offi cer down Slowly Developing Threats:
training. We often see instructors ignoring their trainees’ overuse of verbal commands during reality-based training, either because they don’t recognize how dangerous it is or possibly because they mistakenly believe it’s necessary. It is imperative that instructors are very clear on this matter, that they have the courage and know-how to make it clear to their students, and that they put forth the eff ort to do it right. While there may be good tactical reasons for issuing verbal commands in some cases (see “Slowly De- veloping T reats” section below), it is sel- dom legally necessary (except before using deadly force to prevent an escape, and then
only when feasible3) and often very danger- ous. Moreover, multiple verbal commands are unnecessary, and, by clearly showing an unwillingness to follow through on warn- ings, likely to encourage resistance and thus increase the danger.4
It is also very likely that Deputy Dinkhel- ler hesitated because of civil liability concerns. Civil liability is a very real concern in today’s litigious society, and we also have a legal and moral obligation to use deadly force only when reasonable and necessary. Nevertheless, we have the right—and even the duty—to decisively put a stop to unlawful violence, even through the use of deadly force when necessary to defend lives. Fear of civil liability must never get in the way of our obligation to defend ourselves and others.
Deputy Dinkheller’s dash cam may also have contributed to his reluctance to fi re. Considering the intensive scrutiny given to police use of deadly force by the courts, media and others, tape recordings can be very intimidating. T e camera records just the cold, hard facts, including any mistakes the offi cer makes, no matter how minor or innocent, while ignoring the offi cer’s unique perceptions of the event. It also records events from the camera’s perspective, not the offi cer’s, which can sometimes distort the facts against the offi cer. T ese are valid concerns, but we must keep in mind that the camera also records the suspect’s hostile ac- tions and other factors that are likely to sup- port the offi cer’s decisions. In this case, for example, the recording clearly showed Bran- nan’s frighteningly outlandish behavior and open hostility to an extent that would have
40 The Police Marksman May-Jun 2014
been very diffi cult to convey in mere words. It is also important to remember that the video will not be the sole piece of evidence. Other physical evidence is also likely to be present, and the offi cer’s police report still plays a crucial role in his defense. Regardless of whether a video recording exists or not, a detailed report that clearly articulates the en- tire encounter from the offi cer’s perspective and explains exactly why he felt threatened will still be the offi cer’s most valuable asset if accused of excessive force.
Hesitancy can also come from lack of con-
fi dence or uncertainty about the law and/or department policy regarding the use of deadly force. Practical knowledge is essential to over- coming this problem. It isn’t good enough to just be familiar with department policy and state law on the use of force. Offi cers must develop a solid, working knowledge of these things, and it must be in-depth enough to en- able them to respond appropriately to a wide range of real-world situations, including those that may lead to hesitation. Proper training will help offi cers develop this level of knowledge, thereby increasing their self-confi dence and reducing their un- certainty, but it must consist of much more than classroom lectures and memory work. Presentations of actual case studies that in- volved questionable use of force, followed by in-depth interactive classroom discussions, are one very eff ective way to develop the kind of mental fl exibility needed to apply this knowledge in real-life situations. Discussion can be generated by calling on individual of- fi cers to comment verbally, or by requiring every student to submit their opinions in writing, but small-group exercises are usually the best. People tend to be more forthcoming with their ideas when in small groups, which leads to new ideas, more thoughtful discus- sion, and more thorough analyses. Another valuable exercise is to thoroughly
review and discuss the two landmark U.S. Supreme Court use-of-force decisions, Ten- nessee v Garner and Graham v Connor, and other key court decisions as well. T is will encourage deep thought and help offi cers gain a better understanding of the way the courts view and analyze use of force by the police. For the many offi cers who don’t have access to this kind of training, the Internet
The Kyle Dinkheller Incident
can be an excellent alternative. A search for the two critical U.S. Supreme Court cases mentioned above is a good place to start. Read through them thoroughly, think about how and why the Court made the decisions it did, and then do the same with the other cases cited in these two decisions. Other im- portant cases to review are Estate of Smith v. Silvas, Freeman v. Gore, Hunt v. County of Whitman, Krueger v. Fuhr, Payne v. Pau- ley, Samples v. Atlanta, Sharrar v. Felsing, Tom v. Voida, United States v. Dykes, and
United States v. Koon.5 Any offi cer con- cerned about his safety, fi nancial security, and legal well-being would be wise do this, and whatever else it takes to gain a thorough working knowledge of the law regarding the use of force.
Reality-based fi rearms training can also be used to improve decision making by re- quiring offi cers to make tough use-of-force decisions under stress. Scenarios that chal- lenge observation skills (e.g., distinguishing between a cell phone and a handgun) aren’t good enough. Trainees should also be put in situations in which they must make chal- lenging decisions under stress, like when to shoot a suspect who is loading a rifl e but hasn’t pointed it at you, whether to shoot an armed man in the back who is running into an occupied school house, etc. T ese are the kinds of decisions offi cers sometimes have to make on the street, and the time to learn how to make them properly is during training, not after it’s too late.
Such reality-based training can also help identify various factors that may cause of- fi cers to either hesitate or overreact on the street, and will sometimes expose offi cers who are dangerously reluctant or overly eager to use deadly force. Once identifi ed, these issues can be adequately addressed be- fore they lead to tragedy on the street. Appropriate use-of-force decision mak- ing under stress is too important to leave to chance. We owe it to our offi cers to make sure they receive the best possible training in this critical skill. Return to Question 4
Slowly Developing Threats T ere is one other very likely cause of Deputy Dinkheller’s hesitancy that is much less obvi-
www.policemarksman.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46