**U.S. Department of Justice**

Community Relations Service

## 

## Principles of Good Policing: 

## Avoiding Violence Between Police and Citizens

(Revised September 2003)

www.usdoj.gov/crs

# About the Community Relations Service

The Community Relations Service (CRS), a unique component of the U.S.
Department of Justice, seeks to prevent or resolve community conflicts
and tensions arising from actions, policies, and practices perceived to
be discriminatory on the basis of race, color, or national origin. CRS
provides services, including conciliation, mediation, and technical
assistance, directly to people and their communities to help them
resolve conflicts that tear at the fabric of an increasingly racially
and ethnically diverse society.

CRS does not take sides among disputing parties and, in promoting the
principles and ideals of nondiscrimination, applies skills that allow
parties to come to their own agreement. In performing this mission, CRS
deploys highly skilled professional conciliators, who are able to assist
people of diverse racial and cultural backgrounds.

Police-citizen conflict accounts for a major portion of the disputes to
which CRS responds. The agency provides a wide range of conciliation and
technical assistance to help prevent or resolve disagreements over
alleged police use of excessive force and other policing issues. CRS
carries out most of its activities informally, but will conduct formal
negotiations if the disputing parties believe that approach offers the
best opportunity for reaching a mutually satisfactory settlement of
their differences.

**www.usdoj.gov/crs**

**U.S. Department of Justice**

Community Relations Service

## 

## Principles of Good Policing: 

## Avoiding Violence Between Police and Citizens

# (Revised September 2003) 

# Foreword

Over the years, the Community Relations Service (CRS) of the U.S.
Department of Justice has assisted police departments and communities
all over the country in coming to grips with the difficult task of
maintaining law and order in a complex and changing multicultural
society. Frequently, these efforts have involved minority citizens'
complaints about police behavior, use of force, and hate groups.

In the following pages of this third edition, the staff of the Community
Relations Service, together with knowledgeable law enforcement
executives, have set out guiding principles that should govern police
work in the community.

The underlying assumption is that a police force and the community it
serves must reach consensus on the values that guide that police force.
Those values, while implicit in our Constitution, must embrace as
clearly as possible the protection of individual life and liberty, and,
at the same time, the measures necessary to maintain a peaceful and
stable society. To accomplish this, a police executive must be familiar
not only with his or her own police culture, but with the community
culture as well, which is no easy task in neighborhoods experiencing
major demographic changes.

The Community Relations Service's involvement in police-citizen violence
stems directly from the CRS mandate to assist in community conflicts
that threaten peaceful race relations in communities. Among the causes
of such disputes, none is more volatile than allegations of unwarranted
police use of deadly force against minority citizens. Even a perception
that police follow this practice is cause for concern, because the
negative impact on police-citizen relations will be the same.

These issues have been a central concern for CRS since its inception.
However, the agency stepped up its programming in this area during the
late 1970s when its caseload began to increase. A number of national
leaders cited police-citizen violence as a serious problem, and several
independent studies indicated that minorities were disproportionately
the victims of police use of deadly force. In 1991, the Rodney King
beating in Los Angeles, videotaped by a citizen, was cause for many
departments and communities to re-examine police values and practices,
again resulting in a major increase in CRS casework in this area. More
recently there have been fatal shootings of African-Americans by
Caucasian police officers, including the deaths of Tyisha Miller in
Riverside, California in 1998; Amadou Diallo in New York City in 2000;
and Timothy Thomas in Cincinnati in 2001.

In 1979, CRS organized one of the first major national conferences to
examine the deadly force issue and the safety of police officers. The
League of United Latin American Citizens and the National Urban League
cosponsored the conference. It involved some of the Nation's top police
executives, national civil rights leaders, criminal justice researchers,
local community leaders, and rank-and-file police officers in extensive
discussions about the use-of-force issue. Those discussions laid the
groundwork for unprecedented cooperation on action programs by
conference participants when they returned to their home cities.

For more than 25 years, CRS has made the development and implementation
of innovative approaches to the deadly force problem---and dissemination
of information through other conferences, training workshops, and
publications---a major focus of its efforts. As one part of that effort
in the mid-1980s, the agency invited four of the Nation's outstanding
law enforcement professionals to join in examining the police function
with an eye toward identifying techniques, tactics, and approaches that
should help to minimize violent police encounters with citizens. Those
professionals were Frank Amoroso, chief of police of Portland, Maine;
Lee P. Brown, chief of police of Houston, Texas; Charles Rodriguez,
professor of criminal justice at Southwest Texas University, and chief
of police of San Antonio, Texas; and Darrel W. Stephens, chief of police
of Newport News, Virginia. This group and CRS's own staff developed the
recommendations and suggestions that were presented in the first
printing of this publication.

This publication is a 2003 revision of the 1993 edition. It maintains
the strong emphasis on police values and their affect on officer
behavior and on the community served by a department. New and expanded
sections in the text and appendices have been included on:

• Community Policing

• Changing Demograpics and Immigrant Patterns

• Hate Crimes

• Principles of Community Policing

• Policing in the Post-September 11 Environment

• Responding to Incidents Involving Allegations of Excessive Use of
Force

It perhaps should be pointed out that CRS is well aware that citizens
bear some of the responsibility for the nature of relations with the
police. In fact, CRS has frequently addressed steps that citizens and
police can take cooperatively to reduce community racial tension in its
field services and publications. The interest here, in this publication,
is in focusing exclusively on the police function, because of its
predominant importance in the overall equation of police-citizen
relations.

Finally, while this publication is directed primarily towards law
enforcement, it is also CRS's intent to encourage law enforcement
executives to use its contents to explore their relationship with
representatives of the communities in which they work. In the Community
Relations Service, we have always appreciated the benefits of a
preventive response versus a reactive one. Police executives will find
this publication helpful in devising techniques to avoid racial conflict
and disharmony in the communities they serve.

# Preface

The relationship between the American public and law enforcement,
particularly its violent nature, has been under continual
re-examination. Police-citizen violence and related concerns are prime
topics of conversation wherever law enforcement professionals gather to
discuss problems. Many police departments have made reviewing their use
of force a top priority. And major civil rights organizations have made
a priority of responding to police use of deadly force.

The dimensions of this issue are also reflected in the amount of
research and analyses devoted to it by criminal justice researchers and
scholarly journals. In addition, even a casual reading of the Nation's
newspapers often yields accounts of confrontations between police and
citizens over the use of deadly force in situations where racial and
ethnic tensions create additional complications or difficulties.
Television news programs sometimes provide dramatic supporting videos,
graphically depicting the resulting tensions in a community.

Why has the relationship between law enforcement and citizens come under
such scrutiny? One reason is the significant number of killings by and
of police officers in recent years. A second factor is changes affecting
municipal and civil liability, which have put cities and employees of
local governments under greater legal jeopardy where use of force is
applied.

Another important factor is a succession of court rulings placing more
restrictions on police use of firearms, including the 1985 Supreme Court
decision in *Tennessee v. Garner*, 471 U.S. 1, which invalidated parts
of many states' rules for shooting at fleeing felons. Still another
reason is the increasing primacy given to preserving life as a value
underlying the concept of policing. There is also a movement to
modernize and improve police work from within the profession itself,
partly in reaction to the above incidents but also as a general response
to larger changes in U.S. society.

Two premises underlie the approaches to policing discussed in this
publication. One is that the police, by virtue of the authority that
society vests in them, have overarching responsibility for the outcome
of encounters with citizens. This in no way ignores the fact that the
police must deal with such groups as criminals, persons under the
influence of alcohol and drugs, law-abiding citizens, and persons with
mental impairment. The second and main premise is that good policing
must take into consideration two equally important factors: the *values*
on which a police department operates, as well as the *practices* it
follows.

In addition to adopting a set of values, it is equally important that
police departments clearly and publicly state those values. This sets
forth a department's philosophy of policing and its commitment to high
standards for all to know and understand. To be significant, these
values must be known to all members of the community as well as all
members of the police department. In addition, a department's values
must incorporate citizens' expectations, desires, and preferences. A
department's policies and practices flow from its values. Without clear
values, it is unlikely that practices will be as well focused as they
should.

Law enforcement practices constitute the second major focus of
*Principles of Good Policing*, taking into account major areas of police
responsibility that can produce incidents that escalate into violence.
In isolating these situations, the publication suggests how procedures,
tactics, and techniques might be modified---or new approaches
implemented---to reduce the number of instances in which potentially
problematic police-citizen encounters become problems in reality. This
publication contains principles, practices, and philosophy that are
applicable for law enforcement of all jurisdictions. *While the terms
"police officer," "officer," "law enforcement," and "department," are
used throughout this publication, they are not intended to exclude the
many other kinds of law enforcement agencies and their personnel, such
as sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, marshals, deputy marshals, rangers,
agents, special agents, and investigators who make up the larger law
enforcement family that can benefit from this publication.*

This publication also takes into account that there are no philosophies
or practices that will anticipate the entire range of human behavior
that officers might encounter in the course of police work. It is also
understood that, ultimately, the police officer's judgment will be the
deciding factor in most cases. However, enough relevant experience and
information exist that officers can be given practical guidance which,
in many instances, will help to avoid situations escalating to violence.

Much recent effort to reduce police-citizen violence has focused
exclusively on imposing tighter restrictions on police use of firearms.
Appropriate firearms restraint is critically important, and the
Community Relations Service (CRS) actively provides technical assistance
to police departments when they review and revise their firearms and use
of force policies. However, many departments have found it more useful
to pursue a number of administrative innovations as a package of
protections to officers, citizens, and crime suspects alike. That,
essentially, is the approach this publication takes.

It should also be emphasized that the safety of police officers is
recognized as a fundamental concern. No responsible citizen expects a
police officer to risk his or her life unnecessarily or foolishly. And
no police chief worthy of the responsibility would adopt policies or
practices that expose officers to undue risk. Reverence for all human
life and safeguarding the guarantees of the Constitution and laws of the
United States are also important values in policing.

CRS's interest is in promoting the adoption of policies and practices
that afford maximum protection to officers and citizens. The content of
this publication, in the final analysis, is based on the principle that
good policing involves a partnership between police and citizens. Police
cannot carry out their responsibility acting alone. And it must also be
emphasized that no police department that permits its officers to use
unnecessary force against citizens can hope to gain their support.

Only when sound values, mutual respect, and trust are shared---among all
groups that make up the community---can the police-citizen partnership
work as it should. The recommendations, suggestions, and observations in
*Principles of Good Policing* are offered to help achieve that bond
between citizens and the police.

Law enforcement agencies have responsibility for the outcome of
encounters with citizens, and good policing involves the values upon
which a department bases its operations.

# Original Task Force

## Community Relations Service Staff

John G. Perez

Regional Director

Dallas, Texas

Chairman

Martin A. Walsh

Regional Director

Boston, Massachusetts

Vice Chairman

Atkins W. Warren

National Administration of Justice Specialist

Washington, D.C.

Gus Taylor

Senior Conciliator

Dallas, Texas

Dennis Wynn

Media Affairs Officer

Washington, D.C.

## Law Enforcement Representatives

Frank E. Amoroso

Chief of Police

Portland, Maine

Lee P. Brown

Chief of Police

Houston, Texas

Charles M. Rodriguez

Professor of Criminal Justice

Southwest Texas University

San Marcos, Texas

Darrel W. Stephens

Executive Director

Police Executive Research Forum

Washington, D.C.

# 2003 Publication Revision Committee

## Community Relations Service Staff

Frank Amoroso

New England Regional Director

Boston, Massachusetts

Daryl S. Borgquist

Media Affairs Officer

National Office

Washington, D.C.

