Privacy For Cops

So, here we go, the California legislature is doing their “best” to address the growing number of officer involved shootings. At the same time, they are also making changes to the legal standards used to judge them. According to House Bill 931, entitled Police Accountability and Community Protection Act (PACP).

The PACP would make it illegal for a law enforcement officer to use “deadly” force unless it was deemed “necessary” under the bill. Sounds great so far, doesn’t it? After all, no police officer truly wants to shoot anyone unless they deem it necessary, do they?

Who Decides What “Necessary” Is?
This is the big question and one that seems to be outlined in the legislation. According to the bill’s authors and others, it goes something like this. If the officer’s use of deadly force is deemed after review, to be unnecessary by both them and their peers, then the officer could be prosecuted. In the event they are not imprisoned, it could still cost them years of hassle that can ruin them emotionally, physically, and financially. They further went on to say this is how we go about protecting the community.

This is not likely to make things any better at all. While hindsight is always 20/20, when you are in the heat of the moment, you have to base your decision on the sensory input and your interpretation of the situation of it unfolds. This could, in fact, lead to the decision to pull the trigger and use deadly force where reviewing the situation via dashcam video, eyewitness reports, and the officer’s own memory may possibly have led to a different decision.

The Supreme Court Weighs In
Fortunately, the Supreme Court Cases of Tennessee vs. Garner and Graham vs. Connor set a precedent regarding the use of any type of police force and how it should be evaluated. The most important passage in the Graham vs. Connor statement is, ” The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.

Keep in mind that at the time, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote the decision and that there weren’t any dissenting votes on the panel. This is very much like being handed the commandment from atop Mt. Sinai. Despite this, the powers at large in the California State Assembly have chosen to disagree with the decision put forth by the Supreme Court and have instead chosen to propose their own legislation.

The Other Side of the Problem
Under normal circumstances, any legislation that directly affects law enforcement in the state of California is normally drafted after consultations with a number of local police organizations such as the Police Officers Research Association of California. As of this time, no one has made any attempt to consult with these organizations. Leaving officers in limbo as to what type of reactions they face should they be involved in any type of officer involved shooting.

What used to be a routine traffic stop has now become a very dangerous situation as more officers are being attacked and shot on the side of America’s roads every day. The trick to remaining safe is knowing what to do from the moment you hit the lights until the suspect pulls away or is driven away. Here are six steps you should take if you want to remain safe every time you pull another vehicle over:

Be Prepared for the Stop
• Start by keeping a very close eye on the suspect while you are calling the stop in.
• You need to be watching for attempts to conceal, dump, or destroy any evidence.
• Chose a tactically sound location to pull them over.
• Be sure the front seat of your patrol is clear of anything that might slow down or block an emergency exit.
• Keep a close eye on the suspect watching for attempts to flee.
• Be the first one out the door with your feet on the ground.

Be in Control
Taking control of the situation from the beginning is very important. It is up to you to make sure the situation does not spiral out of control from the outset. Use your interpersonal and communication skills to keep the situation de-escalated before angry words have a chance to turn into physical actions.

The Right Approach Tactics
The best thing you can do for yourself at this point is to make sure you are fully aware of the dangers. Position yourself in such a way as to not be in the way of passing traffic or being trapped between the cars. Take advantage of blind spots, the way you use your lights and mirrors to observe the occupants of the vehicle. This can give you more time to react if something goes wrong.

Never Reach into the Suspect’s Vehicle
You should never reach into a suspect’s vehicle, you put yourself at risk of being attacked by being dragged if the suspect decides to try and drive off.

Time is Always on Your Side
Time is always going to be on your side. There is nothing wrong with delaying the stop until the conditions are more favorable to a safe stop. If you are not comfortable, it’s okay to wait for a backup unit. For instance, you should never try to search a vehicle while at the same time trying to monitor the suspect. This exposes you to potential dangers, especially with a felony stop. Do everything by the numbers, it could save your life.

Beware of the Second Approach
Finally, be very aware of the second approach. While your first approach to the vehicle might have gone peacefully enough, never let this put you at ease. Doing so could cost your life. Try changing the way you approach, come up from the passenger side the second time, or work with your partner to swap out between who is the “Contact” and who is the “Cover” officer.

The most important thing you can do is NEVER treat any traffic stop as routine. Even the simplest of stops could be “the one” that gets you injured or killed. It is your job to uphold the law while at the same time to take every possible step to protect yourself.

