterate and reallege each and every allegation contained in those paragraphs of this complaint marked and designated "1" through "17" inclusive, with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth herein at length.

24. By reason of the foregoing, the plaintiffs' decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, was caused to sustain severe physical pain and mental anguish, including the apprehension of his imminent death from the time of the occurrence on February 4, 1999, until the time of his death on February 4, 1999.

25. The amounts sought exceed the jurisdictional limits of all Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.

26. The plaintiffs demand damages against defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS.

27. It is hereby alleged pursuant to CPLR 1603, that the foregoing cause of action is exempt from the operation of CPLR 1601, by reason of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR 1602.

28. The plaintiffs repeat, reiterate and reallege each and every allegation contained in those paragraphs of this complaint marked and designation "1" through "19" and "24" inclusive, with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth herein at length.

29. The defendant, SEAN CARROLL, intentionally, wantonly, recklessly and maliciously shot at the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, 16 times knowing that his doing so would result in injury to or the death of AMADOU BAILO DIALLO with the intent to cause of injury or death.

30. The defendant, EDWARD MCMELLON, intentionally, wantonly, recklessly and maliciously shot at the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, 16 times knowing that his doing so would result in injury to or the death of AMADOU BAILO DIALLO with the intent to cause of injury or death.

31. The defendant, KENNETH BOSS, intentionally, wantonly, recklessly and maliciously shot at the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, 16 times knowing that his doing so would result in injury to or the death of AMADOU BAILO DIALLO with the intent to cause of injury or death.

32. The defendant, RICHARD MURPHY, intentionally, wantonly, recklessly and maliciously shot at the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, 16 times knowing that his doing so would result in injury to or the death of AMADOU BAILO DIALLO with the intent to cause of injury or death.

33. The decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, was struck with 19 bullets causing fatal injuries resulting in his death.

34. The amounts sough exceed the jurisdictional limits of all Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.

35. The plaintiffs demand damages against the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/1000 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS.

36. It is hereby alleged pursuant to CPLR 1603, that the foregoing cause of action is exempt from the operation of CPLR 1601, by reason of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR 1602.

37. The plaintiffs repeat, reiterate and reallege each and every allegation contained in those paragraphs of this complaint marked and designated "1" through "19", "24" and "29" through "33", inclusive, with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth herein at length.

38. Each of the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, individually and in concert with others, acted under pretense and color of law and their official capacity. SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS individually and in concert with the others, acted wilfully, knowingly, and with specific intent to deprive the plaintiffs' decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, of his rights secured by the fourth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution, including his right to be secure in his person and free from the use of unreasonable force.

39. The defendants, individually and in concert with the others, did deprive the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, of his rights secured by the fourth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution, including his right to be secure in his person and free from the use of unreasonable force.

40. The defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, acted with malicious and wanton disregard of the Constitutional rights of the plaintiffs' decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, including his right to be secure in his person and free from the use of unreasonable force.

41. The defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, exercised unreasonable and excessive force in their attempt to stop the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO. Their use of force against the decedent was unwarranted and wholly unjustified.

42. The behavior of each defendant, individually and in concert with each other, was shocking to the conscience, including drawing their loaded guns and firing 41 shots at the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, when such behavior was not necessary.

43. The decendent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, was not engaged in any criminal act or illegal conduct that would necessitate, warrant or justify the use of the level of force exercised by defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, acting individually and in concert with each other.

44. The decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, was deprived of his right to due process of law. He was deprived of his right to live, be free form serious physical injury, and unjustified deadly and excessive force.

45. The unwarranted firing of 41 shots of which 19 struck the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, ultimately deprived him of his most fundamental right — his right to life.

46. When the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, attempted to stop the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, they were acting pursuant to a policy, custom and practice of the New YOrk City Police Department which encouraged officers of the Street Crimes Unit to aggressively stop individuals without regard to their Constitutional rights, including an individual's right.

