Police Use of Force Explained

September 25, 2016
Tampa, FL

By Richard E. Alvarez

     I often find myself being asked by friends and co-workers about police use of deadly force whenever a shooting occurs, especially when it involves unarmed people or African Americans, because of my service as a police officer with two departments.  Working in a reentry based, primarily African American, Christian nonprofit ministry, I find these questions as both opportunities to correct misperceptions, foster better understanding of police policies, as well as a potential professional pitfall if I misspeak or inject politics into the matter.  Make no mistake about it, I have very strong feelings about the direction this nation is going in the manner it treats those entrusted to protect and serve all of us, and their use of deadly force.  I try to guard against natural biases, since I spent so much time doing the job.  At the same time, I am a criminal justice reform advocate in many ways, so I think I have a very unique viewpoint on these issues.  That, however, is not the purpose of this article.  The real purpose is to allow those who view law enforcement from the outside a peek inside the world of law enforcement by describing training and policies with regard to the use of deadly force.  I think this perspective might help people better understand why, how, and under what circumstances police will use deadly force.  It might also lend some insight into how to avoid being killed by police officers, as well as suggest some possible areas for change or improvement.  There is one caveat, which is I've been out of the game for nearly ten years now.  I'm sure some things have changed, but the basics should be the same, so here we go.

     Police officers are saddled with a massive amount of responsibility.  In many cases, officers only have a high school education, but they are expected to make life and death legal decisions that have serious ramifications to both themselves and others.  Make a decision too quickly, and you may make a deadly error.  Make a decision too slowly, and you might not get to see your family again.  It is absolutely impossible for someone who has never done the job to fully understand what that means and what it does to you and your psyche.  Officers do receive quite a bit of training, but it varies from department to department.  In all cases that I'm aware of, however, police officers are required to attend a basic training course, which lasts for about three to four months.  During this training, an immense amount of knowledge and skill must be acquired in a very short amount of time.  Police work is both physical and cerebral.  Officers receive physical fitness training, unarmed self-defense training, less than lethal weapon training, and firearms training on the physical side.  They also learn how to safely pull over vehicles and search structures.  On the mental side, they must learn all of the relevant state laws and local ordinances that they will be required to enforce in the line of duty.  They must learn the use of force continuum, how to process a crime scene/forensics, and how to properly document everything.  They must learn how verbally take command of a situation and to diffuse hostile situations.

     Upon graduation, the training continues on the job.  The next 2-3 months will be spent in the field training program, where new officers work closely with field training officers to put their newly acquired knowledge into practice on the streets of their jurisdiction.  This is a very dangerous phase, because the lack of experience of these young officers can easily get them killed.  Officers continue to work on the skills in the classroom as well, with legal updates, verbal judo, and use of force.  During use of force training, it is explained that the decision to use force is complicated, but must be made decisively and quickly.  If it is not, the results can be fatal.  Officers are shown many videos and tapes about poor decisions or just the dangers presented by resistive and armed suspects.  It can be quite frightening to think about, but each officer must complete a gut check to see if they can make that decision when the time comes.  They also have to not be paralyzed by fear of death.  It is a calculated risk that all officers take and must be o.k. with.  So, when I hear that training is lacking in police departments, I say there is always room for more training, but generally speaking, most police departments do a pretty good job.

     The Use of Force Continuum is a way to teach officers how much force to use on suspects that are dangerous and/or not submitting to arrest.  It is a protocol created by both the Chief of Police and likely the lead prosecutor for the city or county where the department is located, and it follows generally accepted policing policies for the state and the nation.  Some minute parts may vary between departments, but it is generally pretty similar across the board.  In the departments I worked for it went something like this:

1.) Police presence:  Often the mere arrival and presence of an officer is enough to deter crime or calm a situation.

2.) Verbal Commands:  Officers take control of situations most frequently with the use of their verbal skills.  This is where an officer directs people out of harms way or directs a suspect to surrender and submit to arrest.  Any refusal to comply with the lawful order of a police officer is a crime in most jurisdictions and will lead to an escalation up the use of force continuum if not complied with.  This is where verbal judo, or de-escalation techniques are used to defuse situations if possible, as well.