Recently a woman in Texas accused Officer Daniel Hubbard of making sexual advances during a routine traffic stop. According Sherita Dixon-Cole’s statement, she accused Hubbard of sexually assaulting her in his police cruiser after she had been given a field sobriety test, which she failed. In her statement, Dixon-Cole stated that Officer Hubbard then continued to make even more advances on the way to the station along with promising to set her free in exchange for sexual favors.

The Body Cam Never Lies
However, despite the woman’s accusations, the officer’s body cam contained two full hours of footage that clearly discredited every accusation that Dixon-Cole made against Officer Hubbard. Even the woman’s lawyer made a statement to the effect that the lies she had told were “appalling.”

He went on to say, ” Officer Daniel Hubbard seems to comport himself professionally during the duration of the traffic stop and arrest and – without more – should be cleared of any wrongdoing. It is deeply troubling when innocent parties are falsely accused, and I am truly sorry for any trouble these claims may have caused Officer Hubbard and his family. I take full responsibility for amplifying these claims to the point of national concern.”

Not the First Time
This is not the first time body cam footage has been used to successfully defend an officer who had been accused of misconduct. In South Carolina, the Rev. Jerrod Moultrie, a local NAACP chapter president, accused an officer of racial profiling during what was a routine traffic stop. According to the statement he made, the officer “accused him of having drugs, asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood, and threatening to put him in jail.”

If this wasn’t bad enough, Moultrie then went on Facebook and posted, ” Tonight, I was racially profiled by Timmonsville Officer CAUSE I WAS DRIVING A MERCEDES BENZ AND GOING HOME IN A NICE NEIGHBORHOOD.” Thankfully, once again the officer in question’s body camera footage clearly showed the entire encounter in which none of the actions the officer was being accused of ever happened. Timmonsville Police Chief, Billy Brown made the following statement to a local ABC station, ” When I saw the video, I was shocked that someone who is supposed to be a community leader, a pastor, and head of the NAACP would just come out and tell a blatant lie.”

This is not to say that all body cam footage can be used to exonerate the officer being accused, there are times when the footage has been used to prove misconduct and allow the appropriate level the appropriate punishment. It is hoped that in the future, the continued expansion of body cam use throughout law enforcement at all levels will lead to better protection for both members of law enforcement at all levels. But at the same time, it will help departments to weed out officers who are not behaving appropriately. Which would go a long way towards reducing the amount of anti-police activity and false accusations.

The use of drones is once again in the news, but this time not because law enforcement officers are using them. Instead, it seems that criminals are getting in on the action by using swarms of them to monitor situations and flush out law enforcement officers who are just trying to do their jobs.

An FBI Hostage Situation Gone Awry
In the winter of 2017, the FBI sent a hostage rescue team to a major U.S. city. As part of their mission, they established an elevated observation post whose job it was to monitor the current unfolding situation. It wasn’t long before those in the observation post found themselves surrounded by dozens of high-speed drones. These drones made a continuous stream of low passes at high-speeds at the agents, in an attempt to flush them out of their location.

Once the agents were flushed out, it left the rest of the group blind, making it impossible for them to maintain situational awareness and making it much harder for the officers to achieve their goal. While the incident itself is still classified, it does show you how criminals are putting drones to use to develop increasingly more complex crimes.

How the Drones Arrived
The drones were apparently carried into the area earlier in anticipation of the FBI arriving on scene. Not only were the drones used to flush out the FBI and other law enforcement agents, those operating them used their drones to keep an eye on everything the officers were doing. These images were streamed live via YouTube to the other members or the criminal team. This also meant that anyone else with access to a cell phone and YouTube could see the same streaming images.

This is Not the First Time

This is not the first time criminals have used drones in the commission of a crime. But this is one of the biggest examples of mass use to disrupt an ongoing incident. As law enforcement officers, we can expect this type of situation to become more commonplace as criminals continue to look for new and better ways to improve their success rates and foil the efforts of all levels of law enforcement.

The more sophisticated the drones become, the more likely it is the criminal element will continue adding them to their toolbox. When you stop to consider how sophisticated the video cameras and WiFi or Bluetooth have become, it is easy to see why they have become so popular. All it takes is a fully charged battery and a skilled operator.

Not only have drones become more sophisticated, but they have become more stable and much easier to operate. In fact, they are so easy, most kids over the age of 9 or 10 quickly become expert pilots. Drones have come a long way since their inception, they are inexpensive to buy or replace and almost impossible for law enforcement officers to do anything about. So, the next time you are out on a stand-off situation and you start to see drones in the air, chances are good the bad guys are looking at you, so smile for the birdie and then get back to the job at hand.

