DPS Trooper and Ms. Sandra Bland; A Police Supervisor's Take

By now many of you have either seen the video or watched a news story regarding the arrest and eventual death of Ms. Sandra Bland in Waller County, Texas.  I am sure that most have already formed an opinion.  Well, as a police supervisor, I too have an opinion.

For those of you that haven't seen the entire video, here it is. 

Now, let me state this up front.  The trooper added to the problem himself by not deescalating the situation from the start.  But, was he justified in making his arrest?  Yes he was.  The law requires mere probable cause to make an arrest.  In this case, Ms. Bland committed a traffic violation that could have resulted in her receiving a warning, a citation, or an arrest.  The trooper states later on that he merely was issuing Ms. Bland a warning.  Unfortunately, he did not mention that when he approached her.

The trooper immediately noticed that Ms. Bland was "irritated" over being stopped in the first place.  This has set the trooper’s mindset that he may have a problem with her later on.  By the way, I am only speculating considering how this entire encounter unfolded.  After the trooper receives Ms. Bland's identification, he moves to his patrol car to complete his warning citation and check Ms. Bland for wants or warrants.  It is his second encounter with Ms. Bland that suddenly takes a different turn.

The trooper tells Ms. Bland that she seems "irritated," once again correctly identifying her emotion.  The trooper could have, and should have, immediately deescalated this situation by telling her she was only receiving a warning.  He further could have simply ignored her emotional state and continued to do his job.  Instead, he decided, for whatever reason, that Ms. Bland was going to jail.  I believe this is why he has decided she needed to step out of the vehicle.  He is also annoyed by the fact she is smoking in her car in front of him.  To him, I am guessing this is disrespectful.  As such, the trooper will not be disrespected.

Once Ms. Bland decided she was not going to get out of her car, she continued to escalate the situation even further.  Her attitude has made this matter worse.  The trooper then gives her several verbal commands to exit the vehicle.  He is legal in doing this, by the way.  It is not until the trooper draws his taser and tells Ms. Bland, "I will light you up" that she decides to get out of the car.  Now Ms. Bland is in full view of the dash camera and she is extremely verbal and still noncompliant with the trooper's lawful orders.  The two then move off camera and we only have the audio to go from.  The trooper has called for back up and one officer, a black female, arrives to assist him.  The struggle that ensues is not visible from the camera.  It also sounds as if another person has walked up on the scene that is most likely a citizen.  I state this because I hear the trooper tell someone to back off and leave.  I doubt that he is saying that to an officer.  I also do not know if that person was ever identified.  My guess is the person is indeed now known to law enforcement and has provided a statement.

Once Ms. Bland is now in custody and placed in a patrol car, the trooper approaches Ms. Bland's vehicle and is now back in view of the dash camera.  The trooper tells the first arriving officer that Ms. Bland kicked him.  At that time, the officer points to the area on the trooper's leg where Ms. Bland allegedly kicked him.  At this point, I believe resisting arrest was an appropriate charge.

Some time during the arrest, Ms. Bland states that she has epilepsy.  I have no reason to believe that is an untrue statement.  But, I wonder if the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences knew that information prior to conducting the autopsy.  It would be interesting to know for several reasons.  None of them will be discussed here, however.

Two officers search Ms. Bland's car and it does not appear as if any contraband or evidence of any other crime was recovered.  As a wrecker driver pulls up to the scene, the trooper can be heard talking to someone on the phone.  I am guessing he is talking to his supervisor.  He tells the person on the other end of the phone that he was trying to calm her down.  I don't believe his tactics helped.  In fact, I think his tactics made the entire situation worse.  Ms. Bland does request to be seen by EMS prior to being transported to jail.  She is treated at the scene and later transported to the jail.

Because I don't have the police report, there is no way I can determine exactly what the trooper wrote in his report.  But, I will assume that he knew he was recorded, so the incident should have been accurately portrayed in his report.

Now, any police officer that has worked traffic is likely to have an encounter like this one.  In fact, I believe it happens much more than we know.  This trooper is obviously a young trooper and has not been on the streets very long.  I don't say this to demean or disrespect the trooper; I am just pointing that out to make a point.  Officers who have several years on the streets learn to deescalate these situations much quicker.  They realize early on that their own attitudes and demeanor can be interpreted as aggressive or disrespectful as well.  I am also certain that after reviewing this video, his supervisors believe the trooper did not act in accordance with their training or policy regarding de-escalation tactics.  I submit that he needs additional training in this area.  I think relieving him of duty was a knee jerk reaction intended to calm down the public after Ms. Bland's death in the jail.  I do not see where any of this incident contributed to Ms. Bland's death.  Again, I am merely basing this interview on nothing more than the video and conversations heard on the video.