Jonathan Chace

Associate Director

National Office

Washington, D.C.

George E. Henderson

National Office

Attorney

Washington, D.C.

Timothy Johnson

Program Analyst for Administration of Justice

National Office

Washington, D.C.

Ben Lieu

Conciliation Specialist

Mid-Atlantic Regional Office

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Martin A. Walsh

Regional Director

New England Regional Office

Boston, Massachusetts

Atkins W. Warren

Regional Director

Central Regional Office

Kansas City, Missouri

# 1993 Publication Revision Committee

## Community Relations Service Staff

Robert Lamb, Jr., Chairman

Northwest Regional Director

Seattle, Washington

Thomas L. Battles

Conciliation Specialist

Miami Field Office

Miami, Florida

Daryl S. Borgquist

Media Affairs Officer

National Office

Washington, D.C.

George E. Henderson

Attorney

National Office

Washington, D.C.

Julian Klugman

Western Regional Director

San Francisco, California

Scarlet Parham

Alerts Desk Officer

National Office

Washington, D.C.

John G. Perez

Special Assistant to the Director

Dallas, Texas

Martin A. Walsh

New England Regional Director

Boston, Massachusetts

Atkins W. Warren

Central Regional Director

Kansas City, Missouri

# Table of Contents

Foreword iii

Preface v

Original Task Force vii

2003 Publication Revision Committee viii

1993 Publication Revision Committee viii

Values for Good Policing 1

The Role of Police 1

The Police Culture 2

Developing a Set of Values 3

Contemporary Issues in Policing 7

Changing Demographics and Immigration Patterns 8

Policing in the Post-September 11 Environment 8

Police Culture/Police Society 10

Recruitment and Selection 11

Training 14

Policy and Accountability 16

Effective Police Leadership 23

The Socialization of Police Officers 24

Administrative Mechanisms to Impact Department Operations 25

Guidance Through Positive and Negative Reinforcement 26

Community Education 27

Procedures for Effective Policing 29

Principles of Community Policing 29

Police-Community Partnership 31

Using Community Resources 32

Police Accessibility 32

Managing Potentially Violent Circumstances 33

A Conflict Management Approach 33

Negotiation Versus Confrontation 34

Areas of Special Concern 35

Responding to Incidents Involving Allegations of Excessive Use of Force:

A Checklist to Guide Police Executives 38

Checklist for Effective Policing 44

Concluding Statement 45

Bibliography 47

Appendices 53

A. Role of Police 55

B. Community Policing 81

C. Bias-Based Policing 115

D. Use of Force and Alternatives 125

E. Citizen Complaints and Other Redress Systems 161

F. Municipal Liability 215

G. Public Information 221

H. Hate and Bias-Motivated Crimes 229

I. Areas of Special Concern 287

CRS Offices 305

CRS Customer Service Standards Inside Back Cover

# Values for Good Policing

The primary purpose of this publication is to assist law enforcement
agencies in reducing the incidence of violence between police officers
and citizens. From the perspective of the police executive, the
successful accomplishment of that objective should have two major
benefits. First, it should enhance the safety of police officers.
Second, it should foster an atmosphere of cooperation and mutual respect
between the police and the people they serve. The purpose of this
chapter is to provide a basis for assessing a police department to
determine, first of all, if its culture is conducive to reducing violent
confrontations between the police and citizens. Equally important, this
chapter provides a frame of reference which can be used by any police
chief to develop policy, make decisions, implement programs, and,
ultimately guide the manner in which the department delivers police
services to the community.

## The Role of Police

The role of policing has been dynamic since it became a profession in
1829 under Sir Robert Peel in London, England. The relationship between
police and citizens in American society is generally understood as a
progression from the *political era*, when police were introduced in
American cities in the 1840s to the early 1900s; to the *reform era*,
stretching across the middle part of the 20th century from the 1930s to
the 1970s; and then to the *community era* of modern policing since the
1970s.1  Williams and Murphy point out the lack of involvement of
minorities in policing throughout these different eras. Communities of
color were largely powerless during the political era and thus not able
to influence police strategy. During the reform era, police strategy was
determined largely on the basis of law, although communities of color
were generally unprotected.2  In today's community era of policing, one
of the tenets is the requirement for a cohesive community working in
partnership with a responsive police department. Williams and Murphy
state that this precondition does not prevail in many minority
neighborhoods.

The Community Relations Service (CRS) of the U.S. Department of Justice
has cosponsored a number of forums and worked closely with racial and
ethnic police organizations, including the Hispanic American Police
Command Officers Association, National Asian Peace Officers Association,
National Black Police Officers Association, National Latino Peace
Officers Association, National Native American Law Enforcement
Association, and National Organization of Black Law Enforcement
Executives. These forums focused on the relationship between minority
citizens and police. Williams and Murphy emphasize just how serious the
discussion about the contemporary role of policing in America is:

> ...the history of American police strategies cannot be separated from
> the history of the Nation as a whole. Unfortunately, our police, and
> all of our other institutions, must contend with many bitter legacies
> from that larger history. No paradigm---and no society---can be judged
> satisfactory until those legacies have been confronted directly.

*The Report of the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police
Department* (July 9, 1991) also bluntly states in its foreword that
violence between police and citizens is not something from an era of
policing that is behind us:

> Police violence is not a local problem. Recognizing its national
> character, police chiefs from 10 major cities convened soon after the
> Rodney King incident and emphasized that "the problem of excessive
> force in American policing is real.

## The Police Culture

The "culture" of a police department reflects what that department
believes in as an organization. These beliefs are reflected in the
department's recruiting and selection practices, policies and
procedures, training and development, and ultimately, in the actions of
its officers in law enforcement situations. Clearly, all police
departments have a culture. The key question is whether that culture has
been carefully developed or simply allowed to develop without benefit of
thought or guidance. There are police agencies, for example, where
police use of force is viewed as abnormal. Thus, when it is used, the
event receives a great deal of administrative attention. Such a response
reflects the culture of that department: the use of force is viewed and
responded to as an atypical occurrence. Contrast such a department with
one which does not view the use of force as abnormal. In the latter
case, there may be inadequate or poorly understood policies providing
officers with guidelines regarding the use of force. There probably is
no administrative procedure for investigating incidents where force is
used. And, most importantly, the culture of the department is such that
officers come to view the use of force as an acceptable way of resolving
conflict.

Over the past few years, there has been significant progress in
improving police-community relationships. Yet, the major problem
creating friction between the police and the community
today---especially in communities of color---is police use of deadly
force. This is an age-old problem of which only in recent years has the
public become aware. The fact that this problem existed for such a long
time before receiving widespread attention can again be related to the
culture of the police.

Until the *Tennessee v. Garner* decision in 1985, few if any police
departments had developed their firearms policy around a value system
that reflected reverence for human life. Rather, those agencies which
did have written policies (and many did not) reflected the prevailing
police culture in those policies. The prevailing culture centered on
enforcement of the law. Thus, the official policies of most police
agencies allowed officers to fire warning shots, to shoot fleeing
felons, or to use deadly force in other circumstances reflected less
than the highest value for human life.

It is clear that the culture of a police department, to a large degree,
determines the organization's effectiveness. That culture determines the
way officers view not only their role, but also the people they serve.
The key concern is the nature of that culture and whether it reflects a
system of beliefs conducive to the nonviolent resolution of conflict.

How do you establish a positive departmental culture? In answering this
question, it is important to emphasize again that all departments have a
culture. It is also important to recognize that the culture of a police
department, once established, is difficult to change. Organizational
change within a police agency does not occur in a revolutionary fashion.
Rather, it is evolutionary.

## Developing a Set of Values

The beginning point in establishing a departmental culture is to develop
a set of values. Values serve a variety of purposes, including:

• Set forth a department's philosophy of policing

• State in clear terms what a department believes in

• Articulate in broad terms the overall goals of the department

• Reflect the community's expectations of the department

• Serve as a basis for developing policies and procedures

• Serve as the parameters for organizational flexibility

• Provide the basis for operational strategies

• Provide the framework for officer performance

• Serve as a framework from which the department can be evaluated

In developing a set of values for a police department, it is not
necessary to come up with a lengthy list. Rather, there should be a few
values which, when taken together, represent what the organization
considers important. For example, if it is the objective of the
department to create a culture that is service oriented, then that
should be reflected in its set of values. In other words the importance
of values is qualitative, not quantitative.

Finally, an essential role of the police chief is to ensure that the
values of the department are well articulated throughout the
organization. To accomplish this, the chief as leader must ensure that
there is a system to facilitate effective communication of the values.
This includes recognizing and using the organization's informal
structure. This is important because, in addition to the formal
structure, values are transmitted through its informal process as well
as its myths, legends, metaphors, and the chief's own personality.

Each police department should develop a set of policing values that
reflects its own community. Fortunately, there is a general set of
policing values that can serve as a framework for any department to
build upon to meet local needs. Developing a set of organizational
values is not difficult. A police executive should first clearly explain
what values are to those in uniform. Then the executive should ask each
member of the department to list what he or she considers the five most
important values for the department. The findings of such an exercise
will represent a consensus on the values department members hold most
dear---an excellent starting point for creating a set of departmental
values. What follows is the previously mentioned general set of values
of good policing, which can be the springboard for a department's own
formulation:

**The police department must preserve and advance the principles of
democracy.** All societies must have a system for maintaining order.
Police officers in this country, however, must not only know how to
maintain order, but must do so in a manner consistent with our
democratic form of government. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the
police to enforce the law and deliver a variety of other services in a
manner that not only preserves, but also extends precious American
values. It is in this context that the police become the living
expression of the meaning and potential of a democratic form of
government. The police must not only respect, but also protect the
rights guaranteed to each citizen by the Constitution. To the extent
each officer considers his or her responsibility to include protection
of the constitutionally guaranteed rights of all individuals, the police
become the most important employees in the vast structure of government.

**The police department places its highest value on the preservation of
human life.** Above all, the police department must believe that human
life is our most precious resource. Therefore, the department, in all
aspects of its operations, will place its highest priority on the
protection of life. This belief must be manifested in at least two ways.
First, the allocation of resources and the response to demands for
service must give top priority to those situations that threaten life.
Second, even though society authorizes the police to use deadly force,
the use of such force must not only be justified under the law, but must
also be consistent with the philosophy of rational and humane social
control.

**The police department believes that the prevention of crime is its
number one operational priority.** The department's primary mission must
be the prevention of crime. Logic makes it clear that it is better to
prevent a crime than to put the resources of the department into motion
after a crime has been committed. Such an operational response should
result in an improved quality of life for citizens, and a reduction in
the fear that is generated by both the reality and perception of crime.

**The police department will involve the community in the delivery of
its services.** It is clear that the police cannot be successful in
achieving their mission without the support and involvement of the
people they serve. Crime is not solely a police problem, and it should
not be considered as such. Rather, crime must be responded to as a
community problem. Thus, it is important for the police department to
involve the community in its operations. This sharing of responsibility
involves providing a mechanism for the community to collaborate with the
police both in the identification of community problems and determining
the most appropriate strategies for resolving them. It is
counterproductive for the police to isolate themselves from the
community and not allow citizens the opportunity to work with them.

**The police department believes it must be accountable to the community
it serves.** The police department also is not an entity unto itself.
Rather, it is a part of government and exists only for the purpose of
serving the public to which it must be accountable. An important element
of accountability is openness. Secrecy in police work is not only
undesirable but unwarranted. Accountability means being responsive to
the problems and needs of citizens. It also means managing police
resources in the most cost-effective manner. It must be remembered that
the power to police comes from the consent of those being policed.