What used to be a routine traffic stop has now become a very dangerous situation as more officers are being attacked and shot on the side of America’s roads every day. The trick to remaining safe is knowing what to do from the moment you hit the lights until the suspect pulls away or is driven away. Here are six you should take to heart if you want to remain safe every time you pull another vehicle over.

Be Prepared for the Stop
• Start by keeping a very close eye on the suspect while you are calling the stop in.
• You need to be watching for attempts to conceal, dump, or destroy any evidence.
• Chose a tactically sound location to pull them over.
• Be sure the front seat of your patrol is clear of anything that might slow down or block an emergency exit.
• Keep a close eye on the suspect watching for attempts to flee.
• Be the first one out the door with your feet on the ground.

Be in Control
Taking control of the situation from the beginning is very important. It is up to you to make sure the situation does not spiral out of control from the outset. Use your interpersonal and communication skills to keep the situation de-escalated before angry words have a chance to turn into physical actions.

The Right Approach Tactics
The best thing you can do for yourself at this point is to make sure you are fully aware of the dangers. Position yourself in such a way as to not be in the way of passing traffic or being trapped between the cars. Take advantage of blind spots, the way you use your lights and mirrors to observe the occupants of the vehicle. This can give you more time to react if something goes wrong.

Never Reach into the Suspect’s Vehicle
You should never reach into a suspect’s vehicle, you put yourself at risk of being attacked by being dragged if the suspect decides to try and drive off.

Time is Always on Your Side
Time is always going to be on your side. There is nothing wrong with delaying the stop until the conditions are more favorable to a safe stop. If you are not comfortable, it’s okay to wait for a backup unit. For instance, you should never try to search a vehicle while at the same time trying to monitor the suspect. This exposes you to potential dangers, especially with a felony stop. Do everything by the numbers, it could save your life.

Beware of the Second Approach
Finally, be very aware of the second approach. While your first approach to the vehicle might have gone peacefully enough, never let this put you at ease. Doing so could cost your life. Try changing the way you approach, come up from the passenger side the second time, or work with your partner to swap out between who is the “Contact” and who is the “Cover” officer.

The most important thing you can do is NEVER treat any traffic stop as routine. Even the simplest of stops could be “the one” that gets you injured or killed. It is your job to uphold the law while at the same time to take every possible step to protect yourself.

It hasn’t been that long ago that the simple pump-action shotgun was considered to be the “primary backup” weapon of choice in most if not all police departments across the nation. You only have to look at the news to see how many times police have been forced into using deadly force in a situation in which the suspect was NOT armed simply because they did not have a large enough variety of options to choose from.

What About the Bean Bag Launcher?

And, accordingly, if you watch the news from the big cities, officers are supposed to be armed with 40 mm shoulder-fired bean bag launchers or rubber bullets. But the problem with this thought is that far too few departments have this type of equipment on hand. This leads us to the question of why not bring back the good old-fashioned shotgun, the one that we have seen in patrol cars for decades?

Shotguns can be loaded with buckshot that when fired at the suspect’s lower extremities can cause injuries that are disabling yet not deadly. This seems like the perfect compromise and one that has served officers well since time in memorial. Think about it for a moment, don’t you think this would be a much better solution to coping with a suspect who is flailing around with a knife than shooting with intent to kill?

Almost Always Fatal

If you look at the average protocols in place during LEO training today, the call is for multiple shots to the suspects “center mass.” Odds are that under this type of shooting, the only possible outcome is going to be the death of the suspect.

Not that long ago, most officers were taught to use a 12-gauge shotgun loaded with #00 buckshot. This training often included teaching officers to “bounce” their shots off the pavement where possible to keep the shot more towards the legs of the suspect, thereby reducing the possibility of the killing them instead of wounding them. The idea was to keep the suspect alive so that they could answer to their charges in court and then pay the price for their crimes.

On top of all of this, even if you run of rounds with a standard 12-gauge shotgun, the gun can be used as a club. Butt-strokes smashes, and heavy thrusts can prove to be a serious deterrent to anyone who is behaving in a threatening manner.

Not Getting Softer

The one thing that no one can accuse LEOs of being, is being softer on suspects. If anything, the loss of the shotgun as the primary weapon may or may not offer more protection for officers. The one thing you can, however, count on, is that today’s officers are being placed in the position of being forced to use deadly force in far too many situations where a shotgun may have been able to prevent unnecessary loss of life. This is something well worth thinking about as you set out to equip your officers in the future.

