By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Jeffrey Maddrey’s lawyer admitted to a consensual relationship between Maddrey and Lt. Quathisha Epps, but denied claims of quid pro quo sexual harassment. The lawyer alleges Epps initiated the relationship and is deflecting from an ongoing overtime pay investigation. Epps, however, claims Maddrey demanded sexual favors in exchange for overtime, and retaliated when she refused. This admission contradicts previous denials and further fuels ongoing investigations into the matter.
Read the original article here
A former high-ranking NYPD official, who was the department’s top earner in 2024 with over $400,000 in salary, much of it overtime pay, has admitted to a relationship with a subordinate. This admission follows accusations of sexual misconduct, a pattern that seemingly extends over a decade. However, he vehemently denies that he demanded sex in exchange for overtime assignments, claiming that any connection between the two is purely coincidental. His defense, though, feels hollow given the context of his substantial overtime earnings and the numerous allegations against him.
The sheer amount of overtime pay he received raises immediate questions about the nature of his work and his relationship with his subordinate. It’s difficult to ignore the obvious correlation between his financial gains and the alleged coercive behavior. While he claims no explicit connection was made, the power dynamic inherent in his position makes his claim of innocence hard to swallow.
The accusations against him paint a picture of a pattern of abusive and coercive behavior. This pattern, allegedly spanning more than a decade, raises significant concerns about the NYPD’s internal processes and its handling of such allegations. The fact that this individual enjoyed continued employment, even reaching the highest earning position in the department, points towards a systemic issue of either complicity or negligence.
The argument that he didn’t explicitly demand sex misses the crucial point of implied coercion. The power imbalance between a superior and a subordinate creates a situation where a refusal might jeopardize the subordinate’s job security or career advancement, effectively creating a coercive environment. It’s a form of power rape, where consent is rendered essentially meaningless due to the inherent pressure.
His defense that he merely had a relationship with a subordinate ignores the ethical implications inherent in such a situation. Relationships between superiors and subordinates are generally discouraged, and in many organizations, strictly prohibited due to the potential for abuse of power and the creation of hostile work environments. Regardless of consent, the existence of this relationship itself poses a considerable ethical breach, especially considering the already existing allegations against him. The focus should not solely be on whether he explicitly demanded sex for overtime, but on whether the entire situation constituted an abusive exploitation of his authority.
The fact that he was the department’s top earner, with the majority of his income stemming from overtime, strongly suggests a potential misuse of departmental resources. It’s not unreasonable to question whether the overtime hours were legitimately accrued, or whether they were inflated to justify his alleged actions. This raises concerns about potential fraud and misuse of taxpayer money. The financial implications of his actions far surpass the purely personal.
The situation highlights a larger issue within the NYPD. This individual’s ability to accrue significant wealth and maintain his position despite numerous allegations suggests a system that either failed to protect its employees or actively enabled such behavior. This isn’t just an isolated incident; it’s a symptom of a deeply rooted problem that requires serious investigation and reform. It’s imperative that a thorough investigation is conducted to ascertain the full extent of his actions and to ensure that such abuse of power and potential fraud is not tolerated within the department. The response from the NYPD and the city administration will be telling in determining how seriously they take addressing these systemic issues. Until meaningful changes are implemented, similar scenarios are likely to occur.