47. When the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, attempted to stop the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, they were acting pursuant to a policy, custom and practice of the New York City Police Department which mandated that officers of the Street Crime Unit seize at least one gun per month.

48. Prior to February 4, 1999 the New York City Police Department tacitly authorized the unconstitutional actions of members of the Street Crime Unit including the stopping of individuals without any lawful justification.

49. Prior to February 4, 1999 the New York City Police Department displayed deliberate indifference to the unconstitutional actions of members of the Street Crime Unit including the stopping of persons without any lawful justification. 50. Prior to February 4, 1999 the New York City Police Department knew of the repeated constitutional violations of members of the Street Crime Unit including the stopping of persons without any lawful justification.

51. By reason of the foregoing, defendants violated 42 §1983.

52. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, plaintiffs are entitled to a reasonable allowance for attorneys fees as part of their costs.

53. The amounts sought exceed the jurisdictional limits of all Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.

54. The plaintiffs demand damages against the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS.

55. It is hereby alleged pursuant to CPLR 1603, that the foregoing cause of action is exempt from the operation of CPLR 1601, by reason of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR 1602.

56. The plaintiffs repeat, reiterate and reallege each and every allegation contained in those paragraphs of this complaint marked and designated "1" through "19", "24","29" through "33" and "38" through "52" inclusive, with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth herein at length.

57. Prior to February 4, 1999, the New York City Police Department implemented a policy, practice and custom within its Street Crime Unit of racial profiling with regard to stopping and frisking citizens of the City of New York.

58. The policy, practice and custom of racial profiling by the New York City Police Department Street Crimes Unit was in full force and affect on February 4, 1999.

59. Prior to and on February 4, 1999, pursuant to the policy, practice and custom of racial profiling, African-American males were targeted for "stop and frisk" by members of the New York City Police Department Street Crimes Unit.

60. In stopping and frisking African-American males based upon the policy, practice and custom of racial profiling, members of the New York City Police Department Street Crimes Unit were executing and implementing the policy, practice, and custom of racial profiling sanctioned, established, and condoned by the New York City Police Department.

61. Prior to, and on February 4, 1999, the Street Crimes Unit of the New York City Police Department engaged in a pattern and persistent practice of stopping and frisking African-American males for no other reason than their race.

62. In stopping and frisking African-American males for no other reason than their race, the Street Crimes Unit of the New York City Police Department was implementing and carrying out a policy, practice, and custom established, sanctioned and condoned by the New York City Police Department.

63.Prior to, and on February 4, 1999, the policy, practice, and custom of racial profiling by New York City Police Department Street Crimes Unit resulted in a pattern of persistent violations of individuals' individual rights under the fourth and fourteenth Amendments including the rights of the decent, Amadou Bailo Diallo.

64. Prior to, and on February 4, 1999, although they represent 25.6% of the New York City population, African-American citizens of the City of New York comprised approximately 62% of all persons stopped by the Street Crimes Unit of the New York City Police Department .

65. Prior to and on February 4, 1999, Street Crimes Unit of the New York City Police Department stopped approximately 16 African-American citizens of the City of New York for every one stop that resulted in a contemporaneous arrest.

66.The policy, practice and custom of racial profiling, established, sanctioned, and condoned by the New York City Police Department was directly contrary to and in violation of the fourth and fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

67. The policy, practice and custom of racial profiling, established, sanctioned and condoned by the New York City Police Department was a contributing cause of the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY, AND KENNETH BOSS, attempting to stop the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, and thereafter shoot and kill him.

68. On February 4, 1999, the defendants, , SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY, AND KENNETH BOSS, attempted to stop the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, for no other reason than he was black.

69. On February 4, 1999, the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY, AND KENNETH BOSS, attempted to stop the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, and thereafter shoot and kill him, the defendants were acting pursuant to the policy, practice and custom of racial profiling established, sanctioned and condoned by the New York City Police Department.