The trooper, although he contributed to this incident, did not act in a way inconsistent with what another officer would have done given the same or similar circumstances and the same time on the streets as he.  I think once the trooper is retrained, he should receive whatever discipline his department hands out and get back to work.

One thing not discussed in any of the news stories I have seen or read discusses what I have labeled the "Ferguson Affect."  This nonsense of "hands up don't shoot" has found its way into every aspect of policing.  Police are bad.  White police are racist and worse.  Policing is a very difficult job.  This traffic stop illustrates it clearly.

Ms. Bland, had she simply kept her cool, could have moved on down the road and filed a complaint against the trooper later on.  She could also have demanded a supervisor come to the scene.  People will demand to speak to a supervisor if their phone bills are messed up, or if their television signal is weak, or if they're overcharged in the local super market.  But, they seem to forget all about that when they feel they've been unjustly handled at a police scene.  Ms. Bland did not have any right to resist her arrest.  Period.

The DPS trooper should have immediately deescalated the scene by empathizing with Ms. Bland about her irritation with the traffic stop.  I guess the trooper has had little experience being stopped on traffic.  I understand the position of both Ms. Bland and the trooper.  Who is not irritated when the police stop them?  I get irritated every time.  But, I also understand the trooper's side as I have conducted hundreds of traffic stops over the years.  Two wrongs don't make a right.

A Strong Leader Is Needed For The Baltimore Police Department

So, Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake took the bold step of firing Police Commissioner Anthony W. Batts in Baltimore today.  This is an interesting development.  The Mayor stated that this was a difficult decision for her.  I beg to differ.  I think her most difficult decision still awaits her.  She must now decide who will be her next commissioner.  Considering all the ugly publicity the City of Baltimore has received lately, that will be a very tough post to fill.  This particular article will touch on a couple of subjects.  First, I will discuss some leadership issues that I have noticed that the new commissioner must tackle almost immediately.  Second, I will discuss some policing strategies that I feel would benefit the good citizens of Baltimore while reducing the violent crime rate.

As everyone by now knows, there are a number of leadership issues that became apparent to the nation after the death of Freddie Gray.  Now, let me state clearly from the start.  This article will not address any of that case.  Instead, I mention it only because it is the case that brought the City of Baltimore to the national scene, this time.

As most of the readers here already know, city officials like the mayor or district attorney are elected.  As such, they choose their leaders of the various divisions or departments.  These are known as political appointments.  Typically, the people assigned to those positions serve at the “pleasure of the mayor,” or other elected official.  So, when the going gets tough, the heads of those departments or divisions are typically held accountable.  The politicians are held accountable only once their terms are up and they run for re-election.  The voters may then decide if the person has held up their end of the bargain.  So, my position is that Mr. Batts was a scapegoat.  Having said that, he did deserve to lose his job.  I’ll speak more about that later.  I also believe that Mayor Rawlings-Blake should also resign.  She will not, but she should.

When the citizens of Baltimore decided to riot, it was immediately apparent that the officers were told to “stand down.”  I don’t care what any politician, elected official, appointed chief or commissioner says.  Those officers reacted as though they were on orders to back off.  This was a travesty.  As a result, over 200 officers were injured while thugs were allowed to throw rocks, bricks, bottles and other deadly missiles at the officers.  Additionally, these thugs were given free reign to destroy property wherever they saw fit.  The action taken by the police officers on the street went against their DNA.  Police officers want to take action to prevent injury or property damage, especially to innocent people.  They were denied that ability. 

This decision immediately impacted the entire police department negatively.  I am not talking about what the public saw.  I am talking about morale within the locker rooms, the patrol cars, the stations, and the coffee shops.  Cops were afraid to do their jobs because they KNEW no one had their backs.  They had no support from their upper command staff or city officials.  Once troops have lost confidence in their leaders, there is nothing left.  Morale takes a nosedive. 

Supervisors don’t want to supervise at all, at this point.  Why should they?  They are the ones that will be left holding the proverbial “shit bag” when it’s all over.  Troops will then decide that proactive policing is simply not worth their efforts.  Why should they proactively go after criminal activity when they know they’re automatically guilty of some kind of police brutality before they ever get the chance to explain themselves?  So, they stop doing proactive police work.

The cops that weren’t proactive in the beginning are even less likely to do anything now.  They weren’t doing much before; they’re doing even less now.  Once again, this also negatively affects morale.  So, Commissioner Batts had to go.  All of this happened on his watch.