**The police department is committed to professionalism in all aspects
of its operations.** The role of the professional organization is to
serve its clients. The police department must view its role as serving
the citizens of the community. A professional organization also adheres
to a code of ethics. The police department must be guided by the Law
Enforcement Code of Ethics.3  A profession polices itself. The police
department must ensure that it maintains a system designed to promote
the highest level of discipline among its members.

**The police department will maintain the highest standards of
integrity.** The society invests in its police the highest level of
trust. The police, in turn, enter into a contractual arrangement with
society to uphold that trust. The police must always be mindful of this
contractual arrangement and never violate that trust. Each member of the
police department must recognize that he or she is held to a higher
standard than the private citizen. They must recognize that, in addition
to representing the department, they also represent the law enforcement
profession and government. They are the personifications of the law.
Their conduct, both on and off duty, must be beyond reproach. There must
not be even a perception in the public's mind that the department's
ethics are open to question.

Recognizing that society is undergoing massive changes, police agencies
are confronted with a great challenge. The essence of that challenge is
to be able to respond to problems created by social change, while at the
same time providing the stability that holds a society together during a
period of uncertainty.

By setting forth a clear set of values, articulating what it believes
in, the police department has a foundation to guide itself. Such a
foundation also allows for organizational flexibility. In addition, a
set of values provides the community with a means of assessing its
police department without having to become involved in technical
operations. Value statements serve as the linkage between the ongoing
operations of a police department and the community's ability not only
to participate, but also to understand the reason for police department
strategies. It is within this context that the recommendations and
suggestions in the following pages are presented.

# Contemporary Issues in Policing

Close observers have seen a number of changes in policing. Many changes
have come in the form of programs developed to address a specific issue
or problem and supported with funding from outside of police
departments. These programs include community-oriented policing, school
resource officers, police-community programs such as Midnight
Basketball, and drug and gang reduction programs. While most of these
contemporary programs made positive contributions to the police
organization or the community, they often did not survive after outside
funding stopped because they were implemented alongside what the police
department was already doing and were never integrated into day-to-day
operations.

Moreover, many of these programs were implemented without full
understanding of the factors involved in the issue or problem they were
designed to address. The exponential growth of public and private
funding created a whole new profession of grant writing for local
government and law enforcement. Interest and competition for the grants
were keen; in fact, in many cases, the success of some law enforcement
executives was measured by local officials on their success in competing
for outside funding. And while many organizations became proficient at
writing successful grant proposals and some positive results were
achieved through programs such as McGruff and D.A.R.E. which became very
popular in the community, there were other problems that did not lend
themselves so easily to specially funded programs: officer recruitment
and selection, community demographic and diversity changes,
immigration-related policing problems, cross-cultural communication, and
bias-based policing. Counter-terrorism was recently added to this list.
The problem of police-citizen violence, although it receives
considerable media and community attention and generates genuine
community tension, is one that does not readily lend itself to solution
through a specially funded program. Police management software can now
be obtained to track individual officer activity including tickets
written, complaints, accidents, incidents, assignments, and other custom
factors to help alert the law enforcement executive to problem officers.
However, the solution does not lie in technology alone. Encouraging
positive values and an enlightened philosophy of policing hold some of
the greatest promise for addressing many contemporary issues in
policing.

When violence occurs between police and citizens, the situation may be
complex. Violence often occurs in a setting where the police officer or
citizen may receive considerable support for a violent act. From the law
enforcement standpoint, there may be a solid legal basis for the police
officer's use of force, including deadly force. Attempts to minimize
violent encounters between the police and community must focus on the
police, since their likelihood of exercising control over potentially
violent interactions is much greater. But even when the effort to
control violence focuses on the police, the complexity of the situation
brings a wide range of issues and situations to consider which confront
law enforcement officers every day.

## Changing Demographics and Immigration Patterns

Delivery of policing services in multicultural communities is now
common. Immigration has been the major driver of growth in many areas of
the country. Asian immigrants have accounted for 43 percent of this
growth since 1970, greatly increasing the presence of languages,
cultural values, experiences, and lifestyles with which many other
Americans have had little contact. Hispanic immigration and migration
has reached every State in the country, resulting in new cross-cultural
exchanges in many communities. The social fabric of many communities is
in transition. Multiculturalism is already a reality in many communities
and institutions. The extraordinary infusion of newcomers can heighten
risk factors for conflict because of the underdevelopment of social
organization within the newly arrived population and the inexperience of
existing governmental and community resources working with them. The
movement of existing American-born racial and ethnic populations towards
an increasingly suburban and rural pattern includes heightened
vulnerability to racial incidents and conflict between police and
citizens. Organized racial or ethnic gangs or gang-like groups may form
to prey upon newer residents of other races and ethnic groups in an
attempt to force them to move and to prevent others from moving to
suburban or rural communities.

For these reasons understanding and recognizing changing community
cultural and ethnic diversity is important to contemporary law
enforcement efforts. Cultural characteristics such as language, customs
and traditions are key elements which affect the relationship between
immigrant populations and police. The challenge for the law enforcement
executive is to recognize community and cultural diversity by
effectively responding to the law enforcement and community needs of
culturally diverse groups. In trying to accomplish this mission law
enforcement executives have successfully utilized such strategies as
recruiting officers from the immigrant community, cultural diversity
training, community involvement, establishing community advisory
committees, and educating the immigrant population on the fundamentals
of the U.S. criminal justice system. Expanding or establishing community
organizations to bridge relationships between racial and ethnic groups
and between law enforcement and the community may be an important step
towards improving community relations. Law enforcement executives and
police officers would be well served by a high degree of involvement
with community organizations, so that members of the police department
are clearly seen as members of the community.

## Policing in the Post-September 11 Environment 

There is no better application of the principles of good policing than
in the post-September 11 environment. In the face of the dramatic
terrorist attacks against the United States, the vast majority of
America's communities responded with restraint, tolerance, and good
will. At the forefront of these efforts have been police chiefs and
other law enforcement executives, who captured the spirit of
police-community cooperation. This has been no small challenge, given
the divisions, fears, and other internal stresses which arose during
this unprecedented emergency.

Police chiefs and other local officials recognized that this was a time
for police-community cooperation and collaboration, a time to minimize
any divisions and distractions from the common national priority of
combating terrorism. Homeland security requires communities of
cooperation and citizens of goodwill. A climate of personal safety and
protection requires increased trust of governmental institutions and
agencies, especially law enforcement. Important information is more
likely to be volunteered to authorities. Suspicious and unusual activity
will be reported, and investigations can proceed. Further, public trust
and confidence reduce community tensions, especially between groups that
may feel unprotected and suspected by government institutions.

The aftermath of September 11 became an opportunity for police
departments and other government agencies, including CRS, to deepen
their relationships with Arab-American, Sikh, and Muslim communities.
While these communities were fairly well established, there had been
little occasion for outreach and educational activities before September
11. Since September 11, CRS has conducted hundreds of public forums,
dialogues, and other events designed to build bridges between police
departments and these communities.

What were some of the elements which helped to create the positive
relations, especially between law enforcement agencies and the
communities they serve?

• **Tone-setting messages** by public officials ranging from the
Nation's highest public officials to town mayors and police chiefs
helped to create an atmosphere of moderation and restraint. Their public
cautions against misdirected behavior towards fellow citizens and
pledges to vigorously prosecute of any attacks against individuals or
groups went a long way towards establishing expectations of fairness and
justice.

• **Prompt and sensitive attention by government and law enforcement
officials** to racial and ethnic attacks and incidents helped to create
trust and confidence in public officials and institutions. When
incidents and hate crimes were reported, most law enforcement agencies
reacted with dispatch, sensitivity, and thoroughness.

• **Improved cooperation and coordination** among Federal, regional, and
local policing and other law enforcement agencies helped bridge
jurisdictional tensions and prevent conflicts. Since September 11,
investigative agencies have enjoyed unparalleled cooperation, combining
resources and experience in their investigative and prosecutorial
efforts.

• **Intensive training by police and government agencies in Arab,
Muslim, and Sikh issues** helped to head off cross-cultural conflicts,
misunderstandings, and tensions. Law enforcement agencies recognized
that they needed to deepen their understanding of these cultures, and
many secured training to help officers to be sensitive to the particular
cross-cultural dimensions of police work.

• **Outreach by police departments to Arab-American, Muslim, and Sikh
communities** provided police and leaders from these communities an
opportunity to develop cooperative working relationships. Effective
policing involved deliberate efforts by police chiefs to extend their
connections to these communities by visits, calls, and public forums to
listen, learn of concerns, and reassure members of these communities
that their concerns are taken seriously.

## Police Culture/Police Society

Regarding the competing forces pulling at the police officer, Jerome
Skolnik writes:

> The combination of danger and authority found in the task of the
> policeman unavoidably combine to frustrate procedural regularity. If
> it were possible to structure social roles with specific qualities, it
> would be wise to propose that these two should never, for the sake of
> the rule of law, be permitted to coexist. Danger typically yields
> self-defensive conduct, conduct that must strain to be impulsive
> because danger arouses fear and anxiety so easily. Authority under
> such conditions becomes a resource to reduce perceived threats rather
> than a series of reflective judgments arrived at calmly. The ability
> to be discreet, in the sense discussed above, is also affected. As a
> result, procedural requirements take on a "frilly" character, or at
> least tend to be reduced to a secondary position in the face of
> circumstances seen as threatening.4 

Skolnik's description of this aspect of the police officer's role
provides some measure of understanding of how violence might occur in
encounters with citizens. It also provides a basis for the formation of
"police culture" or the police society. While most occupational groups
develop their own identity, the police identity seems to be much
stronger because of the nature of the work. There is a belief that one
cannot understand the difficulty of the work without having done it.

As a result, when a community questions the actions of the police---as
can be expected when a police officer uses a firearm---the law
enforcement profession has a tendency to close ranks and defend the
officer at all costs. The development of this "police society" begins
with academy training (or even before in the recruiting and selection
process) and continues until the individual becomes an accepted part of
the fraternity. An example of how this socialization process might take
place appears in Jonathan Rubinstein's *City Police*:

> A rookie patrolman was sitting in the roll call room waiting for his
> tour to begin when his wagon partner left a small group to come and
> sit next to him. It was the first time anyone had spoken to him before
> roll call in the two weeks he had been in the district. "Hey, Tony, I
> been meanin' to ask you, where'd you get that little stick you carry?"
> "It's what they issued us at the academy," the rookie replied. "No
> kiddin. Take my advice and get rid of it. Go down to Coteman's and get
> yourself one of them new plastic sticks. They're good and solid, not a
> toothpick." The rookie fidgeted, kept his eyes on the floor, and
> quietly replied, "I don't want to be that way."5 

Although reluctant, the rookie bought one of the new nightsticks the
next day. The socialization process is generally more subtle, and
assignment procedures may well contribute to the police society. Many
departments, for example, rotate patrol officers' shifts weekly, which
makes association with people other than police officers extremely
difficult.

In addition to assignment patterns, the job itself tends to cause social
isolation. After a period of time as a police officer, it is not
uncommon for an officer to begin avoiding contacts with old friends,
even when scheduling permits, because of the tendency to hear stories
about traffic tickets and other negative encounters people may have had
with the police. The result is the creation of an environment where an
officer withdraws further and further from the community. He or she
moves towards the protective shell of the police world where colleagues
understand the nuances of the work.