With more law enforcement agencies across the country are equipping their officers with body cameras as a way to monitor their officers’ interactions with the public, more of these devices are finding their way into our public schools. While this has become quite popular with many, there are others that question there use and how it might affect the privacy of students.

Best Behavior
Worth noting is that most people tend to be on their best behavior if they know they are being recorded. At the same time, the footage captured can be used as evidence in the case of criminal proceedings, including those involving students of any age. The recordings could either prove the accused’s guilt or innocence.

During the Obama administration a series of government grants encouraged by public support and a suite of new laws, police agencies were able to purchase 50,000 body cams across the nations. At that time most were issued to officers who are not equipped with a vehicle or whose vehicle did not contain recording equipment.

This of course led to the introduction of body cameras to school resource officers, bringing them into the school environment. Officers typically do not walk around with their cameras turned on, instead they turn them on when interacting with students or they are investigating a complaint or situation.

Not Enough Justification
At the time, many felt there simply is not enough violence or criminal activity in our schools to justify the use of body cameras by school resource officers. Instead, organizations such as the ACLU are more worried about the privacy of our students than they are about protecting their safety.

In light of the spate of school shooting in the past few years and the increasing violence in our schools, the use of body cams may soon find its way into every school in the country. To be sure the cameras make officers far more accountable for their behavior, but in most schools, this is not a problem.

Other fears espoused by the ACLU are that once the footage has been captured and becomes a matter of public record, it could have a lasting negative impact on the student who got into a simple fight or simply made a stupid mistake. However, keep in mind that while on duty in schools the cameras are not left turned on endlessly recording the students. It must be activated by the officer who must have justification for doing so.

As of this time, the National Association of School Resource Officers has yet to take a stance on the use of body cameras by officers. In the end, the public has a major decision to make. When you stop to think about the fact most schools now have security cameras all over recording the students, the use of a body camera by the school resource officer is simply an extension of this and is designed to protect the students just as much as it is to protect the officer. Hopefully the future will see the institution of body cams on all school resource officers as yet another step in protecting our children.

Last year the Supreme court finally decided to weigh in on the use of a suspect’s cell phone record to track his travels. The more the digital world is taking over, the more police officers around the nation are trying to find the best ways to make use of technology in capturing and convicting criminals. But, it seems there is a limit to how far this is allowed to go, and four months is just too long.

Following an intense oral argument, all nine of the Justices appeared to be divided along what can only be described as unusual lines. This being said, most of the Justices seemed to agree that using a suspect’s cell phone to track their travels for 127 days constituted a violation of their privacy and amounted to no less than unreasonable search.

At the time of the discussion, it remained unclear as to whether the Court would simply decide to limit how long law enforcement officers would be permitted to use a suspect’s cell phone records to track him or if they would simply rule that all cell phone records are private and as such could not be used by any member of law enforcement at any level with an appropriate warrant.

Hampering Law Enforcement Efforts
According to the U.S. government, deciding against allowing open access to this information could seriously hamper investigations into events such as abducted children, bomb threats, murders, or robberies when the suspect is unknown. In situations such as this, investigators often rely on the data they can obtain from cell phone tower records to help narrow down the list of people who were in the area at the time of the crime.

The problem is that officers are not likely to have enough information available to support probable cause and thus be able to obtain a warrant for the suspect in mind and of course, his cell phone. Prior to this, officers would need to obtain a warrant before they could listen in on phone calls made by suspects and more recently view any downloaded content on their smartphones. All this is protected under the 4th Amendment.

Yet at the same time, the courts have allowed officers to access bank and phone records without the need for a warrant. They say this is because the customers knowingly made the calls and wrote the checks, and the records were all held by a private company, not the U.S. government. Today’s systems allow for 24/7 tracking that can easily be seen as an invasion of privacy such as protected under the 4th Amendment.

The battle for who is right in this situation is likely to rage on as both sides have valid points. It seems that as technology continues to advance, private citizens are seeing much of their privacy, either disappearing or becoming in jeopardy of being lost in the shuffle. Yet at the same time, law enforcement officers need to have access to the latest technology if they are to be able to do their jobs and protect those same citizens who are worried about their privacy. No final decision has yet been made, but is expected to come soon.

By now every active or retired police officer across the nation, along with most citizens, is more than well-aware of the problems departments in every nook and cranny are having with recruiting and retaining officers.

Extreme Attrition Levels
If you watch the news today (and who doesn’t anymore), you must have seen the headlines screaming about Nursing shortages and the massive lack of teachers in the country. But, very little is being said about the drastic shortage police departments are experiencing in qualified law enforcement officers. The reality, is that the shortage of qualified LEOs is higher by percentage than either teachers or nurses.

