Castellano said no. They asked if that would have changed his approach. Castellano said probably. That answer was revealing. It meant Castellano would have treated a white homeowner differently than he treated Whitmore.
It meant his approach was based on assumptions about who belonged in the neighborhood, not on actual suspicious behavior. The investigators reviewed the original call to dispatch. The anonymous caller had simply said there was a black male on Maple Street who didn't look like he belonged and was acting suspicious around cars. The caller didn't give a specific address, didn't describe any criminal behavior, didn't provide any details beyond race, a vague location, and the loaded phrase "didn't look like he belonged." It was, in other words, a perfect example of the kind of racially motivated call that officers are trained to investigate carefully rather than act on immediately.
Anonymous calls using phrases like "doesn't belong" combined with racial descriptions and no specific criminal activity are often from people with bias who see any person of color in their neighborhood as inherently suspicious. Castellano should have called for more information, should have observed before approaching, should have looked for actual criminal behavior. Instead, he saw a black man and assumed he was the problem. The investigators also found something else troubling. They pulled dispatch records for Castellano's entire 4-year career and found a pattern.
Castellano had responded to calls about suspicious persons at a rate 40% higher than other officers in his district. And 87% of those calls had involved people of color. Either Castellano was assigned to an area with legitimately more suspicious activity by people of color, or Castellano was actively seeking out calls that allowed him to stop people of color. The data suggested the latter. The investigation took 7 weeks.
During that time, investigators conducted 23 interviews, reviewed 14 hours of body camera footage from Castellano's previous stops, and analyzed 4 years of dispatch records and incident reports. The findings were unequivocal. Castellano had violated department policy on racial profiling. He had conducted an investigatory stop without reasonable suspicion. He had failed to properly investigate before approaching a citizen.
He had made assumptions based on race rather than behavior. But the investigation uncovered something much larger than a single incident. Investigators tracked down the nine individuals who had filed previous complaints against Castellano. Eight of them agreed to be interviewed. Their stories were remarkably consistent.
A 45-year-old black attorney named Jerome Buckley described being stopped by Castellano while jogging in a park near his home. Castellano had demanded ID and asked what Buckley was doing in the area. Buckley explained he lived nearby and ran there three times a week. Castellano had made him wait while he ran Buckley's ID for warrants. There were none.
Castellano let him go without explanation or apology. A 32-year-old Latina small business owner named Elena Fuentes recounted being stopped by Castellano while loading equipment into her van outside her own store. Castellano had accused her of stealing and demanded to see receipts for the equipment. Fuentes owned the store and the equipment was hers. She showed Castellano her business license.
Castellano claimed he was just being thorough. Fuentes filed a complaint. It was marked unfounded. A 19-year-old black college student named Tyrell Washington described being stopped by Castellano while walking home from class at 8:00 p.m. Castellano asked where he was going, where he had been, and why he was in that neighborhood.
Washington explained he was a student who lived three blocks away. Castellano made him empty his backpack on the sidewalk. Washington filed a complaint. It was investigated by Lieutenant Kowalski and dismissed as a lawful investigative stop. The pattern was undeniable.
Castellano consistently stopped people of color in situations that didn't warrant stops. He consistently demanded identification without legal justification. He consistently assumed people of color were out of place in certain neighborhoods. More importantly, the investigation concluded that Castellano's nine previous complaints should have been taken more seriously. A pattern review showed that all nine complaints described similar behavior, Castellano assuming people of color didn't belong in certain neighborhoods, Castellano demanding ID without legal justification, Castellano being aggressive in situations that didn't warrant aggression.
The investigation also revealed that Lieutenant Kowalski had been deliberately vague in his investigations of Castellano's complaints. Kowalski's reports used phrases like "officer was conducting legitimate police work" and "complainant misunderstood standard procedures" without actually examining whether the stops met constitutional standards. In three cases, Kowalski hadn't even interviewed Castellano before closing the complaint as unfounded. He had simply reviewed Castellano's incident report and accepted it at face value. In two other cases, Kowalski had interviewed Castellano but hadn't asked any challenging questions about why the stop was made or whether racial bias might have been a factor.
The previous supervisor had failed to identify the pattern, or worse, had identified it and chose to ignore it. The investigators noted in their report that Kowalski's failure to properly supervise Castellano had allowed a problematic officer to continue violating citizens' rights for years. The recommendation was termination. Castellano's union fought it, arguing that he had been responding to a legitimate call and that his actions, while perhaps overly aggressive, didn't rise to the level of termination. The department's response was simple.
Castellano had profiled a sergeant based on race. If he would do that to a superior officer, what was he doing to regular citizens who didn't have the knowledge or resources to fight back? The union's argument failed. Castellano was terminated 9 weeks after the incident. His appeal was denied.
His law enforcement career was over at age 28. But the consequences went beyond just Castellano. The department launched a comprehensive review of how civilian complaints were handled. They found that under the previous supervisor, Lieutenant Kowalski, complaint investigations had been cursory at best. The review examined 127 complaints that Kowalski had investigated over his final 5 years as a supervisor.
Of those, 94 alleged some form of discrimination or excessive force. Kowalski had found merit in only three. The rest were dismissed as unfounded, unsubstantiated, or complainant withdrew. But, when Internal Affairs reexamined 30 of those complaints with access to body camera footage and dispatch records that Kowalski hadn't reviewed, they found patterns of problematic behavior in 18 cases. Officers making stops without reasonable suspicion, officers using force in situations that didn't warrant it, officers making racially coded comments.
Kowalski's failure to investigate properly hadn't just protected Castellano. It had protected multiple officers whose conduct needed to be addressed. The department published a scathing report criticizing Kowalski's supervision and noting that his failure to properly investigate complaints had allowed problematic behavior to continue unchecked throughout his division. Kowalski had retired 6 months before the Whitmore incident, so he couldn't be disciplined. But, the department stripped him of his retirement ceremony honors and made it clear that his legacy would be one of failed leadership.