3.) Soft empty hands:  These are escorting techniques like guiding someone to the side of road, using arm bars to take them to the ground, handcuffing, and pain compliance/pressure point techniques.  These are the least likely of the physical use of force techniques to cause any real harm to a suspect.  Some departments prefer to use chemical weapons or Tasers at this stage, prior to using pain compliance/pressure points or arm bars and other techniques.

4.) Chemical agents/Tasers:  Many departments have gone to the Taser over pepper spray, but we did not have that option when I was serving.  I think it can be very useful to stop an aggressive attacker in some situations, but some people, especially those high on PCP, are often not affected by either of them.  I also feel there has been an over-reliance on these agents as opposed to soft empty hands combined with verbal commands.  The advantage is there are probably fewer injuries to officers.

5.)  Hard Empty Hands:  These are punches and kicks (yes police officers can legally punch and kick you under the right circumstances.  This is the next level of force for highly resistive suspects.

6.)  Impact Weapons:  These are generally expandable batons these days like the ASP, but they can be old fashioned "billy clubs" or PR-24's, as well.  These are used to bring down extremely resistive subjects who have not succumbed to the other techniques.  Both hard empty hands and impact weapons are also guided by target zones.  Large muscle masses and the nerves that run along the legs and arms are green targets and should be struck first if possible.  Joints and the chest and abdomen are considered yellow zones and require a greater level of justification for the elevation of force, and the head and spine are red targets, which would require a justification to use deadly force in most cases.

7.)  Deadly Force:  This is generally a firearm such as a pistol, rifle, or shotgun, but it can also be an automobile, knife, or anything available if the situation gets bad enough.  The use of deadly force is only authorized when there is a threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or to others by a suspect.  An officer must be able to articulate why they felt that either they or another party were in danger of being killed or seriously injured by the actions of the suspect.  It does not always require that the suspect be armed.

     The Use of Force Continuum is a guideline that officers must follow and be able to explain why they took the actions they did.  It is not necessary to follow all of the steps in order.  If the situation is getting worse rapidly, the officer may jump two or three steps ahead.  Conversely, the level of force may also be reduced when resistance is reduced or stopped when compliance is attained.  It is generally acceptable for officers to use one level of force higher than the suspect is using.  It's not supposed to be a "fair fight."  Police officers fight to win.  That's why officers might show up in overwhelming numbers to arrest someone.  The show of that much force is often enough to make someone surrender, which means no one gets hurt.  An officer's primary goal is to go home and see their family every night.

     Yes, it is perfectly permissible to shoot an armed person if they refuse to drop a weapon, even if they are not pointing it at anyone, as long as they are ordered to drop it if time permits.  Officers are not expected to wait until a suspect actually points a gun or starts shooting when they can stop the suspect prior to endangering anyone else.  Yes, officers can shoot a person with a knife when they are within 21 ft., because experience and repeated demonstrations have shown that someone with a knife can cover that distance and stab an officer before he can even get his gun out of his holster.

     No, officers can't just shoot someone in the leg.  Officers spend a lot of time at the shooting range honing their skills with their pistols, but combat is another story entirely.  They can do shoot/don't shoot scenarios and conduct practice scenarios using real weapons loaded with marking rounds, instead of live ammo, but nothing can truly prepare an officer for the stress of combat shooting.  If an officer is say 85% accurate on the range, his accuracy will drop to 20-30% in combat.  There are many physiological reasons for this, such as tunnel vision and the adrenaline pump that accompanies being shot at.  Research has shown that people who repeatedly train the same actions in practice will be more likely to revert to training when they lose their minds in the heat of combat.  Therefore, officers are taught to shoot for the largest target, or "center mass", of a suspect in training, to increase the likelihood of actually hitting them.  This video is great demonstration of what I'm talking about:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayZ_Cn0E6Qs.

