Forensic Scientist Sues Nassau County, Claims Firing Was Whistleblower Retaliation

NASSAU COUNTY, NY. — A forensic scientist is suing Nassau County and the county medical examiner’s office for wrongful termination, alleging in the lawsuit that she was fired in an act of both disability discrimination and whistleblower retaliation.

Former county medical examiner’s employee Robyn Fishkin filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York on Nov. 21. Fishkin’s attorney, Paul Bartels, said in a civil complaint that her now-former employer had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and New York State civil rights law, as well as her first amendment rights to freedom of speech and freedom to petition the government, when firing her in 2024.

In the lawsuit, Fishkin seeks damages to compensate for loss of past and future earnings, bonuses, compensation, pension benefits, health benefits and other employment benefits, as well as damages stemming from emotional injury and distress, related to the disability and first amendment claims.

The claim of whistleblower retaliation, the complaint reads, stems from Fishkin’s 2021 participation in an investigation by the Nassau County Inspector General (NCIG), an investigation later taken over by the New York State Inspector General (NYSIG).

Neither of the inspectors general immediately responded to requests for comment Friday. The complaint included no further details regarding the 2005 or 2006 cases mentioned.

Bartels did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The Nassau County attorney’s office also did not immediately respond to requests for comment, while the medical examiner's office declined to comment.

As part of her participation, Fishkin took part in, “multiple discussions with the NCIG and NYSIG regarding her knowledge of potential illegal activity at the crime lab," the complaint reads. According to the complaint, that activity included, “the misuse of government funds and improper, unlawful, and inaccurate revisions of scientific findings to fit the political agendas of the defendants. In particular, there was a cover-up of an error from a 2005 sexual assault case where the suspect was later convicted of a 2006 high-profile homicide."

In these discussions, both inspectors general assured Fishkin that her comments were protected, lawful and proper, the complaint reads, her attorney said.

By November of 2021, the complaint reads, crime lab management was aware of the investigation and announced its own investigation into, “a breach in data security and the unauthorized dissemination of case information,” with Fishkin receiving another email regarding, “improper [Combined DNA Index System]/DNA disclosure and penalties to intimidate [Fishkin] because of her participation in the investigation.”

Beginning in March of 2022, the complaint reads, retaliatory action began. A promotion for Fishkin was “improperly delayed” that month, ultimately being awarded after Fishkin filed a grievance with the county, the complaint reads.

Two months later, in May of 2022, Fishkin was formally disciplined for “improper data access,” at a meeting with crime lab management, the complaint reads. While the disciplinary action did not come with specifics regarding the alleged improper access, Fishkin was informed that she “could be subjected to termination for any additional improper data access,” after that initial disciplinary action, the complaint reads.

Fishkin is aware of another employee at the medical examiner’s office who participated in the same inspectors general investigation and received the same disciplinary action on the same day as Fishkin, the complaint reads.

Around that same month, the complaint reads, a lab director for the county filed a report to county district attorneys which they said “contained inaccurate information and called her integrity into question, and improperly accused her of malfeasance.”

Over the ensuing Summer months, Fishkin was ostracized and excluded in the workplace, demoted from her senior analyst position and stripped of casework duties despite repeated requests for the work, the complaint reads. Fishkin was also denied access to a private space to meet with her lawyer, union representatives or the inspectors general during this time, the complaint reads.

In September of 2022, the complaint reads, Fishkin was made aware of an allegation that she had been insubordinate and disrespectful to a coworker, an allegation stemming from over a year prior.

In a May 11, 2023 incident, the complaint reads, the county had dispatched two anonymous investigators to Fishkin's private residence on a day that she had taken off from work, at which point the investigators trespassed at her home in Suffolk County and taped an unmarked envelope to her door with a letter inside of it, all while using profane language and engaging in “aggressive posturing.”

Finally, Fishkin was subjected to a written threat of termination in a May 11, 2023 letter, the complaint reads. Three months later, on Aug. 22, 2023, Fishkin filed suit in Nassau Supreme Court alleging whistleblower retaliation on the part of the county and the medical examiner’s office for her participation in the inspectors general’s investigation. That action, the complaint reads, is currently pending.

On Apr. 24, 2024, Fishkin was fired from her job at the county medical examiner’s office, the complaint reads.

“The notice terminating her employment specifically states that the Defendants were
‘of the judgment’ that [Fishkin] was unable to do her job ‘by reason of disability,’” the complaint reads. “Therefore, [the county] clearly terminated [Fishkin’s] employment, at least in part, because of a perceived disability.”

Fishkin filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on Sept. 25, 2024, the complaint reads, to which the county responded on Jan. 20, 2025 with a position statement. After a Feb. 21 response from Fishkin, the complaint reads, the EEOC issued a Determination and Notice of Rights letter on Aug. 25.

In that letter, the EEOC said it would not be investigating Fishkin's claim further, and would make no determination about whether further investigation would reveal violations on the part of the county. That determination, the EEOC said, did not certify the county's compliance or lack thereof with employment equal employment opportunity statutes. In the same letter, the EEOC notified Fishkin of her right to sue the county.