So, the mayor has now named Deputy Police Commissioner Kevin Davis as the interim commissioner.  I am certain that he will eventually be named the commissioner because I don’t expect there to be too many applicants for that position as long as the current mayor is still in her post.  I will also say that the morale in the Baltimore Police Department will not improve any time soon for the same reason.

As a political appointment, Commissioner Davis’s decisions will be motivated by his desire to stay employed.  Additionally, someone in that command staff made the decision, and passed that decision downward, to not take any police action during the initial stages of the riots that allowed several officers to get injured and cause millions of dollars in property damage.  Because Commissioner Davis is only the interim, I doubt he will have the ability to choose his entire staff.

The bottom line is this; the entire command staff needs a major adjustment.  No one in the Baltimore Police Department can clean house the way it needs to be.  A person from outside that agency with strong leadership skills is needed to get that city and police department back on their feet.  That is because an outsider does not have any personal relationships within the organization.  There are no loyalties to worry about and that will enable the most qualified candidates to be selected for the appropriate jobs in that department.

Now, for some strategies to help get Baltimore back to a much calmer city.  First, department heads and city leaders must meet with communities and explain to them what their strategies are.  All of these strategies have to include communities and their leaders.  After all, they live there; they need to have their voices heard and their suggestions considered.  This is how leaders gain confidence and trust in the community.

Secondly, another strategy is get the proactive officers back to policing.  There are some great cops in the City of Baltimore that are chomping at the bit to get back to arresting crooks.  They need to be allowed to do that.  And most importantly, they need their leadership to back them up.  When cops are proactive, they are perceived as more aggressive.  More internal affairs complaints are filed.  Fine…. Let the complaints come.  However, I would ensure that all of these officers are equipped with body cameras before other officers in lower crime areas.  Keep in mind, I don’t know if the Baltimore Police Department has enough cameras for every officer.

Thirdly, training is another very important consideration.  All officers would need immediate training on how to appropriately respond to hostile citizens.  They would also receive refresher training on de-escalation techniques in an effort to calm fears from both the public and the officers.

Fourthly, the Freddie Gray incident needs to be thoroughly investigated from a training standpoint.  Every action officers took on that day needs to be looked at and evaluated for proper and improper techniques.  The entire department would then be trained on that case specifically.

Fifthly, a complete review of department policies needs a comprehensive review.  Should adjustments need to be made, they should be done forthwith.  The department would then receive training in that arena as well.

Finally, every officer and supervisor would be held accountable for his or her actions.  People make mistakes and cops are people.  Just because a video emerges that shows what appears to be a major beat down does not mean that’s what happened.  But, if it’s discovered that mistakes were made, appropriate discipline or training should occur.

This article only scratches the surface of the entire issue.  The next commissioner has his or her work cut out for them.  Best of luck!

Beat Cops Can Solve Chicago's Violence

So, once again the public is talking about violence in Chicago after July 4.  Last year, the weekend was one of the most deadly in Chicago’s history.  This year, the violence was down, but still extremely deadly.   Experts all over the country are now debating the causes.  However, has anyone asked the cops?  What about the citizens that live in these violent neighborhoods?  This article will focus on some common sense solutions that will put an end to the violence.

First, one of the biggest arguments presented today is the access to firearms.  This is only partially true.  The problem is that criminals have the easiest access and Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country.  So, how does law enforcement combat that?  Cops are not in the business of passing laws.  Cops are in the business of enforcing those laws by arresting offenders.  Once a person is arrested, they are then placed into the “system” to face whatever justice is headed their way.  In general, cops don’t really care what the charge is, they just know that once the lock up a suspect, they don’t want to have to deal with him or her in the near future.

But, what generally happens is the person arrested is allowed to post bond.  Now, most arrests for possession of a firearm are minor offenses, so bond is indeed appropriate.  But, what about when a case makes it to a court and a prosecutor dismisses the case?  The person is then simply let out of jail.  They may not get their weapon back, but it will not be long before they can get one off the streets.  There is a huge black market for guns.  This is most especially true in areas where firearms are made more difficult to obtain.  Passing more laws in an effort to curb gun violence is not going to solve the problem in Chicago.  Getting rid of the black market for guns would be more effective.  The black market is a subject for another article and will not be discussed here.