From the standpoint of addressing the problem of police-community
violence, the "police society" is critical. The reinforcement of narrow
views by limiting contact only to other officers has an impact on the
creation and perpetuation of violent encounters with citizens. The
"police society" also severely hampers efforts to investigate complaints
of excessive force. The police profession must reach a point where
violence is discouraged at the peer level. When violence does occur,
police officers themselves must be involved in providing information to
the investigative process impartially and with integrity. At the same
time, there are also positive aspects to a close-knit work group, and
care must be taken to ensure these positive aspects are not harmed when
attempting to deal with the negative ones.

## Recruitment and Selection

Bringing the right type of people into law enforcement is another major
aspect of any effort to improve the police profession and address the
violence issue. Most discussions of police reform have touched on the
importance of recruitment and selection as a long-term strategy for
improvement. Although this may be obvious, they are difficult problems
in and of themselves and, in addition, also a source of conflict between
the police and the community.

The source of conflict is disagreement over what type of person is best
able to handle the responsibilities of a police officer. One continuing
debate is the amount and type of education appropriate for a police
officer. Another debate involves the police agency's racial make-up.
While there is general agreement on the need for a police department to
reflect the make-up of the community it serves, there is considerable
disagreement on how that balance should be attained. The courts have put
to rest some of the physical requirements thought to be important for
the police for so many years. But the question of the psychological
make-up of an officer---and how it should be measured---has yet to be
resolved.

Although there is a wide range of opinion on what type of person is best
suited to handle the rigors of the job, three factors are considered
vital in terms of violence between the police and community. These
factors should be incorporated into the overall process of recruiting
and selecting police officers:

• The department should have a ratio of employees of color and national
origin that reflects the diversity of the community it serves.

• Continued emphasis should be placed on bringing into law enforcement
people reflecting a variety of college disciplines.

• Individuals should be psychologically suited to handle the
requirements of the job.

### **Recruitment.** Once an agency decides what type of individual it wants as an officer, it needs to develop a recruitment plan. Many departments limit their recruiting efforts to local newspaper advertisements when positions are open. This method will usually produce a pool of applicants. However, the type of individual sought may not respond to newspaper advertisements.

It is not unusual to hear in police circles that selection criteria are
extremely rigid and that only 1 or 2 out of 10 applicants will survive
the entire process and be offered a position. One could also make a
convincing argument that recruitment efforts are not very effective if 8
or 9 of 10 applicants cannot survive the recruiting process. Perhaps the
effort devoted to processing applicants unsuited to becoming police
officers could be redirected to recruiting the right type of applicant.
The point here is that the recruiting method should be carefully
designed to attract the type of applicant desired.

Law enforcement agencies use a variety of approaches to recruit
applicants. Some send recruiting teams to "career days" on college
campuses, while others send recruiters to various cities to look for
experienced police officers. Still others concentrate recruiting
resources on their immediate geographic area. Many departments have made
use of the local news media through feature stories, public service
announcements, and Internet job postings. Some have also used business
and corporate assistance to develop brochures that provide accurate
information about what the department offers. An agency may need to
circulate its recruitment announcements using a number of methods, such
sending them to a diverse group of community leaders, setting up a table
at community meetings, shopping malls, schools, colleges, and community
gathering places.

A factor that has an immense impact, but is often not addressed
effectively in recruiting plans is the influence of existing members of
the police organization. Negative attitudes of individual officers about
their job and the department may cause potential applicants to look
elsewhere for employment. On the other hand, positive attitudes may
exist for the wrong reasons---for example, because the department has an
image as a place for "macho," TV-style cops.

Therefore, it is important that the recruiting plan and its underlying
rationale be shared with all employees, so they have a clear
understanding of the department's objectives. Employees can serve as
excellent recruiters if they know these objectives and appreciate the
critical importance of their jobs. Employees can also better discuss
some of those issues often put forth as impediments to attracting high
quality applicants. For example, they can speak directly to issues such
as low pay and the difficulties of shift work. They are in the best
position to talk about positive as well as negative aspects of a police
career.

The objective of a recruiting program should be to attract a large
enough pool of desirable applicants to fill department vacancies. This
does not mean that the only measure of the recruiting effort should be
the number of people who complete employment applications. If a
department needs a higher ratio of employees from different racial and
ethnic groups to reflect the community, and the only people completing
applications are not from desired groups or do not meet basic
requirements, then the objective is obviously not being met. The
recruiting plan must contain relevant and measurable objectives that are
monitored to ensure every effort is being made to meet them.

### **Selection.** After an individual has expressed an interest in becoming a police officer, most departments begin a process that involves a series of steps designed to aid in making the selection decision. The selection process continues to receive a great deal of attention. Arbitrary selection standards that were common in the past have been eliminated by courts and other actions. Further research should be conducted by the human resources department of a police department to establish a sound selection process.

The close examination of this process has underscored its importance. It
has also helped focus attention on developing a better understanding of
the police officer's job and on including steps that measure whether a
candidate has the potential for meeting those requirements. Even with
these improvements, a number of selection issues have continued to
generate considerable controversy. Two of these, educational
requirements and psychological screening, are measures believed to have
potential for reducing violence between the police and community.
However, these alternatives obviously would take years to change the
make-up of a department. In many departments, psychological screening
and educational requirements cannot be imposed upon individuals
currently employed.

Educational issues have been a long-standing topic of discussion in law
enforcement circles. As early as 1931, the Wickersham Commission report
noted the need for higher levels of education.6  The President's
Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice
recommended in its *Police* task force report that officers should have
a minimum of two years of college and supervisors and administrators
should have four years.7  The National Commission on Police Standards
and Goals established a standard in its *Police* report, published in
1973, that by 1983 a basic entry-level requirement should be a
baccalaureate degree from an accredited college or university.8  It is
now thought that a diversity of degrees is preferable to only criminal
justice degrees to avoid similarity of thinking among officers and to
avoid limiting the broad experience required for an effective law
enforcement agency.

These reports were followed by many other calls for similar
requirements, but the reality has been that few departments have
actually made any changes in entry-level educational requirements. A
1985 report published by the Police Executive Research Forum, *The
American Law Enforcement Chief Executive: A Management Profile*, noted:
"In 1976 the Police Chief Executive Committee recommended the immediate
institution of a four-year college degree for new chief executives of
all agencies with 75 or more full-time employees. Nearly ten years
later, almost 50-percent of those officials still do not possess a
baccalaureate degree."9 

If it is not possible to make much progress at the top, the entry-level
standards will be extremely slow to change. It is not within the scope
of this publication to set forth all of the arguments for vigorously
pursuing the upgrading of entry-level requirements. Regardless, many
believe that an entry-level requirement of a bachelors' degree would go
a long way towards addressing a number of problems in law enforcement,
including violence between police and the community.

The psychological fitness of police officers is also of major importance
in addressing the violence issue. A police officer has considerable
discretion in the manner in which day-to-day responsibilities are
fulfilled. This discretion extends to the use of force. One method to
improve the prediction of whether an individual is able to handle police
responsibilities is psychological evaluation. Although many departments
do not use psychological screening in the selection process, the
Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies has established
the following as a mandatory standard for all agencies:

> 32.6.6 An emotional stability and psychological fitness examination of
> each candidate is conducted, prior to appointment to probationary
> status, using valid, useful, and nondiscriminatory procedures.
>
> ***Commentary:*** Law enforcement work is highly stressful and places
> officers in positions and situations of heavy responsibility.
> Psychiatric and psychological assessments are needed to screen out
> candidates who might not be able to carry out their responsibilities
> or endure the stress of the working conditions.10 

The importance that the Commission on Accreditation has placed on this
area by making it a mandatory standard is obvious. If an agency does not
currently use this tool in the selection process, it will take a number
of years for its adoption to have an effect on the organization, but it
would be a positive step towards minimizing future problems.

## Training

Training can have a significant impact on all aspects of police service
delivery and is of critical importance in the control of
police-community violence. A Police Foundation study on the use of
deadly force published in 1977 noted: "In the course of this study
police chiefs and administrators were asked what steps they would
consider most likely to bring about a reduction in unnecessary shootings
by police officers. The most common response was to recommend a tight
firearms policy coupled with an effective training program."11 

While one can generally agree with this response, findings in the 1982
International Association of Chiefs of Police report, *A Balance of
Forces*, also need to be considered:

• In-service crisis intervention training as opposed to preservice
training was associated with a low justifiable homicide rate by police.

• Agencies with simulator, stress, and physical exertion firearms
training experience a higher justifiable homicide rate by police than
agencies without such training.

• Marksmanship awards given to officers for proficiency in firearms
training are associated with a high justifiable homicide rate by the
police.

• In-service training in the principles of "officer survival" is
correlated with a high justifiable homicide rate by the police.12 

These findings clearly suggest that when it comes to training police
officers, both the *type* of training and the *approach* to training
police officers must be carefully examined. In examining this area,
Herman Goldstein makes several pertinent observations on police
entry-level training in *Policing a Free Society*:

> • The success of training is commonly measured in terms of the number
> of hours of classroom work. Eight weeks is considered 100 percent
> improvement over four weeks...
>
> • ...those who have analyzed the status of recruit training have found
> much that is wrong...the programs are structured to convey only one
> point of view on controversial matters in a manner intended to avoid
> open discussion.
>
> • ...there is an unreal quality in the training program in the
> emphasis placed on military protocol, in their narrow concept of the
> police function, and in their according-to-the-book teaching of police
> operations.
>
> • ...they tend to portray the police officer's job as a rigid one,
> largely dictated by law, ignoring the tremendous amount of discretion
> officers are required to exercise.
>
> • ...training programs fail to achieve the minimal goal of orienting a
> new employee to his job...failure to equip officers to understand the
> built-in stresses of their job...officers are left to discover on
> their own the binds in which society places them...
>
> • If recruit training is inadequate, in-service training is more
> so.13 

In Goldstein's observations one begins to understand some of the
limitations of automatically turning to training to solve all problems.
Perhaps it also suggests why some training programs may be associated
with a higher rate of police justifiable homicides. A more recent
observation in this area is made by Scharf and Binder in *The Badge and
the Bullet*:

> Our analysis suggests a framework in which to analyze training related
> to police deadly force. Few training programs have attempted to
> conceptualize the varied and complex competencies necessary to
> implement a responsible deadly force policy. Most training...focuses
> upon one or possibly two isolated competencies. Shooting simulators
> attempt to train police officers to quickly identify threats against
> them. Some crisis intervention training approaches focus almost
> exclusively upon the verbal skills useful in dealing with a limited
> range of disputes. If training is to be effective in reducing the
> aggregate number of police shootings, it must focus on multiple
> psychological dimensions, emphasizing those capacities that might
> influence police behavior in a wide range of armed confrontations.
> Also, such training should be conducted in environments simulating the
> complex, and often bewildering, conditions in which deadly force
> episodes usually take place. From our observations, this approach to
> shooting training is rare in police departments.14 

Scharf and Binder's observations indicate a need to rethink the approach
to firearms training and, at the same time, reinforce Goldstein's
observations almost 10 years earlier on training in general. Both
observations, however, seem to suggest that the advantages to be gained
from training will not be realized until programs go beyond teaching a
single response to complex situations. The focus should be on training
and developing a "thinking police officer" who analyzes situations and
responds in the appropriate manner based upon a value system such as
this publication proposes.