For anyone who is interested in becoming a member of law enforcement, this drastic shortage means that depending on where you live, you should have no problem finding several to choose. However, for anyone interested in becoming a member of law enforcement, there are some very good reasons why there is such a shortage.

Low Pay
With so many more people earning at least undergraduate degrees, the starting salary of most LEOs no longer comes close to matching those being offered in other areas of employment. While this might be the case at the entry level, many who turn away from this career field fail to take into account the career possibilities, benefits, and retirement it has to offer.

Minor Infractions
As society becomes more tolerant of minor crimes and the use of marijuana is legal in some states and decriminalized in others, making it harder for departments to find qualified individuals as potential candidates. Simple things like using marijuana, which might be perfectly legal in a particular state will keep anyone from employment in the field of criminal justice.

Too Many Video Games
Today’s youth is far more obsessed with a sedentary lifestyle involving playing video game, online gaming, watching TV, pretty much anything but being active. This has led to an epidemic of obesity and low levels of physical fitness. When you consider how rigorous the average day in a law enforcement officer’s duty cycle requires a very high level of physical fitness. Finding people who meet the necessary standards is becoming increasingly difficult, further reducing the number of available candidates.

Poor Credit
Most departments run a background check that includes a credit report. Although simply having a low credit score may not be cause to decline an applicant, other issues can. These might include an extreme debt to income ratio where the person’s income would not be sufficient to cover his debts. They can also include a person who has multiple accounts in collections.

The Early Bird
To anyone who is interested in the field of law enforcement or criminal, the best things they can do to ensure they are a suitable candidate, is to plan ahead. This means avoiding the pitfalls of “legal” pot, exercising, working out, eating healthy, and of course keeping your credit and finances in good shape. Advice to those currently in law enforcement can and should pass on to the children and anyone else they know who is considering law enforcement.

There for a little while it seemed like you couldn’t turn on the news without hearing about a fast food worker refusing to serve a police officer. For a while, the problem seemed to have quietened down, rude signs went away, and no one was refused service. But, that ugly old snake seems to be raising its head again, albeit we hope for a much shorter time.

Dateline Sumiton, Alabama
It seems like two employees at a Little Caesars Pizza restaurant refused to serve one of the local police officers. Officer Ronnie Phillips of the Dora PD with 20 years in law enforcement and a Navy veteran posted his unpleasant experience on Facebook. It seems that Phillips was on his way home from work wearing his uniform and driving his official vehicle when he pulled up to the drive through window. At this point two female employees refused to take his order or his money.

Phillips posted this comment on Facebook, “My family and I have been coming here since they opened several years ago!!!! I have NEVER in my entire life done anything, don’t know that I’ve ever even seen these females before. I can assure u I will never come back to this store!!!! People tell police that we are supposed to be thick skinned and not let stuff get to us!!!! It just…… well honestly PISSES ME OFF!!!”

An Immediate Investigation
An immediate investigation was launched by Little Caesars Corporate offices resulting in the immediate termination of the two female employees in question. Jill Proctor, Little Caesars Corporate Communications Manager, told Fox News, ” Two employees did refuse service to the police officer. We don’t tolerate this. We are proud to serve those who tirelessly serve us, and we always strive to do our best.”

Little Caesars then treated the entire Dora PD to free pizza as a way to show their appreciation and support. Then they went a step further by offering free pizza to every LEO current and retired in the Birmingham metro area. The response was overwhelming, Proctor stated, ” We enjoyed serving hundreds of law enforcement officers and their families that day!”

Sadly, Not the Only One
The trend is back and definitely seems to be on the rise as those we are sworn to serve and protect continue to turn their anger on us. Consider these three recent examples, in Florida a McDonald’s employee “feigned disgust” and refused to serve a police officer, a second McDonalds employee in Virginia was fired after refusing to serve a police officer, and a few months ago a Dunkin Donuts employee in NYC told two NYPD officers that he “doesn’t serve cops.”

Is this trend going to continue? It seems that the more strained the overall mental status of the country becomes; the more people are looking for ways to vent their anger. Unfortunately, as most of you are only too aware, these same people expect you to come to their aid when they are robbed or assaulted. What can you do, respond just as if they were any other citizen in town. There is a an old adage that goes, “You can attract more flies with honey than you can with vinegar”, it’s a little like the old smother them with kindness idea. Perhaps one day people will no longer behave in this manner and will once again appreciate those who put themselves in harm’s way every time they go to work. Until then, there are plenty of other places to grab a cup of coffee or a burger.