IFF - Lessons from Blue on Blue Shooting Studies

[Excaliber]

Some very interesting research has recently been published in the Force Science News regarding findings from studies of incidents in which LEO's were involved in confrontations where other LEO's and were either shot by mistake, or had close calls.

The findings may increase understanding of some of the issues addressed in recent discussions here, including the thread on the recent tragedy at the Nevada Costco. The actions recommended for officers who find themselves on the wrong side of a potential misidentification situation can be readily adapted for CHL holder use.

[Fangs]

EDIT: Double posted.

[Fangs]

Most relevant info, I added the bold :

Tactical considerations. Based on input from “police executives, trainers, and tactical experts,” the task force offers certain “excellent basic rules” to help prevent an officer-on-officer confrontation from escalating to deadly force.

If you are an officer (or CHL holder) who’s challenged while out of uniform (not wearing sash/badge/tiara), the report advises:

“1. When you hear the command, ‘Police! Don’t move!’ assume the command is addressed to YOU, not just the suspect you are pursuing. Lock yourself in position. Don’t move.

“2. Resist ‘reflexive spin,’ the natural tendency to turn towards the voice that is confronting you, as even the turn of your head may begin to bring your weapon around causing the confronting officer to feel threatened.

“3. Use your voice to identify yourself loudly and clearly as a police officer (CHL holder).

“4. Obey the commands of the challenging officer, including a command to drop your weapon, and do not make any movement without the permission of the challenging officer; regardless of your rank or position (or really cool ninja skills), the uniformed officer is in command.”

[Vic]

3. Use your voice to identify yourself loudly and clearly as a (CHL holder).


I'm having a hard time imagining this one.

Picture any scenario involving an armed bad guy, yourself with a drawn handgun, and one or more police officers. The officer shouts a command to stop and/or drop your weapon. It seems to me that any other action that does not fulfill those demands is potentially fatal. I cannot imagine that the police, at that particular moment, give a hoot whether or not you have a CHL. Telling them so is wasted effort.

Maybe I'm getting the steps out of order, and you'd identify yourself as a CHL after complying.

[Excaliber]

3. Use your voice to identify yourself loudly and clearly as a (CHL holder).


I'm having a hard time imagining this one.

Picture any scenario involving an armed bad guy, yourself with a drawn handgun, and one or more police officers. The officer shouts a command to stop and/or drop your weapon. It seems to me that any other action that does not fulfill those demands is potentially fatal. I cannot imagine that the police, at that particular moment, give a hoot whether or not you have a CHL. Telling them so is wasted effort.

Maybe I'm getting the steps out of order, and you'd identify yourself as a CHL after complying.

"Police Officer" makes good sense for an LEO. "CHL" is not likely to be as universally recognized. Substituting "complainant" or "victim" might give you better results.

[ELB]

3. Use your voice to identify yourself loudly and clearly as a (CHL holder).


I'm having a hard time imagining this one.

etc...

I think you are right. Just say "police officer" like it says in the procedure. Forget stuff like "CHL," "victim," "good guy", whatever. The cop needs to hear something that has meaning to him. It doesn't have to be documented up front, it just has to introduce enough doubt in his mind to keep him from shooting.

[Excaliber]

3. Use your voice to identify yourself loudly and clearly as a (CHL holder).


I'm having a hard time imagining this one.

etc...

I think you are right. Just say "police officer" like it says in the procedure. Forget stuff like "CHL," "victim," "good guy", whatever. The cop needs to hear something that has meaning to him. It doesn't have to be documented up front, it just has to introduce enough doubt in his mind to keep him from shooting.

You may want to reconsider.

If you tell an officer you're an LEO when you're not, he won't be amused. If you weren't in trouble before, you will be then.

[Beiruty]

3. Use your voice to identify yourself loudly and clearly as a (CHL holder).


I'm having a hard time imagining this one.

etc...

I think you are right. Just say "police officer" like it says in the procedure. Forget stuff like "CHL," "victim," "good guy", whatever. The cop needs to hear something that has meaning to him. It doesn't have to be documented up front, it just has to introduce enough doubt in his mind to keep him from shooting.

Claiming you are a Police Officer when you are not can result in an arrest, jail time and felony too. Just freeze, if you already pulled your pistol then drop it to the ground and follow commands.

[ELB]

Claiming you are a Police Officer when you are not can result in an arrest, jail time and felony too. Just freeze, if you already pulled your pistol then drop it to the ground and follow commands.

At the point you find yourself at the muzzle of police weapon, this is a trivial consideration, and not terribly likely anyway. Playing Barney Fife and pulling over people with your blue light, yeah, you are going to see some charges. Saving your own butt at the tail end of a SD shooting -- the first priority is NOT getting shot by the responding police officer. Everything else can take care of itself later.

Farnam (a police officer, btw) actually recommended this to us in a slightly different context. Out of the dozen police officers in his classes along with us citizens, he got no pushback and lots of agreement. Specifically, "POLICE DON"T SHOOT!" Police get snippy about it later, your lawyer can challenge them to prove you didn't say "PLEASE DON"T SHOOT." But again, you are alive to argue about it.