This is obviously a much different approach to training than has been
used in law enforcement. It requires consideration of a total situation
as opposed to focusing solely on the final "shoot/don't shoot" decision.
This does not mean that many of the components of current training
programs should be dropped. They need to be tied together into a
decision-making framework that causes officers to make decisions in
earlier stages of responding to a call or handling an incident. This
would minimize the risk of a situation evolving to a point where the use
of firearms is required to protect someone's life.

In support of a new approach to police training, Los Angeles County
Sheriff's Department psychologists Marcia C. Mills and John G. Stratton
reported findings in the *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin* in February 1982
that "The nature of academy training and type of services actually
provided are often discrepant. Seventy to 90 percent of police training
is devoted to crime control, laws, and police procedures, while
frequently 70 to 90 percent of subsequent job duties are devoted to
interpersonal communication and interaction."

## Policy and Accountability

Policy is a guide to the thinking and actions of those responsible for
making decisions. Its essence is discretion. And policy serves as a
guide to exercising that discretion. The development of policies to
guide the use of discretion by police officers is key to the effective
management of police organizations. It is also critical to the control
of violence between the police and community.

A primary consideration of policy development, then, is to build
accountability into police operations. As stated in the opening chapter
on values, the principle of police agency accountability to the citizens
it serves is fundamental to the relationship. Police departments which
that adopted values that uphold professionalism and integrity have
consistently established policies that recognize the importance of
accountability systems that build citizens' trust in police agency
programs and personnel.

The importance of policy development has also been underscored by the
Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies. Most of the
commission's standards require a written directive to provide proof of
compliance with those standards. Almost all of the agencies that have
been accredited, or are in the process of self-assessment, have
commented on how the documentation of their policies and procedures has
been improved. There are three policy areas of particular significance
with respect to police violence concerns: policies dealing with
firearms, citizen complaints, and public information.

### **Use of Force and Alternatives.** The appropriate use of force and the use of the least amount of force in effecting arrests are essential values which characterize a department that respects the sanctity of life. Officers and departments that fail to train in and demonstrate the use of appropriate force, not only create the potential for heightened racial conflict, but also raise high municipal liability risks for their communities. Officers who are skilled in conflict resolution will find ways to avoid higher levels of confrontation. Where conflict cannot be avoided, less than lethal force can be employed by law enforcement personnel in accord with changing community values. 

### **Citizen Complaints and Other Redress Systems.** Even the best police department will receive complaints, and the absence of an effective complaint procedure has figured prominently in many cities troubled by allegations of excessive force. In fact, "Citizen complaints about police behavior, particularly the excessive use of force, is one part of the larger problem of relations between the police and racial and ethnic minority communities," according to Samuel Walker and Betsy Wright Kreisel.15  As a result, police executives generally recognize the need for a trustworthy vehicle for citizens to seek redress of grievances involving alleged police misconduct.16  Most police chiefs know that when a department conveys to the public that it accepts complaints and is willing to aggressively examine allegations of abuse, police officers can expect to win the citizens' confidence needed to do their job more effectively. The department's complaint procedure should be set forth in writing regardless of the size of the community or the department.17  

The best way to ensure that police officers conduct themselves properly
in the performance of their duties is to set reasonable policies and
then establish effective procedures for internal review and sanctions.
But, as indicated above, the system for handling citizen complaints must
be one in which all citizens have confidence. Nor can the principle be
ignored that the police department is a public service agency which
ultimately must be accountable to the citizens. An increasing number of
cities in which citizens have lost confidence in the internal review
process have tried various configurations of civilian oversight
mechanisms or civilian overview boards with mixed results. A number of
arguments are made both in favor of and against these mechanisms. For
example, some observers hold that the police cannot objectively review
themselves, that civilian review strengthens public confidence in the
department, and that it ensures that police officers do not abuse the
law. "Official data on citizen complaints consistently show that racial
and ethnic minorities are overrepresented among persons alleging police
misconduct," according to Walker and Kreisel. This has resulted in a
situation in which "the perceived failure of internal police complaint
procedures has led civil rights groups to demand the creation of
external, or citizen complaint review procedures," Walker and Kreisel
conclude.18  On the other hand, critics of civilian oversight or review
maintain that civilians lack the knowledge and experience to evaluate
the police, that such oversight inhibits officers' use of force when it
is warranted, and that such mechanisms are redundant, because police
themselves review complaints against officers.

When municipal officials attempt to establish a civilian oversight
mechanism, police executives should anticipate strong resistance from
rank and file officers. In fact, even some of the most progressive
police officials do not favor civilian oversight mechanisms. While they
agree that there is a need for public accountability, these officials
point out that oversight groups are not panaceas and have had only mixed
success. They also suggest that emotions aroused by establishment of
civilian oversight mechanisms may themselves lead to insurmountable
problems. Citizens who are chosen to serve can be briefed by police
officials on policy, practices, and procedures and help them become more
acquainted with the department's operations so that they can serve
better.

There are four basic types of oversight systems:

• **Type 1.** Citizens investigate allegations of police misconduct and
recommend findings to the chief or sheriff.

• **Type 2.** Police officers investigate allegations and develop
findings; citizens then review the findings and recommend that the chief
or sheriff approve or reject the findings.

• **Type 3.** Complainants may appeal findings made by the police or
sheriff's department to citizens, who review them and then recommend
their own findings to the chief or sheriff.

• **Type 4.** An auditor investigates the process by which the police or
sheriff's department accepts and investigates complaints and reports on
the thoroughness and fairness of the process to the department and the
public.19 

Those establishing civilian oversight mechanisms, regardless of type or
format, must address six issues when designing a charter:

1\. How much access to information will the public be given regarding
the complaint and the process?

2\. Will conciliation between the complainant and the officer be
attempted?

3\. Does the oversight agency or the police executive determine
discipline for officers?

4\. What are the rights of officers during the process?

5\. Who receives complaints, and who investigates complaints?

6\. Will police officers be included or excluded as members of the
oversight board?20 

### **Municipal Liability.** The U.S. Supreme Court in *Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York*, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), concluded that local governing bodies/municipalities can be held liable when a plaintiff alleges and proves "that official policy is responsible for a deprivation of rights protected by the constitution." Since that 1978 decision, a number of courts have imposed liability on police supervisors and municipalities that do not take care to guard against officer misconduct and do not provide adequate training for their police officers (see *City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris* 489 U.S. 378 (1989)). In an article by Professors Daane and Hendricks titled "Liability for Failure to Adequately Train," they state, "Not only does a good training program increase the effectiveness and safety of police officers, it may also reduce the potential for liability of the officers, the supervisors and the agency. This potential for liability may range from cases involving use of force and deadly force, the failure to provide medical care, to those involving arrest procedure."21  These authors further state, "...it is imperative that police officers be provided with excellent training; \[and that\] good police management through training helps to reduce liable incidents for the officer, the chief and the municipality." (See full article in Appendix F-1.)

### **Public Information.** An area of policy that goes hand-in-hand with police accountability and police-community relations is the law enforcement agency's approach to release of public information. Clearly, the news media serve as a major source of information about the police and their activities. As such, the media play a key role in developing citizens' views of the police. Given this important function of the media, it is difficult to understand why so many police agencies fail to develop a public information policy and a relationship with the media based on mutual respect and trust.

This is especially important in the area of police-community violence.
Media coverage of incidents involving the use of force is often the only
information the community has to form an opinion about the
appropriateness of police action. There is a tension between informing
the public about an incident and getting the facts on that incident. The
department should have procedures for identifying who can make public
statements, along with procedures for verifying information before it is
released to the public.

Silence on certain aspects of the investigation may be viewed as
stonewalling, when in fact, the department simply does not have the
information. The department that explains why certain information is not
yet available and makes assurances that, when it does materialize, it
will be disseminated to the extent permitted by law, will be regarded as
responsive to the community's concerns. In the absence of information
from official sources, the news media are forced to prepare the story
based on information gained only from bystanders and unofficial agency
sources, an approach that may result in less than accurate reporting of
the incident. The stage is then set for friction between the police and
media. Misinformed community members may also form erroneous perceptions
of the police and their actions.

Police officials must provide sufficient information and detail to
accurately explain an incident. At the same time, they need to be
careful not to jeopardize an investigation or the department's position.
This is a difficult expectation of the police, but it is not impossible
to deal with both needs. The task is much less difficult with a clearly
articulated public information policy. (See sample public information
policy in Appendix G-1.)

### **Racial Profiling and Bias-Based Policing.** Law enforcement profiling is inappropriate when race or some other sociological factor, such as gender, sexual orientation, or religion is used as the sole criterion for taking law enforcement actions. Profiling that singles out members of the community for no reason other than their race is discriminatory and provides no legitimate basis for police action and has serious consequences. "Whether intentional or unintentional, the application of bias in policing tilts the scales of justice and results in unequal treatment under the law," writes Ronald L. Davis, the author of a study on bias-based policing for the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE).22  Allegations of racial profiling and other bias-based policing activities, particularly traffic stops and random searches, have become national issues, as the escalating coverage in the media shows. There has also been legislative proposals at the state and national level addressing racial profiling, along with lawsuits brought by civil rights organizations and the U.S. Department of Justice. 

Racial profiling erodes the necessary trust between law enforcement
officials and the communities they serve. There is also the collateral
damage of police recruitment of minorities being made more difficult and
minorities becoming less willing to participate in the criminal justice
process. The use of objective factors indicating potential criminal
activity as a basis for making traffic stops may be a legitimate and
effective law enforcement tool. However, inappropriate profiling impairs
law enforcement's abilities. Furthermore, the use of race as the sole
criterion for making traffic stops is legally and morally wrong.
Discriminatory traffic stops divide communities and make police and
prosecutors' jobs more difficult.

One way to address this issue is with a defined set of department values
that are the basis of the department's policies, and practices. Law
enforcement officials have to monitor and manage the discretion
exercised by their officers to ensure their actions are guided by values
and principles that gives preeminence to the civil rights of citizens.

As Davis writes in the NOBLE study:

> Racial profiling imposes on the basic freedoms granted in a democratic
> society. For many in the minority community, racial profiling is an
> old phenomenon with a new name. A common response to racial profiling
> is the development of policies that declare racial profiling illegal,
> limit officer discretion in the area of traffic stops, and mandate
> training in cultural diversity.
>
> These measures are a necessary first step, but alone they cannot
> reduce bias in an organization. Symptoms will resurface and appear in
> other areas, such as walking stops, the use of force, police
> misconduct, minority officer recruitment, retention and promotion.
> Racial profiling is not the standalone problem; it is a symptom of
> bias-based policing.23 

Police departments and communities can avoid debilitating accusations of
racial profiling by communicating with each other about police strategy,
crime trends, and community concerns. In a response to the aftermath of
the fatal shooting of Amadou Diallo by New York City police in 1999,
George Kelling writes:

> ...Police increasingly rely on analysis of crime data, mapping and
> other methods to develop tactics for addressing specific problems.
> When they discover that guns are the primary instruments of murder in
> black neighborhoods, is it racial profiling or smart policing to
> target anti-gun efforts there?
>
> Resolutions to these issues are possible, but not easy. They involve
> balancing individual rights with community interests, effectiveness
> with costs, and the tradeoffs among important values...Police and
> neighborhood leaders will have to seek each other out aggressively and
> honestly...24 

### **Hate Crimes and Hate Violence.** Hate crime is a crime that is based in whole or in part on the offender's animus towards the status of the victim. This perceived "status" of the victim may be based on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. David N. Aspy and Cheryl Blalock Aspy write, based on 1997 research from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, that "Hate crimes occur when a hating person enters a climate that encourages the discharge of hate-driven violence on certain targets."25 Victims of hate crimes feel vulnerable to more attacks and develop feelings of alienation, helplessness, suspicion, and fear. A defining feature of hate crime is that each offense victimizes not one person but a group.26  When perpetrators of hate are not prosecuted as such and their acts are not publicly condemned, their crimes can weaken even those communities with the healthiest of race relations. Hate crimes can exacerbate community tensions that in turn trigger community-wide racial conflict and civil disturbances. Based on its experience with hundreds of hate crimes cases, CRS recommends that police can initiate proactive measures before the fact such as taking actions to improve communication between majority and minority groups by the establishment of a human rights commission; establishing mechanisms to defuse rumors that may fuel racial tensions and conflict; utilizing the media as a helpful ally; implementing community policing and retaining police-community relations units in the transition towards community policing.

