MANHATTAN — In a lawsuit that pitted an ex-Playboy bunny against the New York City Police Department, the onetime centerfold has emerged victorious — with a $1.2 million payout to prove it.
The jury in the case was so sympathetic to Stephanie Adams’ tale of being unjustly manhandled by police that it awarded her $385,000 more than her attorney asked for, the Daily News reported.
"I was praying for justice and waited six years to speak my truth in court, and I'm very grateful for the closure and the healing," Adams told the News.
Adams, 41, who was Playboy’s Miss November in 1992, sued the city after suffering multiple injuries from a 2006 encounter with police.
The incident began with an argument between Adams and taxi driver Erik Darko, who falsely told police that Adams "flashed vampire teeth" and threatened to shoot him.
Police confirmed they threw Adams to the ground to subdue her after they arrived on the scene, claiming they were unsure if the bunny was armed.
Adams, for her part, countered that she was dressed in skintight jeans and a bare midriff top at the time.
Sgt. John Rajan later admitted to the jury that Adams' attire that evening left "no place to conceal a weapon."
Adams, who claimed she was the first openly gay Playmate to pose for the magazine, said she suffered permanent neck and back injuries as a result of the scuffle six years ago — pain that resonated with jury members, who took just over eight hours to rule in Adams’ favor.
"I put myself — I put my daughter — in her shoes and wondered if this could not have been handled more judiciously," a middle-aged woman who sat on the jury told the News.
"He not only threw her to the ground, he was holding her there, even though he could see she was not armed. It felt like it was too much."
In a statement, the city’s Law Department said it was planning an immediate post-trial motion.
"A report of a gun — which is what the officers received in the Adams case at 11 p.m. — is as dangerous as it gets. The plaintiff failed to comply with police orders to freeze and drop," a spokeswoman said.
"Given the number of fast-breaking interactions — requiring split-second judgments — that the police must make annually, there inevitably will be an occasional verdict against an officer," she added. "However, we do not believe that the evidence supported the verdict."