70.On February 1, 1999, the defendants did deprive the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO of his rights secured by the fourth and fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution by unconstitutionally attempting to stop him and thereafter shooting and killing him.

71.By reason of the foregoing, the defendants violated 42 U.S.C. 1983.

72.The amounts sought exceed the jurisdictional limits of all Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.

73.The plaintiffs demand damages against defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY, AND KENNETH BOSS, in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS.

74.It is hereby alleged pursuant to CPLR 1603, that The foregoing cause of action is exempt from the operation of CPLR 1601, by reason of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR 1602.

75. The plaintiffs repeat, reiterate and reallege each and every allegation contained in those paragraphs of this complaint marked and designated "1" through "19", "24", "29" through "33", "38 through "52" and "57" through "70" inclusive, with the same force and effect as if more fully set forth herein at length.

76. In 1997 The New York City Police Commissioner, Howard Safir, tripled the size of the New York City Police Department Street Crime Unit from 120 to 380 officers.

77. As a result of this sudden and drastic increase in the size of the Street Crime Unit, officers assigned to the Street Crime Unit received grossly inadequate training.

78. The expansion of the Street Crime Unit from 120 to 380 officers left the Street Crime Unit dangerously unsupervised.

79. Prior to February 4, 1999, the New York City Police Department assigned officers to the Street Crime Unity without proper training.

80. Prior to February 4, 1999, the New York City Police Department implemented a policy of assigning officers to the Street Crime Unit who had received grossly inadequate training.

81. Prior to February 4, 1999 the New York City Police Department failed and neglected to establish proper and adequate guidelines, procedures or training programs for officers entering the Street Crime Unit.

82. The actions of the New York City Police Department in assigning inadequately trained officers to the Street Crime Unit evidenced deliberate indifference by the New York City Police Department to the rights of persons with whom officers of the Street Crime Unit came in contact as manifested by the systemic and grossly inadequate training received by officers assigned to the Street Crime Unit.

83. The defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY and KENNETH BOSS, received grossly inadequate training.

84. The grossly inadequate training received by the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY and KENNETH BOSS, and the lack of proper and adequate supervision, was a contributing cause of the defendants attempting to stop the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, and thereafter shoot and kill him.

85. By reason of the foregoing, the defendants violated 42 U.S.C. §1983.

86. The amounts sought exceed the jurisdictional limits of all Courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction.

87. The plaintiffs demand damages against the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY and KENNETH BOSS, in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS.

88. It is hereby alleged pursuant to CPLR 1603, that the foregoing cause of action is exempt from the operation of CPLR 1601, by reason of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR 1602.

WHEREFORE, the plaintiffs demand judgment against the defendant, THE CITY OF NEW YORK in the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Causes of Action and against the defendants, SEAN CARROL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, in the First Cause of Action in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS, in the Second Cause of Action in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS, in the Third Cause of Action in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS, in the Fourth Cause of Action in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS, in the Fifth Cause of Action in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS, and in the Sixth Cause of Action in the sum of TWENTY MILLION AND 00/100 ($20,000,000.00) DOLLARS, together with exemplary damages against the defendants SEAN CARROL, EDWARD McMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, in the sum o FORTY-ONE MILLION and 00/100 ($41,000,000.00) DOLLARS, together wit the interest, costs, including reasonable attorneys fees and disbursements of this action.

Yours, etc.,
GAIR, GAIR, CONASON, STEIGMAN & MACKAUF
Lead Counsel,
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
80 Pine Street
New York, NY 10005
(212) 943-1090

OMAR MOHAMMEDI, ESQ.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
SAIKOU AMADOU DIALLO and STANLEY S. OSTRAU
200 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10016
(212) 725-9160

DEVEREAUX CANNICK
Attorney for Plaintiffs
SAIKOU AMADOU DIALLO and STANLEY S. OSTRAU
69-06 Grand Avenue
Maspeth, NY 11378
(718) 426 0444