The following are best practices for police departments to prevent hate
crimes from escalating racial and ethnic tensions into conflict or civil
disturbances:

• **Strong Policy Statement (Internal and External).** The department
and community must be clear about the police executive's position
against hate crimes. Every employee in the department must be held
accountable for practicing and following that philosophy. In some cases
a local government ordinance against hate activity modeled on existing
hate crime law in effect in that State may form the basis for the police
executive's position and departmental policy.

• **Training (In-service and Academy Classes).** Officers within the
department and trainees need to become aware of and educated about
crimes motivated by prejudice, how to respond to them, how to meet the
needs of the victims, and how to collect the proper evidence. Raising
their awareness about these crimes makes it more likely that they will
show sensitivity and understanding when investigating such cases. In
addition, these officers will remember that hate crimes and subsequent
investigations will be taken seriously. Very often leaders from
communities targeted by hate crimes and others can be invited to be part
of the training effort.

• **Procedures.**

--- Adoption of a model policy for investigating and reporting hate
crimes, such as one supported by the International Association of Chiefs
of Police.

--- Establishment of data collection procedures using uniform
definitions of hate crimes available through the FBI and reporting of
the information collected (even small numbers in a jurisdiction may be
valuable for providing an aggregate regional or national understanding
of hate crimes).

--- Establishment of a racial-bias crime unit in large cities to
investigate and respond to such crimes.

--- Establishment of a civil rights office in smaller municipalities.

--- Establishment of a two-tier internal review process for all
potential hate crimes in accord with the FBI recommendation on bias
crime incidents.

--- Pre-identification and training of community leaders to assist in
the response to hate crimes.

---Establishment of protocols and response procedures between law
enforcement, school, social service providers, and community leaders for
addressing hate crimes. (CRS has mediated hate crime response protocol
agreements that can serve as models for law enforcement agencies and
communities.)

---Collaboration with communities to build coalitions of political,
business, civic, religious, and community organizations to help create
positive climate and foster cooperation, inclusion of diverse groups in
decision-making processes to increase confidence in government, and
working with schools to prevent and plan responses to hate crimes on
campuses.

--- Collaboration with a local human relations commission in community
forums on racial and ethnic relations to help encourage a positive
community climate.

---Prosecution of hate crimes to encourage better reporting of these
crimes, ensuring their investigation, establishing hate crimes task
forces, and assisting victims and witnesses during the adjudication of
their cases.

--- Collaboration with schools to prevent and deal with hate crimes and
hate-based gang activity in schools, including development of a plan to
handle hate crimes and defuse racial tensions. (CRS has helped some
communities develop memorandums of understanding between law
enforcement, schools, and local social and community service agencies
who have a role in addressing school-related hate crimes.)

--- Documentation of hate crimes and hate crime patterns through
research on the scope and impact of and solutions for hate crimes.

--- Establishment of a temporary rumor control and verification center
immediately following an incident. (A police department or municipal
telephone can be staffed by a diverse team 24 hours a day during the
crisis period so as to help reduce tensions or prevent escalating
tensions which may lead to violence. Use the media and community
organizations to publicize the telephone number in the affected
community.)

• **Community Interventions.** Community intervention activities are
essential following a hate or bias incident to address the needs of
victims, community fear, and racial tensions, as well as to prevent
retaliation and to change the climate that allowed hate to exist and to
target specific groups. Law enforcement executives need to act quickly
and publicly to avoid perceptions of apathy and acceptance of the hate
crime. Useful steps include finding allies and collaborating with them
on activities to meet short-term issues and later establish long-term
goals to address diversity issues through community dialogues, annual
diversity events, periodic police-community forums, and police-community
advisory groups.

# Effective Police Leadership

Today, the policing function is viewed increasingly in terms of the
"contractual" relationship with the people. That is, given the high
community impact of law enforcement service delivery, such services
should be based on community needs, safety, concerns, and on relentless
enforcement of the law against criminals, with due consideration for the
safety of officers. The contractual nature of this relationship
notwithstanding, frequently neither minority community expectations of
police conduct nor police expectations of support from the minority
community have been met. The result, of course, has too often been
violent encounters between citizens and the police. The seriousness of
this situation, wherever it exists, makes it imperative that the
community and police initiate steps to reduce violence.

As in all matters involving how law enforcement is conducted, the role
of top police executives is key. Among a multitude of other duties, the
police executive must establish personal credibility with all segments
of the community. The chief must articulate law enforcement standards of
conduct and make clear what behavior the chief expects of the
department's officers. The community should understand what constitutes
unprofessional conduct and, above all, must have a reasonable
understanding of procedures for investigating and adjudicating cases of
use of deadly force.

To reduce the potential for violence, police executives must inculcate
the values articulated by policy and procedure into two levels of the
police department: the administrative level and the "line" or
operational level. To accomplish the task of value-transition on one
level without doing so on the other is futile, for no change in police
behavior will result. In addition to the two *levels* of the
organization which the police executive must address, two *dimensions*
of law enforcement must also be addressed: the police "culture" and
various community cultures. Thus, to effect change in the
police-community violence, police executives must take a
multidimensional approach. Traditional approaches to reform have been
one-dimensional, and have met with little success.

The necessity for multidimensional leadership exists for several
reasons. Consider, for example, the police executive who develops the
"ideal" use-of-force policy, and who develops a strong system of
"internal audit" and reporting to ensure that violations are identified
and addressed. This executive has created an administrative response to
the violence problem. However, he or she has not addressed the
operational-level aspects that influence the use of force by law
enforcement officers: training, peer-group pressure, informal
leadership, initial socialization, and role of the union, if any.

Nor has the executive addressed the *external* factors that impact use
of force: the community's level of confidence in the department; prior
use-of-force incidents; the existence of a healthy police-community
partnership; community norms; media treatment of use of force; sanctions
against use of force by local courts, prosecutors, and other official
agencies; and community tolerance levels for violence.

Policy developed by the police executive that does not take into account
external factors is likely to fail. The administrative functions of
policy, procedure, audit, review, and sanction will most probably be
offset by operational-level attitudes, beliefs, and informal social
structures that tell the line officer that it's "better to face an
internal affairs investigation than to have your family confronted by
the undertaker." This police executive will most likely find that his or
her administrative efforts will fail in the face of what appears to be
an overwhelming "subculture" among line personnel and community members.
The policies, procedures, and administrative infrastructure will fail,
not because they were inherently "bad," but because they were not
integrated at the operational level to combat police-community violence.

The police executive who desires to affect the cycle of police-community
violence must focus on at least four functions which offer the potential
of creating change. All four of these functions are amenable to change
through effective police leadership, and all four combine to aid the
chief executive in developing a multidimensional approach to
police-community violence. These four functions are:

• The socialization process of police officers

• The administrative mechanisms designed to impact on the operation of
the police department

• Positive and negative reinforcement of police officers

• The education of the community and the news media

## The Socialization of Police Officers

The socialization process for patrol officers has been well documented
in the literature---as discussed elsewhere in this publication. Police
officers tend to *become* the kind of police officers they are
*socialized* to be. The two most important components of the
socialization process---and thus the process of leadership---are formal
training and informal "peer group" indoctrination of the young officer.

The field training officer (FTO), field training program, and formal
classroom training form the cornerstone of the young officer's
operational personality. The acquisition of acceptable operational
traits and the inculcation of "preferred" organizational values during
this period will last for years under the tutelage of effective
leadership. *The acquisition of "bad habits" can be avoided through a
carefully designed socialization process that is implemented by
handpicked personnel at the training academy and in field orientation
experiences.*

The field training officer is all important to the success of a
department's training program as the FTO is the first person in
authority who will orient a new officer to the job environment. These
officers must be:

> ...role models and actually represent the explicit values of the
> organization. Otherwise, a situation of conflicting behavioral
> expectations may occur during the training of new police
> officers...Managers must be aware that the values of police officers
> are directly related to the concept of the hidden curriculum since
> values significantly influence organizational performance and
> community perceptions. Therefore, a manager can use the selection...of
> FTO as a proactive method for developing a work environment that
> promotes organizational goals and objectives in Field Training
> Programs.
>
> The progressive leader can use the influence of the FTOs to build
> positive work environments by being aware that the influences of
> mentors and the need to be accepted are powerful factors in the
> training of new officers. When there is consistency between explicit
> and implicit organizational values, explicit job-related behavioral
> expectations are continually reinforced throughout the training
> program, creating a conducive learning environment for new officers.
> Accordingly, leaders that set forth explicit behavioral expectations
> through the development of a "value-congruent" training program have
> the potential to significantly improve organizational performance.27 

There are several questions the police executive may ask which will help
to gauge the effectiveness of a department's leadership in the area of
socialization. While the following are generic questions, they will help
identify areas that need improvement:

• Do FTOs demonstrate conformance to the department's values?

• What type of officer is routinely appointed as a field training
officer for police cadets, those with a high tolerance for violence or
those with a low tolerance for violence?

• Are officers routinely appointed as FTOs for police cadets
"negotiators" or "confrontationalists"?

• Are FTOs trained in methods of referral, negotiation, problem
resolution, and other "alternative" police responses?

• Are FTOs routinely encouraged to attend public forums, neighborhood
meetings, task forces, and other "formal" group processes involving the
community?

• Do FTOs receive informal as well as formal rewards for their services
to the organization?

• Does the formal training process include classroom time devoted to
community relations, problem resolution, negotiation, and alternative
police response? Is it ongoing?

• Which receives greater emphasis in the training curriculum,
self-defense and firearms instruction or group and interpersonal
interaction skills?

The chief executive's answers to these questions will aid in identifying
areas which should be addressed concerning the socialization of new
police officers. Once the desired socialization of police officers is
attained, it is a role of leadership to continue to refine this
socialization.

## Administrative Mechanisms to Impact Department Operations

Administrative mechanisms are probably the most commonly used leadership
tool for managing police-community violence. The process of effective
leadership here involves first determining the values which must be
proffered by departmental policy. This is followed by the development of
procedures, rules, and regulations which reflect those values including
establishing internal audit, review, and sanction processes to enforce
compliance; and "interfacing" with the community to reduce the use
"violent" solutions to problems. There are several questions the police
executive should ask to determine the extent to which administrative
mechanisms about police use of force are in place:

• Has the department appropriately integrated the organization's values
into its use-of-force policy and then, through leadership, required
adherence to both?

• Does the department have written procedures, rules, and regulations
which implement these policies and values?

• Does the department have formal internal review, audit, and monitoring
processes to ensure that these procedures, rules, and regulations are
followed?

• Does the department have a formal process to advise the community on
the functioning of the audit, review, and monitoring processes?