Second, and in my mind more prominent, is the problem with gang violence.  Most of the shootings in Chicago have been gang related.  This is a much bigger problem.  One strategy for officers to combat gang violence is for city leaders to allow officers to be much more aggressive in gang related activity.  This is very simple to do.  The strategies involve zero tolerance on gang related crime.  Beat officers know where the gang members hang out, where they live, where they commit their crimes and who they are.  Policies that are passed that prohibit officers from aggressively going after criminals of this type make the community much more dangerous.  Officers must be allowed to go after gang members wherever they are at any time of day or night.

Another strategy closely related zero tolerance is the so-called “Broken Windows Theory.”  What this refers to is the fact that neighborhoods that look run down, stay run down.  When lawns aren’t mowed, trash is allowed to pile up, homes are allowed to sit in disrepair for months on end; the neighborhood tends to draw more criminal activity.  This includes graffiti, vandalism, gang violence, thefts and burglaries, to name a few.  When officers are allowed to target these kinds of areas by issuing citations for minor offenses, ticketing home owners for not keeping up their yards, locating and citing property owners for abandoned properties and the like, the neighborhoods see almost instant results.  The reasons for this are numerous.  First, the public sees officers in their neighborhoods.  The officers and community then begin to have normal conversations on a daily basis.

The area begins looking much cleaner and organized, thus lending the community to feel more together.  This sense of community begins to build as well.  More people then start talking to officers about crime trends, suspicious people or vehicles, and they take ownership in their community.   The partnership is then more solidified when residents notice crime dropping in their area.  This is called simply Community Policing.

Thirdly, legislators need to ensure that stiffer penalties are attached to gang related crimes.  Lock these criminals up for longer periods of time.  It may not be illegal to be a gang member, but it should carry heavier sentences if a gang member commits a crime.

These simple strategies only touch the surface.  Much deeper is the root cause of gang membership and the violence it produces.  That is a discussion for another article.  The bottom line here is that the Chicago leadership needs, for their own city’s sake, to listen to the beat officers.  They know exactly what they need and how to solve the violent crime issue.  Let them do what they are trained to do and give them the support they need.

Security response to a large incident: How much is too much?

A report of shots fired at the Navy Yard in Washington, D. C. brought a huge response from law enforcement from all areas.  The response was immediate and overwhelming.  As it turns out, the report was false.  The incident remains under investigation at the time of this writing. 

Almost immediately, the media began broadcasting what little information they could gather.  However, due to my security and law enforcement back ground, I was watching and listening for other things.  One thing I noticed right away was how much the reporters talked about the overwhelming response.  That got me to thinking.  Following, I will explain some of the dangers associated with such a response.  I will also explain the positives.  But, let me make one thing very clear.  Security is not 100% full proof.  I don’t care how many layers of security a person, business, ship yard, or military installation has it is not protected from a determined criminal or terrorist. 

One news program noted that there had been a number of false reports over the past 30 days.  The reporter insinuated that law enforcement and intelligence officials were over reacting.  Were they?  I say no they were not.  Here is why.

False alarms are part of the law enforcement business.  Suspicious people are often gone on arrival (GOA).  Burglary alarms are most often false alarms.  Suspicious vehicles often belong in the area they were spotted or they too are GOA.  The question then is just who is making these reports?  Could it be a truly concerned citizen?  Could it be an anonymous caller.  What about a person that is just measuring a response to help them determine time lines, number of respondents, or actions of those respondents?

In an incident such as the one at the Navy Yard, remember that just three years ago 12 people were killed in that same building due to an active shooter.  Not to mention, the July 4 celebrations and elevated terrorist alert has people on edge.  So, the response was huge.

Now, if a terrorist were to be the person reporting this shooting, what might he/she be looking for?  First, how many people responded?  Where did they come from?  How were they armed?  Where did they stage?  What did they do about evacuating the facility?  Where were they evacuees sent?  What about the media?  Where were they staged?  Why is any of this important? There is a very simple answer to the last question.

By measuring the response to a false report, a terrorist may now have new targets that are now exposed.  If a terrorist wanted to cause great harm in front of the media and get the best exposure, this is the time to do it.  Remember, even with law enforcement all over the place, these terrorists are committed to their cause.  Death to them is martyrdom.  So, a terrorist, or other criminal, could inflict serious casualties in a very short period of time.

Law enforcement leaders are aware of this threat.  They are constantly vigilant to the possibility someone is lurking in the crowd looking to inflict harm upon the masses.  This is why the response is so overwhelming.

Again, no security is 100% guaranteed.  But rest assured, every precaution that could be taken is considered.  Remember to be vigilant and pay attention to your surroundings; especially if you are evacuated for such an incident.  Report any suspicious or unusual events to local law enforcement.