RPD Fails to Provide Interpreter to Deaf Driver
Body-worn camera footage shows no interpreter was provided. RPD’s internal review cleared the officers despite policy violations.
Quick Summary
On January 18, 2024, a Deaf motorist was involved in a traffic accident in Rochester. A call to 911 was made via a Deaf relay service. The motorist was involved in a car accident and needed assistance. Upon arrival, the responding officer, Ryan Fantigrossi, did not offer or attempt to obtain an ASL interpreter. Instead, he conducted the interaction without any formal accommodations.
An internal complaint (PSS Case 2024-0084) was filed. Deaf Refugee Advocacy supported the complainant's interpreter needs during the process.
This was not a minor oversight. The RPD’s Professional Standards Section (PSS) devoted substantial resources to this case: scheduling interpreters, conducting a formal stenographic interview with the complainant, and compiling internal documentation. Despite this investment of time and public funds, the case was dismissed without discipline, and without even interviewing the officer involved.
This was not one officer making a field error. A formal complaint was filed, reviewed, and signed off on—raising critical questions:
Who approved this outcome?
This case raises systemic concerns about how RPD communicates with Deaf motorists and whether every Deaf driver in Rochester is at risk of similar violations.
The City’s internal review concluded there was no wrongdoing, despite clear conflicts with ADA requirements and RPD’s own written directives and it being on video.
The documents below provide the original case materials, internal correspondence, and analyses referenced in the sections above.
A. Narratives & Summary Documents
- Case Summary PDF
- Body Worn Camera Analysis
- The DOJ Warned Monroe County About This in 2005 (blog post)
- Policy vs. Practice: What RPD’s Interpreter Failure Reveals (blog post)
- Interpreter Refused: A Deaf Driver, RPD Policy, and the Fight for Communication Rights (blog post)
- When Police Dismiss a Deaf Motorist’s Complaint: What You Can Do Next (blog post)
- Chronological Observational Summary of BWC Footage - A time-ordered reconstruction of observable actions, communication attempts, and officer responses based solely on the body-worn camera video. This document is not a verbatim transcript; it is Transparent Law Enforcement’s narrative interpretation of events as depicted on video.
B. Official RPD Policy Documents (PDF)
B. Initial Starting Point (PDF)
In 2024 TLE requested complaint and disciplinary data from the RPD. This request was delayed multiple times and ended up being lumped in with the NYCLU's request and fulfilled once the NYCLU won a pivotal case (NYCLU v. Rochester Police Department) for transparency in law enforcement.
D. FOIL Correspondence & Public Records
This section contains the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests, responses, and appeals related to the Rochester Police Department’s handling of PSS 2024-0084.
Initial FOIL Request Appeal
BWC FOIL Request
- City of Rochester, NY. Records Request FOIL-2025-3060 Completed.pdf
- BWC Video - may be provided upon request to Deaf advocacy organizations, Journalists, Legal professionals, Policy researchers. Email: admin@transparentlawenforcement.com
- BWC Redaction Log FOIL 2025-3060 - CR2024-00012063 - Mt Hope Ave and Westfall Rd.pdf
- We do have an appeal in process regarding what TLE believes is incomplete production of records FOIL-2025-3060 Appeal.pdf
E. Requests for Comment (PDF)
- Inquiry Regarding Interpreter Use and PSS Case 2024-0084 (June 2nd, 2025)
- Inquiry Regarding Interpreter Use and PSS Case 2024-0084 Attempt 2 (July 2nd, 2025)
Download Complete Case Packet
📦 Download Full Case Packet (ZIP)
Contains all documents referenced below.
Last updated: December 2025