[mgood]

When you shout "POLICE, DON'T SHOOT!" You can later claim that you were addressing them as police. "Police, don't shoot," rather than, "Hey you, don't shoot."
Will they buy it, probably not. But it introduces some plausible deniability.

Not saying I recommend this, just something to think about.

[Excaliber]

When you shout "POLICE, DON'T SHOOT!" You can later claim that you were addressing them as police. "Police, don't shoot," rather than, "Hey you, don't shoot."
Will they buy it, probably not. But it introduces some plausible deniability.

Not saying I recommend this, just something to think about.

You might want to resolve your decision on this prior to becoming involved in an incident. The question won't look any easier then.

If you decide to go with this tactic, be sure to let us know how that works out for you. If at that point you find yourself in a position where communication with folks outside the walls is difficult, please ask your attorney to manage that detail for you.

[jester]

If you decide to go with this tactic, be sure to let us know how that works out for you. If at that point you find yourself in a position where communication with folks outside the walls is difficult, please ask your attorney to manage that detail for you.

What offense do you propose he will be charged with, assuming this happens in Texas? http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/

[joe817]

If you decide to go with this tactic, be sure to let us know how that works out for you. If at that point you find yourself in a position where communication with folks outside the walls is difficult, please ask your attorney to manage that detail for you.

What offense do you propose he will be charged with, assuming this happens in Texas? http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/

Impersonating a Public Servant(Police Officer) is a 3rd degree felony. See Penal Code Chapter 37.11:

Sec. 37.11. IMPERSONATING PUBLIC SERVANT. (a) A person commits an offense if he:

(1) impersonates a public servant with intent to induce another to submit to his pretended official authority or to rely on his pretended official acts; or

(2) knowingly purports to exercise any function of a public servant or of a public office, including that of a judge and court, and the position or office through which he purports to exercise a function of a public servant or public office has no lawful existence under the constitution or laws of this state or of the United States.

(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.

Like Excaliber & many of us on the forum, I have book marked the Texas Statutes for reference. Sometimes a pain to look something up, but it straight from the horse's mouth:

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/?link=PE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jester]

I saw that too, and if the statute stopped after the word "servant" it would be a different story, but merely impersonating a public servant doesn't look like it meets all the elements of the offense.

However, if someone pretends to be a cop and makes traffic stops ("submit to his pretended official authority") or pretends to be the health inspector and tells a restaurant to close ("his pretended official acts") those look like they meet the elements of the offense.

Which doesn't even address the question of whether saying "POLICE. DON'T SHOOT." is impersonating a public official. Compare to "WAITER. THE CHECK."

[Excaliber]

I saw that too, and if the statute stopped after the word "servant" it would be a different story, but merely impersonating a public official doesn't look like it meets all the elements of the offense.

However, if someone pretends to be a cop and makes traffic stops ("submit to his pretended official authority") or pretends to be the health inspector and tells a restaurant to close ("his pretended official acts") those look like they meet the elements of the offense.

Which doesn't even address the question of whether saying "POLICE. DON'T SHOOT." is impersonating a public official. Compare to "WAITER. THE CHECK."

I am aware of the technical elements of the statute, and I agree that making the statement you suggest does not rise to the level necessary to solidly meet all the elements of the offense. I do not agree that you'd be safe from being arrested and going to jail for it, and even as a retired LEO I wouldn't use that tactic.

With either a sympathetic DA or excellent (read expensive) legal representation, you may eventually either have charges dropped or be acquitted at trial. But there's a real good chance you'd be arrested initially because the real world is much sloppier than legal theory.

The reality is that many street officers are not fully up on the really fine points of every one of the voluminous laws they're charged with enforcing, as we see not infrequently in incidents recounted here. Most are pretty sharp on the offenses they deal with day in and day out, but impersonating a public servant isn't in that group in most agencies. In 20 years I saw so few cases I could count them on the fingers of one hand and have fingers left over.

If what you do is reasonably close to some of the elements they remember for an offense of this type, to which they're particularly sensitive by the way, I'd give you at least a 65% chance of taking the ride and being initially charged unless one of them happens to be studying for a promotion exam and just finished covering the nuances of that statute.

Trouble and expense aside, this would likely muddy the waters on the rest of your case which may not be as clean cut as you'd like either for any one of a million reasons. I don't think it would be helpful to the "squeaky clean good guy" image you'd like to present to the grand jury considering the much more serious charges that could come out of a self defense situation.

Consider this approach by the ADA at your aggravated assault / manslaughter / murder trial: "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, if this man would brazenly lie directly to the first responding units about being a police officer, don't you think he'd lie about allegedly being robbed by Mr. ________, who only asked him for directions, and shooting him totally without justification as you heard his brother testify just moments ago, because he's prejudiced against people of (fill in the blank) ethnicity?" And your highly persuasive, incontrovertible counter to that might be?

If you're the adventurous type who is willing to invest everything you have in a test case that, if successful, may advance Texas jurisprudence with new case law on the fine points of what constitutes impersonating a public servant after years of hard fought battles, by all means have at it. I'll follow your case periodically in the news.

Just don't count on me to break the trail on that for you. My own strategies are built around coming out of an incident with as little life disruption and cost as possible.