     No, police departments don't usually release evidence, video, or reports of a us of force incident while it's under investigation, and no it's not a violation of FOIA.  Those items must be released to the press, unless a judge orders them not to be, only after the investigation and/or prosecution is complete and they are requested.  There are many reasons for this.  One is that videos often don't tell the whole story and can inflame a public that simply doesn't understand the law or the rules governing deadly force prior to the uncovering of all of the evidence.  It could also pollute a potential jury pool if this evidence is seen on television or the internet prior to a trial.  Finally, processing all of the evidence and completing an investigation is a very time consuming and detailed process where it is extremely important that it is done correctly.  Officers have no time to worry about releasing such evidence just to satisfy an angry or curious crowd.

     Yes, an unarmed person can be shot if they pose a risk of serious physical harm or death to the officer or someone else.  Examples of this are trying to take an officers gun, beating him to the point where he/she is nearly unconscious, choking them, or doing anything else that might result in loss of consciousness, broken bones, prolonged or intractable pain, or death to an officer or citizen.  I was nearly killed by an unarmed man over an attempt to get him to get rid of his open container of alcohol.

     No, there is no conspiracy to hunt down African American males by white police officers, or police in general.  The vast majority of police officers are good people who must make very difficult decisions that can cause death to themselves or others.  They are also human and can make mistakes. Making life and death decisions in the blink of an eye is inherently prone to occasional mistakes. That is why officers are often given the benefit of the doubt.  Actual intentional criminal behavior is rare and is usually discovered and prosecuted quickly.  It is also important to remember that each situation is different and requires a great deal of very detailed investigation, which when complete, is sent to the prosecutor to decide if he will take it to a grand jury to decide if charges are appropriate.  The cases aren't always clear either.  The prosecutor must consider the totality of the circumstances and apply the "reasonable person" standard to the officers actions.  Would a "reasonable person" faced with similar circumstances make the same or similar decision, and does that decision fall within the bounds of the law and the use of force continuum?  The general public is not equipped to make this decision.  It is very important to remember that the public is not privy to all of the facts, either.  The media loves to fan these flames in an effort to generate more interest and sell more newspapers or advertising opportunities.  We live in an age of tabloid journalism where blood and conflict sells, and actual facts are less important.  It is easier to run with a story that generates controversy, and later print a retraction, than it is wait and possibly miss the story.  Ferguson is great example.  The whole "hands up don't shoot," scenario was completely false and verified by the Justice Department and independent witnesses.  All of the physical evidence supported Officer Wilson's story, including Michael Brown's fingerprints and DNA on his weapon.  He was not shot in the back either.  These are the facts, but the media didn't want to wait for those, and it resulted in a town burning, and a good officer never being able to do what he loved again.

     No officer goes to work thinking they are going to shoot someone that day.  Most officers make it through their career without ever firing their weapons outside of the firing range, but some are not so lucky.  It is a hard decision that affects the officer, his family, the suspect, and the suspect's family forever.  No officer wants to have to make that decision, but that is what they are hired to do.  It can lead to stress, heavy drinking, and PTSD.  Not only do officers not want to shoot you, most will make every effort to get you to comply, but that doesn't always work out.  The easiest way not to get shot is not to put yourself in that position in the first place.  Do what the police tell you to do.  Answer yes sir or no sir.  DO NOT resist them or fight with them if they try to arrest you, and don't argue.  That is what court is for.  Court will not be held on the street.  If you feel you were treated unfairly or inappropriately, file a complaint or talk to a lawyer.  No one hates a bad shooting more than a good police officer.  It makes all of us look bad.  More than that, no one hates a criminal cop more than a good officer.  They are rooted out, prosecuted, and sent to jail.  Trust me, I've seen it happen, and we all saw the officer in South Carolina who shot the suspect in the back while running away get charged and convicted for his actions.  These incidents are rare, but remember most shootings are justified, and they represent a very small portion of the number of violent killings in this nation.  There is always room for improvement and having community discussions with experts and police officials on the topic is the best way to start, not burning down neighborhoods.  That is the quickest way to shift the focus from your cause and turn public opinion against you.

     Today I pray for peace and reconciliation, and to see the respected status of those who risk everything for people they don't even know to be restored.  We are living in very difficult times, and I hope this little article does something to promote discussion and real understanding about the use of force by police officers.  God bless, and thank you for reading!

-Rich

   

I Would Never....

