Nicosia Mathews

  • Recommendation Termination
  • Decision Termination
  • Length of process about 1 year April 20, 2021 to June 16, 2022 Closed
  • Investigative Agency COPA

Charged with violating 7 rules on 10 counts

Show all counts

Rule 2 3 counts

Any action or conduct which impedes the Department's efforts to achieve its policy and goals or brings discredit upon the Department.

Rule 4 1 count

Any conduct or action taken to use the official position for personal gain or influence.

Rule 6 1 count

Disobedience of an order or directive, whether written or oral.

Rule 8 1 count

Disrespect to or maltreatment of any person, while on or off duty.

Rule 9 1 count

Engaging in any unjustified verbal or physical altercation with any person, while on or off duty.

Rule 38 1 count

Unlawful or unnecessary use or display of a weapon.

Rule 14 2 counts

Making a false report, written or oral.

Board Member Votes & Decisions

Majority Decision

3 agreed

Agreed with the final decision of the board

0 disagreed

Disagreed with the final decision of the board

0 did not vote

Did not vote or were not present for voting

The Board finds Respondent’s utter lack of credibility disturbing—her COPA statements and hearing testimony were inconsistent and disingenuous. Most notably, during both of her COPA statements she denied having any verbal or physical contact whatsoever with Nicole Pugh on the night of the incident and maintained that she did not even see Nicole in the house. During her hearing testimony, however, Respondent acknowledged that she did engage in a confrontation with Nicole in the house and even filmed Nicole with Respondent’s cell phone while Nicole was barely dressed. The Superintendent highlighted numerous additional inconsistencies between Respondent’s COPA statements and her hearing testimony which collectively discredit Respondent’s substantive hearing testimony altogether. 

The Board finds Respondent’s claim not credible and deeply troubling, especially because she, a sworn Chicago police officer, made the same false statement not once but twice. The body-worn camera footage and recorded 911 call do not portray Respondent as hysterical at all—in fact, she appears and sounds quite calm. Additionally, during her second COPA statement, Respondent contradicted her claim that her statements were unintentional when she admitted that she told the 911 operator and Officer Serna that she had just left work so that she could get the officers’ attention. The Superintendent established that Respondent’s true purposes for lying to Officer Serna and to the 911 operator were to avoid discipline for wearing her uniform off-duty and to bolster her credibility as a witness for her brother. The Board finds that Respondent’s false statement to Officer Serna was both willful and material and that Respondent is guilty of the charges set forth in Specification No. 2.

Respondent’s statement to COPA that she was not wearing her vest or gun that night was materially false and she knew it was false -- it was designed to shield herself from disciplinary action and to escape responsibility for abusing her authority as a Chicago police officer. The Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding that Respondent is guilty of the charges alleged in Specification No. 3.

Minority Opinions