The HPD comes under scrutiny after Officer Ezequiel Laureano is caught on film striking a handcuffed student during a riot at the University of Hartford. The incident occurs the very same day on which Rodney King is filmed being beaten by the LAPD. Laureano is arrested for assault, and the case causes a public scandal which brings attention to the HPD’s weak structure of accountability. The Hartford Courant publishes a thorough report on the department’s shortfallings and lack of effective deterrents against police brutality, which pressures the department to institute several policy changes.

Following another gap in case activity, the defendants succeed in changing the terms of the consent decree such that officers can carry their semi-automatic service weapons while off duty.

There is no activity on the case until 1981, when a group of minority HPD officers file a motion to intervene into Cintron v. Vaughan alleging discriminatory promotion practices. The Guardians had filed a set of complaints with the chief in 1979 concerning these issues, which were never adequately addressed. They ask for an injunction preventing all promotions until the problem is solved. Nothing came of this spate of litigation, and the motion would later be withdrawn in 1985.

There is no activity on the case until 1981, when a group of minority HPD officers file a motion to intervene into Cintron v. Vaughan alleging discriminatory promotion practices. The Guardians had filed a set of complaints with the chief in 1979 concerning these issues, which were never adequately addressed. They ask for an injunction preventing all promotions until the problem is solved. Nothing came of this spate of litigation, and the motion would later be withdrawn in 1985.

No further action is taken within the consent decree, but Hartford community organizers continue to push for change through direct means. The Committee Against Police Repression (CAPR) organizes a protest in language which mirrors Cintron; they march against “a pattern of harassment and brutality” by the HPD, specifically claiming that officers have been arresting scores of Puerto Rican young people for simply walking down Park Street in the North End. (Source) Representatives of CAPR succeed in getting a meeting with police officials, who promise to investigate complaints of arbitrary arrest and rough treatment in the area. (Source)

There is no activity on the case until 1981, when a group of minority HPD officers file a motion to intervene into Cintron v. Vaughan alleging discriminatory promotion practices. The Guardians had filed a set of complaints with the chief in 1979 concerning these issues, which were never adequately addressed. They ask for an injunction preventing all promotions until the problem is solved. Nothing came of this spate of litigation, and the motion would later be withdrawn in 1985.

There is no activity on the case until 1981, when a group of minority HPD officers file a motion to intervene into Cintron v. Vaughan alleging discriminatory promotion practices. The Guardians had filed a set of complaints with the chief in 1979 concerning these issues, which were never adequately addressed. They ask for an injunction preventing all promotions until the problem is solved. Nothing came of this spate of litigation, and the motion would later be withdrawn in 1985.

In 1973, Judge Blumenfeld resolves Cintron v. Vaughan in a consent judgment between the HPD and minority groups under judicial oversight. Reactions to this decision vary, as many community members believe that the decision does not wholly account for the harmful practices exercised by the HPD. This consent judgment sets a precedent for additional settlements to follow for the next fifty years, constituting the longest held consent decree against a U.S. police department.