September 11, 2016

By Rich Alvarez

      Part of my new job, well part of the job I have voluntarily undertaken in the last three years or so too, is to change hearts and minds on the topic of reentry.  I currently try to make partnerships with business leaders so that they will agree to hire graduates of our career development program.  If that seems like a steep task in a heavily politically conservative area of a heavily politically conservative state, you'd be right.  So how does one go about doing that anyway?

     I overcome objections like, "I've had a bad experience when I hired an ex-offender in the past," or "I'm just not willing to take the risk that they will steal from me," or "I'm not going to hire a criminal, it's just too risky."  These are real concerns, and I have to acknowledge the validity of them first.  I understand that there is a risk.  Furthermore, I understand that a business owner is in business to make money and not for charity.  These are relatively easy objections to overcome.  Once I explain how our program is voluntary and that our graduates have already demonstrated a will to change.  I also explain the career development process, the job coach position, and the life coach that is available to each client.  I also inform them of the federal bonding program and the WOTC.  I explain that our program cannot guarantee a 100% success rate, but it is very different from just hiring an ex-offender, or really anyone for that matter, off the street.  We take the human resources cost and responsibilities on for small companies that might not be able to do so, and we do everything possible to remove the risks associated with hiring our demographic.  In fact, I feel we provide that business with an employee that is ready to add value to their business immediately.  That's why our success rate is so high, and why the Governor trusts Ready4Work enough to fund us over other options.  This is usually enough, but not always.

     One of the hardest parts of my job is when someone still has reservations, because they view ex-offenders as a sub-class of the rest of society.  They are "criminals" and should be shunned, because they simply can't be trusted.  That's when I have to pull out the big guns.  First, I explain the problem of mass incarceration.  I explain that our country, that we all think of as "free", is in many ways, not that at all.  I explain that we incarcerate a higher percentage of our population than any other nation on earth, including China and Russia.  That usually blows people away, because its simply not something that's even in the stream of consciousness of the average American, unless they've had a personal experience.  I also explain the immense costs to the tax payers of incarceration and recidivism.  On average in Florida, it costs about $18000 per year per inmate to jail them in the state prison system.  This does not include local and county jails.  Based on these numbers alone, the cost to the state is in the billions of dollars, and the cost to Hillsborough County is about $600-800 million per year.  That money comes from our taxpaying pockets, including business owners.  The problem with that number is that it really doesn't cover the true cost of crime does it?  It doesn't cover the cost of police officers needed to investigate and arrest  criminals, or prosecutors, or judges, or public defenders.  It doesn't cover the costs to victims in terms of property loss or damage, medical bills, and psychological trauma. It also doesn't cover the cost of lost productivity of the criminal, had he actually been gainfully employed instead, or the cost of supporting his family that relied on him for income.  It can't possibly measure the cost to his or her children who must now live without a parent in their lives and all the psychological baggage, including the increased likelihood that the child will follow in the parent's footsteps.  The true cost is really incalculable, isn't it? 

     I often relate my experience as a former police officer and state corrections officer in Ohio.  I explain that I often saw the same people coming back to jail time after time.  When I would ask them why they kept re-offending, they would often explain that they could not get a job, housing, or medical and mental healthcare.  They told me if they went back to prison, at least they would get "Three hots and a cot."  It was better than the alternative of living in squalor and homelessness on the streets.  That struck me as profound.  I then ask the potential employer, what is someone to do if they can't find employment with a living wage, or a home, or the ability to better themselves through education?  What are they to do if they can't get their mental health or substance abuse issues properly addressed?  These the main reasons criminals go back to a life of crime.  I tell them that the way I was brought up was that if I made a mistake, I was told to own up to it, take my punishment, learn from it, and move on.  I find that most people believe that to be the case in our criminal justice system as well.  I then explain that the formerly incarcerated are often not given the opportunity to move on.  They continue to be punished through job and housing discrimination, and are never given the opportunity to become working, taxpaying, law abiding citizens again.  In fact, in some states, like Florida, they are stripped of their right to even the most basic  American right to participate in society, the right to vote.  They are, in effect, put into a caste system that is almost impossible to escape, unless someone gives them a helping hand.  At this point, most people are shocked that this is the reality of America today, and they agree to give someone a helping hand by hiring our graduates.

