Understanding Force

Understanding Force

Sid Heal, Senior Instructor1Legal definitionThe exercise of strength, energy or power in order to impose ones will.All force is a form of coercionIn the legal arena, force is broadly defined and can include psychological coercion.Force defined122

It's not pretty.It's not pleasant.Someone always loses.Everyone is an expert thefollowing day.There's money to be madewith mistakes!So why is force so controversial?13

Average award for excessive force was $178,8783

WTO riot Battle for Seattle2:4112Seattle police and law enforcement officials outside the department -- including King County Sheriff Dave Reichert -- complained bitterly that Stamper and Schell were not prepared to handle the thousands of protesters who descended on the city for the WTO meeting.As a result, WTO delegates were placed at risk, the meeting was disrupted, violence spilled out of downtown into the residential Capitol Hill neighborhood, downtown businesses sustained more than $2 million in damage and the city's retail core lost millions more dollars from lost sales at the height of the Christmas shopping season.On Wednesday night, police officers yanked Seattle City Councilman Richard McIver from his car as he tried to drive into a restricted area.McIver, who is black, said the officers ignored his business card, and he said the incident highlights problems in how the department deals with people of color.Moreover, police officers complained loudly and publicly that the failure to anticipate violence left their ranks so thin that they could not do their jobs. Many said they were dangerously tired while on the front lines for nearly 20 hours without food, backup support or enough tear gas and pepper spray. "I certainly do accept full responsibility that our officers did not get all the support they needed and deserve," Stamper said. "As the chief, it's fundamentally important for people to understand that we knew this was going to be big. We knew that there was a potential for violence and destructive behavior."

4U.S. Constitution4th amendmentuse of force can be a seizure8th amendmentcruel and unusual punishments14th amendmentdue process of law & equal protection under the lawState ConstitutionState LawCase LawAgency Policy & Rules of EngagementGeneral Authority104thThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

8thExcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

14th No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

5A peace officer may use force to:Effect an arrestPrevent escapeOvercome resistanceNeed not retreat or desist from their efforts by reason of resistance or threatened resistanceNor shall such officer be deemed an aggressor or lose his rights of self-defenseSpecific Authority96Graham v. Connor (1989)Objectively reasonable standardJudged in the totality of the circumstances without hindsightThe severity of the crime at issueWhether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or othersWhether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flightCase Law8The notion that all excessive force claims brought under 1983 are governed by a single generic standard is rejected. Instead, courts must identify the specific constitutional right allegedly infringed by the challenged application of force, and then judge the claim by reference to the specific constitutional standard which governs that right.

Claims that law enforcement officials have used excessive force in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of a free citizen are most properly characterized as invoking the protections of the Fourth Amendment, which guarantees citizens the right "to be secure in their persons . . . against unreasonable seizures," and must be judged by reference to the Fourth Amendment's "reasonableness" standard.

The Fourth Amendment "reasonableness" inquiry is whether the officers' actions are "objectively reasonable" in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation. The "reasonableness" of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation.

The Johnson v. Glick test applied by the courts below is incompatible with a proper Fourth Amendment analysis. The suggestion that the test's "malicious and sadistic" inquiry is merely another way of describing conduct that is objectively unreasonable under the circumstances is rejected. Also rejected is the conclusion that, because individual officers' subjective motivations are of central importance in deciding whether force used against a convicted prisoner violates the Eighth Amendment, it cannot be reversible error to inquire into them in deciding whether force used against a suspect or arrestee violates the Fourth Amendment. The Eighth Amendment terms "cruel" and "punishment" clearly suggest some inquiry into subjective state of mind, whereas the Fourth Amendment term "unreasonable" does not. Moreover, the less protective Eighth Amendment standard applies only after the State has complied with the constitutional guarantees traditionally associated with criminal prosecutions

7Unreasonable forceAny force that is unnecessary or unjustifiableMost commonly results from a lack of urgencyExcessive forceForce that is necessary but is more severe than is appropriate in either in kind or durationMost commonly results from choosing the wrong weapon or applying it incorrectlyInappropriate Force78Expressed ThreatThe consequences of defiance are made knownAllows the adversary to make an informed decisionImplied ThreatThe consequences of defiance are left to the imagination of the adversaryThe more powerful of the two typesThreats69

Force Continuuma tool used to describe a succession of force options from minimal to maximumTwo philosophical underpinningsThe amount of injury likely to be incurred by a suspect (effects based)The amount of defiance presented by a suspect (behavior based)Where would you place pepper sprays and TASERs?Continuums can be confusingto lay peopleespecially juriesDescriptivenot prescriptive!Estimating Force5Which goes wherepepper spray or Taser?10Threatseven if only impliedDevices that are only engaged on the volition of a suspectSometimes called "passive" forcePhysical discomfort but without serious traumaSerious injuryLethalLevels of Force411Force Quadrant (Behavior based)CooperativeResistiveAssaultiveSerious Injury

312How Far is Far Enough?Generally, a club or edged weapon can be considered lethal if the suspect is within 7 meters.Blunt Impact or Edged Weapons~21 Feet(7 Meters)Thrown Objects~60 Yards(50 Meters)Less than 3% of the population can throw an object large enough to cause serious injury beyond 50 meters.213Nonlethal (Less-Lethal, Less-than-Lethal) and harmless are not synonymsNonlethal weapons are incapacitatingNonlethal Options are a substitute for Lethal OptionsA dramatically improved nonlethal option will not have a dramatic effect on lethal force ratesLethal Force is 100% effectiveLess Lethal Force should also beThreshold vs. WindowPerceptions and Misconceptions114The objective is to win not to fight!Sid Heal

909-732-8325 H9692@Verizon.net15Selection by Range0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300StunbagFin-stabilizedPellets FN 303 Pepperballs OC OC (MK-46) Sponge GrenadeStunbag (40mm)Knee knockers Foam Baton DusterMono-BallRubber BatonPellets (40mm)TASER Stingball (thrown)

Stingball (Launched)16ClassItemNearFarsgStunbag1560sgFin-stabilized15135sgPellets1030eFN30310120ePepperball030cPersonal OC315cMark 46 OC1510040Sponge3030040Stunbag216040Kneeknockers4515040Foam Baton3015040Duster03040Mono Ball306040Rubber Baton3010040Pellets3050Sting Ball60120Taser021 Lethal vs. NonlethalDefined by intent NOT capability!Can lethal force be justified to recover a nonlethal weapon?Physical vs. PsychologicalA credible threat of lethal force is a nonlethal option!Is intimidation an acceptableapplication of force?

Types of ForceHow they are used not what they can do is the defining factorWarning shots are nonlethalBaton strikes to the throat are lethal

At bestno force is necessary. At worstno harm is done.17