## Guidance Through Positive and Negative Reinforcement

Effective leadership has its most conventional impact in the area of
positive and negative reinforcement of police officers. Contrary to some
beliefs, negative reinforcement is not "punishment." This term refers to
the removal of unpleasant stimuli from one's environment. Positive
reinforcement, of course, refers to the provision of rewards for
behavior that is desirable. The chief executive should ask several
questions to help assess how effectively department leadership uses
reinforcement to foster nonviolent behavior:

• Which officers routinely receive the most sought after special
assignments in the department: those known for their confrontational
style or those known for their mediation skills?

• For what type of activities are officers most frequently commended by
the department---avoiding the use of force while achieving the
department's aims, or using force to effect the arrest of criminals?

• When was the last time the department recognized, formally or
informally, an officer for *avoiding* the use of force?

• Does the performance evaluation system recognize and reward an officer
for his or her ability to avoid the use of force?

• Does your department recognize force avoidance by officers as a matter
of policy?

The chief executive's answers to these questions will aid in identifying
areas that need to be addressed concerning the positive and negative
reinforcement of officer behavior. It is the role of leadership to
continue to refine the positive socialization initially imparted to
police personnel. This is accomplished through selecting appropriate
positive and negative reinforcement for personnel who behave in ways
which foster nonviolent problem resolution.

## Community Education

Another way for the police executive to establish effective leadership
in the realm of police-community violence is to educate the community in
the expectations they should have of the department and the expectations
the department has of the community. This function addresses the
"community cultures" dimension of effective leadership. No matter what
the internal functions of effective leadership within the department,
positive change in the police-community violence cycles will occur more
easily if the community is involved in the change process.
Police-community partnerships and the engagement of the community in
solving problems of violence enhance police effectiveness.

There are several questions the law enforcement executive can ask to
determine the extent the community is likely to be involved in helping
retard the police-community violence cycle. These questions are based on
the premise that the police and the community share ownership,
responsibility, and accountability for reducing these incidents of
violence:

• What programs does the department have that assist officers in
understanding community attitudes towards police use of force?

• What programs does the department have that assist officers and the
community to reduce incidents of police-community violence?

• Do all officers engage in interactive meetings with community groups
and leaders?

• Does each officer consider himself or herself responsible for building
police-community trust?

• Are there existing mechanisms for "taking the pulse" of the community
on key issues involving police-community violence?

• Does the department periodically schedule formal meetings with
community groups and leaders to review the issue of police-community
violence?

• Do all the parties involved in reducing police-community violence
(police, courts, probation, prosecutors, schools, and the community)
meet regularly to review strategy and results?

These questions help the executive identify areas or concerns that
should be addressed in managing the police-community partnership. The
extent to which this connection is well managed will, to some extent,
dictate the degree of success the police executive can expect.

In summary, the "effective leadership" of a police organization's
attempt to control the police-community violence cycle cannot be
accomplished by a one-dimensional approach to the problem. A leadership
plan which focuses merely on one aspect of the problem is most likely a
plan that will not achieve its objectives. What is required is a
multidimensional approach which focuses on both internal and external
factors, an approach which addresses operational problems as well as
administrative processes, and which addresses the need for change within
the informal leadership of the department as well as the need for change
within the community.

Through the development of an "interactive" model of professionalism
which focuses on the four stated areas of change within the department
and its environment, police executives can develop the effective
leadership necessary to have an impact on the cycle of police-community
violence. Until an approach is developed that is multidimensional,
interactive, and fully supported by the chief executive, reliance on the
"leadership model" to reduce the police use of force will bear little
fruit.

# Procedures for Effective Policing

A police department's procedures---what it actually *practices*---are,
of course, a fundamental element in determining relationships with the
community. Even the most positive values will be of little use unless
they are reflected in the performance of officers on the street. Thus,
the need to reduce police-citizen violence will not be met solely by
adopting a set of values. Practices must be implemented which
demonstrate an enlightened, practical approach to policing. Within that
context, there are a number of important considerations.

## Principles of Community Policing

Community policing is a policing approach embraced by some departments
and espoused by national law enforcement organizations. It is described
as a philosophy, managerial style, and organizational strategy that
promotes better police-community partnerships and more proactive problem
solving with the community. It can help solve a wide range of community
problems and issues involving crime control, crime prevention, officer
safety, and the fear of crime.

Community policing is referred to by several names, most commonly as
community-oriented policing, problem-oriented policing, community
problem solving, neighborhood policing, and problem-based policing.
Community policing is based on collaboration between police and citizens
in a nonthreatening and cooperative spirit. It requires that police
listen to citizens, take seriously how citizens perceive problems and
issues, and seek to solve problems which have been identified. "A
fundamental assumption of the community policing approach is that the
community is more likely than the police to recognize and understand its
public safety needs," states researchers Vincent J. Webb and Charles M.
Katz.28  Effective community policing can result in enhanced quality of
life in neighborhoods, reduction of fear of crime, greater respect for
law and order, increased crime control and crime prevention, and greater
citizen satisfaction with police services.

While community policing continues to evolve, current research shows
that it results in improved safety for both residents and police,
neighborhood revitalization, positive neighborhood and police morale and
confidence, heightened confidence in government institutions, including
police, and improved race relations. Community policing has been shown
to decrease actual criminal activity29  and reduced fear of crime. As
one resident of Chicago said, "When you have a sense of camaraderie and
cooperation between beat officers and community residents you lose the
sense of fear."30  However, law enforcement executives should be aware
that "community perceptions of the potential effectiveness of community
policing may determine how residents rate the importance of community
policing activities carried out by the police," according to Webb and
Katz. In fact, they state some community policing activities may be
viewed as unimportant to the community, while others, such as
investigations of drug and gang-related activities, may have broad
community support. Reports on public support for community policing has
been generally favorable. "In general, the findings show that
'preventative' community policing activities, or those usually
considered as having an indirect effect on crime, are regarded by the
community as being less important than 'enforcement' activities, or
policing activities thought of as having a more direct effect on
crime."31  Police executives may need to explain to communities that
community policing programs---like all other policing programs---are
enforcement oriented. The difference with community policing programs is
an intentional focus on community interaction with the department

In Madison, Wisconsin, police officers and community volunteers
conducted surveys of police activities and police efforts to resolve
neighborhood problems. The Madison Police Department found that "as the
officers completed the questionnaire with the participants, the
respondents gave information to the officers about the quality of life
and social order issues whereas the other volunteers who were not
officers, those issues rarely emerged." In the Madison interviews,
participants reported a wide variety of concerns to police officers:

> ...a greater concern that children would be hurt while playing in
> their neighborhood; less satisfaction with their neighborhood as a
> place to live; parking, public drinking and intoxication, gang
> activity and graffiti as more of a problem; drug sales, drug usage,
> drug addiction, possession of guns and weapons, violence, fighting and
> assaults all to be more of a problem; more negative assessments of the
> effectiveness of rental property owners and managers in dealing with
> neighborhood problems, and of the extent to which residents were
> organized and committed to improving neighborhood conditions.32 

Community policing represents a continuation of the established
traditions of policing in the United States. It flows from three values
discussed in the section of this publication on values:

• The police department believes that the prevention of crimes is its
number one priority.

• The police department involves the community in the delivery of its
services.

• The police department holds itself accountable to the community it
serves.

The 10 underlying principles of community policing are:

1\. Crime prevention is the responsibility of the total community.

2\. The police and the community share ownership, responsibility, and
accountability for the prevention of crime.

3\. Police effectiveness is a function of crime control, crime
prevention, problem solving, community satisfaction, quality of life,
and community engagement.

4\. Mutual trust between the police and the community is essential for
effective policing.

5\. Crime prevention must be a flexible, long-term strategy in which the
police and community collectively commit to resolving the complex and
chronic causes of crime.

6\. Community policing requires knowledge, access, and mobilization of
community resources.

7\. Community policing can only succeed when top management police and
government officials enthusiastically support its principles and tenets.

8\. Community policing depends on decentralized, community-based
participation in decision-making.

9\. Community policing allocates resources and services, based on
analysis, identification, and projection of patterns and trends, rather
than incidents.

10\. Community policing requires an investment in training with special
attention to problem analysis and problem solving, facilitation,
community organization; communication, mediation and conflict
resolution, resource identification and use, networking and linkages,
and cross-cultural competency.33 

## Police-Community Partnership

Improving a police department's image in the community takes more than
just concern or wishful thinking. For the police to be truly effective
in a changing, complex society, they must recognize that it is in their
own self-interest to administer a department that is competent, fair,
honest, and responsive to the needs of the individual citizen. The
police department must establish an effective partnership with the
community as a whole, the foundation of which is mutual trust and
understanding. Police organizations must realize that *they* have the
ability to alter their own image within the community.

A well-developed community relations effort should be the product of
careful construction, designed by the police and the public together,
and should not be the result of an emotional reaction to a temporary
crisis in the community. The fundamental tenet of any successful
police-community relations effort must necessarily involve an open
channel of communication between the police and the public. Once
established, a communications vehicle should be further developed to
ensure that the channel remains open.

Police departments must be sensitive to the fact that virtually every
phase of their operations has an eventual impact on the community, which
translates into an individual citizen's assessment of a department's
effectiveness. Token or artificial efforts towards enhancing public
image will quickly be recognized as an insincere gesture, which can only
invite public ridicule and repudiation.

Training must also be in place to ensure that all officers veteran and
recruit alike---continuously maintain an understanding of, and a
sensitivity to, the social and human relations problems that surface
within the community. Police departments should adopt a
community-oriented attitude in every facet of their operations. The
public must be convinced that the department's concern for community
relations is not just a priority for administrators or community
relations officers, but a serious concern that has the commitment of
each officer.

## Using Community Resources

Defining the police role within a community should not be solely the
responsibility of a law enforcement agency. The entire community,
represented by traditional and nontraditional agencies and groups alike,
should be called upon to identify local concerns that fall within the
purview of the police department. Suggestions should be carefully
weighed and freely debated in an atmosphere which recognizes that no
single element or agency has exclusive jurisdiction or authority for
determining what the posture or reaction should be towards problems that
have impact on the entire community.

Within every community there are business and professional groups,
social service agencies, religious and civic organizations, and non-law
enforcement city agencies, all of which are potential resources for
dealing with many of the problems that confront the police. Such
organizations have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to donate
time and effort in support of programs that improve the quality of life
in a community. An effective police executive researches the community
and develops a "resource bank" of organizations willing to donate time
and effort in support of police initiatives to improve services to the
community.

The assistance and interaction that these groups afford can be of great
benefit in offering cultural, language, direct service, and training
opportunities for police officers. In an era of tight fiscal control and
dwindling budgets, these organizations can help law enforcement agencies
develop specialized programs that address current and future needs. The
police and community groups should establish areas of mutual concern,
analyze points of disagreement that call for resolution, and reach a
consensus on how all parties concerned can work together effectively in
crisis situations. CRS can provide technical assistance in implementing
meetings with the community to build a partnership with the community.

## Police Accessibility

A police department's effectiveness in making itself accessible to the
community will invariably depend on whether there is a plan or program
to promote and enhance involvement with citizens. Whether the purpose is
to inform citizens about police initiatives, to inform them about
general police department progress or conditions, to secure their input
in a specific area, or to discuss effectiveness of the department and
its personnel, most police executives depend on three basic avenues.
They are: direct dialogue with citizens and representatives of
organizations, use of the news media, and communication of selected
information through various means, including speeches and assignments to
designated personnel. At the same time, all department personnel and all
means of communication should be focused on making the department
"approachable" to citizens.