     Every once in a while, someone's heart is still not convinced to do the right thing.  That's when I try to put them in the shoes of someone they might be able to relate to.  I tell them that the only real difference between many ex-offenders and the rest of society is that most people just aren't caught.  That's when I get a horrified look and the inevitable statement, "I would never....".  It's hard to repress my smile as I ask them if they always made great choices, even as a young person or teenager, or were there some things that, had they been caught, they might have gotten themselves into legal trouble?  I ask them to envision this scenario.  "Imagine you have just gotten off of work and are to meet some co-workers for a couple of drinks to celebrate a big deal that just closed.  You are the man of the hour, and someone talks you into a third drink, over the two drink limit you set when you are driving.  You suddenly get a call from your wife that your child needs to go to the doctor and she needs you home now.  You don't feel intoxicated at all, because you just consumed your third drink, but you order a cup of coffee to go, just to be on the safe side.  You get behind the wheel of the car and start to drive home.  As you are approaching an intersection, you hit a bump and the coffee spills in your lap.  You look down and try to wipe the steaming coffee from your lap.

     When you look back up, the light has changed and an elderly woman is crossing the intersection in a walkway.  She's right in front of you, and you jam the brakes in a panic, but its too late.  You mow down the elderly woman to your horror.  You get out and try to help, but there is clearly nothing you can do, and she expires at the scene.  The police show up on the scene, and they smell alcohol on your breath.  You are distraught and don't do well on the tests, so they arrest you for DUI and Vehicular Homicide.  As if the evening could not get any worse, the officer tells you that the woman is the Mayor's mother, and the media is on scene.  They film the police taking you away in cuffs.

     Your wife is so angry at you that you were out drinking instead of being home for your sick child, she refuses to bail you out of jail.  Your work sees the story on the news, and reporters have shown up at your job.  They simply can't afford to be associated with this kind of negative publicity, so they let you go unceremoniously.  Now you have little money in savings for an attorney, because that money is needed to support your family and pay their bills, so you must rely on a public defender who is overworked and underpaid.  You try to convince them how important you are and how it must be a mistake, because you weren't impaired at all.  In fact, you were trying to be responsible by drinking coffee to remain alert so you could help your daughter.  If it hadn't been for that darn bump, none of this would have happened.  The public defender is unimpressed and advises you to take a plea.  You are offered five years in prison instead of fifteen years if you are convicted at trial.  Realizing that you have little chance to win at trial given your lack of resources and your representation, you reluctantly agree.  Now you are a felon headed to prison.  Do you see how one very small error in judgement can lead to consequences you could never have foreseen?  Don't drink?  O.K., you took a couple of Ambien for your insomnia and the wife tells you that she absolutely has to have something from the store and she's too sick to go out.  The result is the same."

     My point is this, we all make poor choices from time to time that can have disastrous consequences if the circumstances align against you.  There are countless examples of these things happening to otherwise law abiding citizens, and their lives changed overnight for the worse.  They often then cannot escape the cycle of poverty and criminal activity that leads to recidivism unless someone steps in to help them. People don't start off as bad.  They are often turned bad due to the circumstances in their lives, and we must learn to place ourselves in the shoes of others.  No one can say what they would do if faced with the same circumstances of someone who committed a crime.  We often like to view ourselves in the most positive light compared to others in order to make ourselves feel better, but if we are honest with ourselves, we have all made some terrible choices in life.  That was also the point of last week's suggested reading.   There are so many laws on the books now, especially at the federal level, that it is estimated that we all commit approximately three felonies and day without even realizing it.  It's just that no one is watching and we have not been caught.  We can not possibly know everything a criminal may have been through in life or how well equipped they were to make the right decisions.  I don't want you to get me wrong, I'm in no way suggesting that criminals should not be caught and punished for the crimes they commit.  They absolutely should, but once they pay the price assigned by the court, they should also be afforded the opportunity to learn from their mistake and move on.  They should be allowed the opportunity to become productive, tax paying, voting citizens again.  

