- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 week, 4 days ago by .
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
Create And Track Police Department History
Home › Forums › Rhode Island › East Providence Police Department › William Nebus
Former Chief William Nebus was accused of gender-based discrimination and harassment by a department secretary, Cheryl Curti. The allegations included inappropriate comments and actions over several years, such as suggesting an inappropriate relationship between Curti and a former chief, serving her with a fake no-contact order at a retirement party in 2017, and kissing her on the cheek at another event. Curti filed a lawsuit against the city in June 2022, alleging violations of civil rights and fair employment practices. Nebus retired in October 2021 after 29 years with the department.
[Return to blog post](https://watchaudits.com/william-nebus-east-providence-police-department/)
Former Chief William Nebus faced a lawsuit filed on June 7, 2022, by department secretary Cheryl Curti, alleging gender-based harassment and discrimination. The suit claims Nebus made inappropriate comments about Curti’s relationship with a former chief, issued a fake no-contact order at a 2017 retirement party, and kissed her on the cheek at another event, stating, ‘See what a few drinks will do to you.’ Curti sought compensatory and punitive damages. Nebus retired in October 2021 after 29 years with the department. ([abc6.com](https://www.abc6.com/east-providence-employee-sues-city-over-accusations-of-discriminatory-behavior-by-former-police-chief/?utm_source=openai))
[Return to blog post](https://watchaudits.com/william-nebus-east-providence-police-department-2/)
We're building a comprehensive database of police interactions to promote accountability and transparency in law enforcement.
It is strictly against our rules to:
Violation of these rules will result in immediate content removal and possible account suspension.
By organizing this data, we can potentially demonstrate when officers were previously aware of laws they later claim ignorance of, challenging qualified immunity defenses and promoting accountability.