What did the NYPD body‑camera footage of the Chakraborty shooting show and what did investigators conclude?
Executive summary
The NYPD body‑worn camera footage released in early February shows officers entering Jabez Chakraborty’s Queens home, repeatedly ordering him to drop a knife, retreating and closing a door, and then firing multiple rounds after he pushed past that door and advanced toward them while holding a kitchen knife; the video is partially obscured at the moment of firing and ends as he collapses, with officers administering first aid afterward [1] [2] [3] [4]. Investigations remain active: the NYPD’s Force Investigation Division and the Queens District Attorney’s Office are reviewing the shooting, early reporting says the footage appears to support the officers’ account that Chakraborty advanced with a knife, but oversight bodies and the family dispute aspects of the response and the completeness of the released footage [5] [3] [6].
1. What the body‑camera footage visually shows
The released body‑cam from the responding officers captures moments inside the Briarwood home in which Chakraborty is seen with a large kitchen knife, a family member attempts to block or restrain him, officers repeatedly command him to drop the weapon, the officers retreat and place a glass vestibule door between themselves and Chakraborty, he pushes through that door toward them, and then an officer fires several shots as Chakraborty advances — the camera view is partially obscured by the shooter’s arms during the discharge and the video ends with Chakraborty collapsing and officers continuing to shout for him to drop the knife [2] [7] [3] [4].
2. How police officials and the mayor characterized the footage
The NYPD expedited release of the footage as part of its stated practice for officer‑involved shootings and said the visuals corroborate its account that Chakraborty advanced on officers with a knife after police and family members attempted de‑escalation, while Mayor Zohran Mamdani—who viewed the video and met the family—emphasized the case as evidence of broader mental‑health response failings and urged treatment over prosecution for Chakraborty [8] [5] [9].
3. The family, advocates and critics who challenge the official narrative
Chakraborty’s family, supported by advocacy groups, says they originally called 911 seeking an involuntary medical removal and an ambulance, not an armed police response, and they have criticized the NYPD for releasing edited footage and for actions taken at the scene such as seizing phones and asking immigration‑related questions — claims the NYPD disputes and which the city says the released footage did not substantiate [6] [10] [11]. Civilian oversight already weighed in: the Civilian Complaint Review Board recommended misconduct charges against the involved officers, a move that diverges from internal investigators’ findings and could lead to departmental proceedings [6].
4. What investigators have concluded so far and the status of legal review
Multiple agencies are examining the incident: the NYPD’s Force Investigation Division is conducting the departmental probe and the Queens District Attorney’s Office is investigating with reports that prosecutors have considered possible attempted‑murder charges; several outlets noted that, at least in initial public viewings, the released footage appears to substantiate the officers’ claim that Chakraborty advanced with a knife prompting the shooting, but no final prosecutorial or grand‑jury decision has been reported [1] [12] [5] [3].
5. Medical aftermath, tactical details and evidentiary limits
Reporting says Chakraborty was hospitalized — accounts vary in describing his condition from stable to critical — and that officers provided first aid and used a tourniquet at the scene; two officers also received minor treatment for injuries such as tinnitus according to police statements [1] [3] [9]. The released clip is limited in scope: it is described by the family and some outlets as edited or incomplete, the moment of firing is visually obscured on the shooter’s camera, and not all contemporaneous materials (initial 911 audio was not immediately released by police though some outlets later published 911 recordings), leaving unresolved questions about the lead‑up, alternatives to police response, and how much the public footage reflects the full evidentiary record [6] [7] [3].