     So, the next time you think, " I would never..." when you hear about a crime, take the time to try to put yourselves in that person's shoes to try to figure out how they arrived at that point.  It's ok to feel anger at them for hurting other people or taking their property.  That's normal, but at the same time, we should think about what's going to be happen when they get out?  What are you going to do to help make sure they don't do back by committing another crime?  Can you be a mentor?  Can you give them a job opportunity?  Can you vote for measures that eliminate collateral sanctions and remove the barriers to becoming a productive citizen again?  After all, isn't that the whole point of the Department of Corrections, to correct bad behavior?  We all have a responsibility as taxpayers, Christians especially so, to do everything in our power to eliminate the cost to taxpayers, victims, and the former criminal themselves.  What will you do to help?

Before You Judge Someone Else, Read This!

     Sorry I've been off for so long.  I've been settling into a new condo, in a new state, with a new job.  While it's all very exciting and certainly part of God's plan, I felt the need for an update.

     My new home is in Dunedin, Florida, which is a suburb of Tampa.  It's a cute little artsy town with a personality unlike anywhere else I've been in this state.  It's bike friendly and dog friendly, and it's kind of a foodie and microbrewery hotspot.  I love it here, but most of all I'm proud of my new job.  While I love the idea of Comprehensive Reentry very much, and I will not abandon it entirely (I have visions of creating a truly unique mobile app based on the website), my primary focus is the new agency I work for, Abe Brown Ministries.

     I am taking the next natural step by working for an agency in Tampa that does everything I set out to do with Comprehensive Reentry.  It would actually be a conflict of interest for me to continue anything but the blog right now.  Abe Brown Ministries has been around since the 1970's and functioned pretty much as a prison ministry with a bit of local outreach, such a food bank.  They still do that valuable work today, but they have taken on so much more in the last two years.  They are now part of the Ready4Work Program under Operation New Hope in Jacksonville.  The purpose of that program is to take a holistic approach to reentry and help the returning citizen become productive tax paying persons again.  They take care of housing needs with transitional housing.  They help with food and clothing if they are in need.  They screen for drugs and certain kinds of offenses, like sex offenses and serious violence.  They make certain any substance abuse, mental health or physical health problems are addressed by the proper professionals.  They then place them in a 4-6 week long career development class that teaches them an array of life skills many may have never been exposed to including managing workforce conflict in a healthy way, work ethic, resume writing, and interviewing skills.  Once they feel the client is sufficiently ready, they receive a job coach who will follow them throughout the remainder of the one year program while providing guidance, assisting with placement in a career, and acting as an intermediary to head off problems if need be.  They also receive a life coach who acts as a mentor and is usually a member of the faith based business community in the area.  Then there's me.

     My job is to interact with C-level decision makers that can influence or change employment policy with local employers.  I try to develop partnerships with businesses that will be willing to hire our graduates.  I change hearts and minds in a state that is still steeped in an Old South mentality when it comes to criminal justice.  I do this through knowledge, my personal experiences on both sides of the law, salesmanship, and testimonials from other satisfied employers.  I even invite them to our campus to see what we do, which often gives comfort to the employer, and I provide information on the Work Opportunity Tax Credit and the Federal Fidelity Bonding Program.  So far, I've met with a decent amount of success, but not enough to employ all of our people yet.  If you are interested in reading more about what we do, check out our website at www.abebrown.org or our You Tube channel  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvXFCuKMKk.  Someday, I hope to supplement  this organization with a mobile app that will assist in placement of our clients and spread the word of this comprehensive reentry organization.

     I also wanted to share this article, because I often don't get positive support from my facebook friends when I talk about what I do.  I think this is important work, because I've already heard my own story from one of my clients, and then I read this article.  It explains what both of us faced when it came to the federal government.  It talks about how many of us commit felonies everyday unwittingly, but no one in law enforcement is looking at the time.  Once you realize this, and how your life will change if they happen to look, it suddenly sheds a new light on our self-righteousness when we look at those who have spent time in prison and are trying to make a new start.  I recommend reading this article and book it is based on.  God Bless and have an awesome week!

-Richard E. Alvarez

Recommended Reading:

https://mic.com/articles/86797/8-ways-we-regularly-commit-felonies-without-realizing-it#.1kk0Mbfvr