The most common standard for measuring a department's effectiveness with
respect to accessibility is the number and attitude of citizens who
freely approach the department to make inquiries, complain, or volunteer
their assistance. If the attitude of citizens demonstrates confidence in
the department and pride in performing a civic function, it can be
surmised that a substantial level of departmental accessibility has been
achieved. On the other hand, if citizen contacts or encounters with the
police are characterized mostly by a mixture of fear, rancor, and
general distrust, then the police executive and the department's
personnel have a lot of hard work ahead of them.

## Managing Potentially Violent Circumstances

Each day, police officers are called upon to handle a wide variety of
situations, any one of which potentially might result in an officer or
citizen suffering serious bodily injury or death. Although no two
situations will be exactly the same, police have encountered the vast
majority of different *kinds* of circumstances before. Therefore, most
response situations lend themselves to prior analysis and review.
Whether the police are called upon to handle a violent domestic dispute,
a barricaded subject with hostages, a major civil disturbance, or other
situations, departmental procedures can be drafted to provide the
individual police officer with direction that will reduce the chances of
unwarranted violence. Care should be exerted to ensure that written
directives on most response situations are carefully developed,
regularly updated, and constantly reviewed by every member of the
organization.

Along with written directives, another major component of a police
department's efforts to manage circumstances is its commitment to
in-service training and development. While many organizations rightfully
place a premium on the value of recruit training, they are sometimes
less attentive to providing a systematic program of in-service training
for veteran officers. Although departments may be powerless to control
the level of violence that officers face in every situation, they should
recognize that a carefully designed program of in service training is of
fundamental importance to avoiding police-citizen violence and ensuring
officer safety. Many police contacts with citizens or suspects have the
potential for violence, as emphasized elsewhere in this publication, but
a well-trained officer is the first line of defense in reducing the risk
of serious injury or death.

## A Conflict Management Approach

There is no magic formula or step-by-step guide that can ensure the
maintenance of an orderly community. Every community has unique
characteristics, and conflict resolution requires a knowledge of the
intricacies of the community, its problems, concerns and priorities. A
problem for the police is the recognition that many of the factors that
contribute to community tensions and delinquency, such as poverty,
unemployment, and the lack of education, cannot be addressed directly by
the police. In spite of this, the police should be attuned to the
concerns and changing priorities of their communities, and be willing to
offer assistance in identifying and resolving sources of conflict that
have a debilitating effect on the community.

One course of action police administrators should consider is developing
a conflict management program. The primary purpose of such a program
would be to serve as an alert system for tension-breeding incidents that
are police related and which could create conflict and disharmony in the
community. A conflict management program would include: continuous
assessment of community tension, regularly planned outreach to the
diverse communities and their leaders, department plans and procedures
outlining the response to potentially violent situations with special
emphasis on the continuum in use of force, and training of officers in
conflict resolution skills and mediation. When the program is
functioning effectively, the results should provide police leadership
with more in-depth and timely information that will broaden
communication with all parties concerned, contributing to the
maintenance of order in the community.

In order for a program to function effectively, training in conflict
management and resolution should be extended to all persons, police and
civilian alike, who have expressed a willingness to become involved in
such an experiment. Such an undertaking should be a first step in
looking beyond the traditional methods of arriving at conflict
resolution and may serve as the impetus for developing other more
innovative approaches. In forming a conflict management program, police
departments should recruit representatives from all segments of the
community. Such a selection procedure would provide for a broad
cross-section of viewpoints and capabilities which, in the end, can only
serve to maximize the effectiveness of the program.

## Negotiation Versus Confrontation

When the police are called to the scene of a potentially
life-threatening situation, more often than not a confrontation not of
their making confronts them. In the initial moments, the person or
persons responsible for instigating the confrontation may appear to be
in control. But as sufficient numbers of officers arrive, the inevitable
decision on using force to end the confrontation is brought up for
consideration. While no two situations are exactly alike, the merits of
negotiation, mediation, and conflict resolution should be given their
due. Police who employ force as an immediate response to a crisis
situation are frequently labeled as reactionary---as opposed to being
recognized as the power in control of the situation. In most instances,
police departments that elect to employ mediation and conflict
resolution and other communication skills instead of force are generally
credited with reducing the level of tension.

Negotiation in a crisis situation generally affords the police an
opportunity to carefully formulate a well-constructed response.
Additional time also facilitates the strategic placement of key
personnel, who by then will be in full possession of virtually all of
the resources which appear necessary to bring about a successful
conclusion of the situation. In the final analysis, if all attempts at
talking fail and the time for negotiating comes to an end, the police
will be able to demonstrate that they legitimately attempted to use
reason instead of force, and only altered their course of action when no
other alternative reasonably existed.

Expert skills at negotiating, mediation, and conflict resolution are not
natural talents that are automatically acquired by each new officer who
enters the field of law enforcement. Departments should ensure that
classes in negotiating, mediation and conflict resolution are contained
within the curriculum of their in-service training and development
programs. Recognizing that the decision to negotiate---as opposed to
resorting to force---will not always be a viable option, the police
department should at least indicate its preference for negotiation
whenever possible.

## Areas of Special Concern

To understand the causes, and to reduce the incidence of violent
encounters between the police and citizens, it is necessary to identify
situations that have demonstrated a high potential for violence.
Unfortunately, data on police use-of-force situations are not collected
on a national scale, and the research has been primarily confined to the
use of firearms. However, through an empirical approach, it is possible
to establish areas of police-community interaction that are of
particular concern because of the friction which results. Some of those
areas are discussed below, along with suggestions of guidance police
agencies may consider providing to their officers. It should be
emphasized that the list is not intended as comprehensive.

### **Use of Deadly Force.** Of all the decisions a police officer is called upon to make, none has greater impact than the decision to use deadly force. Police in this country have been given the legal right to use force, up to and including deadly force, in order to maintain peace and order. Officers are often required to make that decision under highly stressful, split-second circumstances which leave little margin for error. The use of such force is justified in only the most extreme circumstances. The obvious reason for this severe limitation is the high potential for serious injury or death to the officer and other persons, innocent and guilty alike.

A 1999 Bureau of Justice Statistics study34  estimated that police in
the United States make nearly 45 million face-to-face contacts with
citizens a year. Only 1 percent of the citizens report being subjected
to threat or use of force by police and the majority of cases involve
levels of force at the lower end of the use-of-force continuum.

Recognizing that less-than-lethal force may still result in injury and
community unrest, officers need to exercise discretion in the
application of force in those situations as well. Establishing criteria
for a continuum of force will enable officers to adjust their use of
force to the seriousness of a perceived life-threatening situation. An
example of such a continuum is the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Model: officer
presence, verbal direction, soft empty hand, oleoresin capsicum, hard
empty hand, intermediate weapons, and lethal force. In addition,
officers who are skilled in conflict resolution and persuasion may find
ways to avoid higher levels of confrontation altogether. To determine
the most appropriate policies on use of force for a given department and
community, the department may benefit from a comprehensive review and
analysis of each use-of-force incident. Such a review may help officers
discern patterns in the incidents or officer behaviors that have
important implications for the development of policies that reduce
use-of-force incidents.

While police use of deadly force is a rare occurrence, its impact can be
felt throughout the community and undermines public confidence in the
police. Aside from the ethical and moral ramifications of taking
another's life, or leaving them perhaps permanently disabled, a police
officer also faces the prospect of being held criminally liable if
deadly force was improperly employed. People in today's litigious
society will frequently challenge the officer's decision to use deadly
force in a civil court as well. For all of these reasons, it is
absolutely imperative that officers thoroughly understand their
responsibilities, rights, and limitations regarding the use of deadly
force.

From the police department's perspective, a high standard of ongoing
specialized training is essential in minimizing the risk that every
officer faces in deciding to use deadly force in a particular situation.
Such a training effort, which has traditionally concentrated on skills
relating to firearms proficiency, should also address the various
implications that are attached to an officer's decision to use deadly
force. Police agencies also have a special and fundamental
responsibility to carefully formulate written policies on the use of
deadly force which are clear and can be understood by every member of
the organization.

When an incident of deadly force occurs, especially one involving the
loss of life of a person of color, and when there is a perception of
excessive use of force, civil disorder or unrest is possible. The
incident itself, and the events that follow, form a continuum of
potential flash points or triggering incidents that may lead to civil
unrest or disorder. These flash points include:

• The incident itself

• The investigation of the incident

• The community reaction to the incident

• The announcement of the result of the investigation

• The announcement of procedural court decision(s), sentencing, or jury
verdicts

• New incidents involving police or grievances

There are several variables that influence the reaction to an incident
by the public, especially an affected community of color or tight-knit
ethnic community. Among the factors impacting the level of public
discontent and anger are:

• Pre-existing conditions---the overall quality of race relations in the
community, especially police-community relations

• Nature of the incident itself---the type and nature of force used,
especially if it was deadly force or was excessively brutal by community
standards

• The circumstances surrounding the incident, including the age and
mental condition of the victim and the reaction of witnesses

• Concurrent police action---the actions of the other police officers at
the scene and the actions taken, or statements made by officers and the
police chief

• Media reporting of the incident

• City leadership actions---what the mayor and other community leaders
say or do

• Initial community response---whether there is an immediate community
reaction and escalating racial tensions

The CRS publication, *Responding to Incidents Involving Allegations of
Excessive Use of Force: A Checklist to Guide Police Executives*, which
appears as a boxed exhibit on the following pages, can be used as a
reference by law enforcement executives dealing with use-of-force
incidents.

### **Arrest Situations.** More officers lose their lives in arrest situations than in any other circumstance. "From 1992 through 2001, 34.4 percent of the victim officers were involved in arrest situations when slain," according to the FBI.35  Most of the police use-of-force situations would more than likely fall under the general category of resisting arrest. However, this area is the source of much controversy. The circumstances surrounding arrests have been the cause of major, recent police-minority group clashes in particular.

For most people, an arrest is an extremely stressful experience. And it
can cause reactions that are highly unusual and out of character for the
individual. For some, an arrest is viewed as a complete loss of freedom,
and their resistance may include the use of firearms, which dramatically
increases the possibility of a police officer using force.
Unfortunately, the data available does not identify specific types of
arrest situations as being more likely to result in use of force by or
against an officer.

Studies over the years, however, have provided an indication that some
*officers* are more likely to use force in effecting arrests than
others. Therefore, it appears an effort is needed to identify arrest
situations where force is used and to determine if there are common
factors present. If there is an indication that certain officers or
situations result in force being used by or against officers, then
approaches can be developed for dealing with those specific
circumstances.

### **Responding to Disturbance Calls.** Response to disturbance calls continues to be an area where police officers are exposed to potential assault and loss of life. While some express surprise at this, disturbance situations present clear dilemmas to police officers who must deal with them. They must intervene in disagreements between two or more parties, knowing little about the conflict, and often having very little real authority to address the underlying problems---unless one party has committed an offense. Moreover, the parties involved in the conflict generally have an expectation that the police should side with them since they believe they are right. It is also not unusual for officers to end up in a position where both sides of the conflict direct their wrath at them, if it becomes necessary to make an arrest. These are the situations that result in force being used by and against the officer. Such situations are all the more volatile when officers are dealing with minority persons.

Over the past 25 years, greater attention has been devoted to enhancing
the skills of police officers in this area. In the more progressive
police departments, time has been allocated in recruitment and in
service training---to developing a better understanding of all types of
conflict situations---with the emphasis on family or domestic violence.
With that improved understanding of conflict management this provides,
officers are able to handle more of the disturbance calls, in a manner
that avoids use of force and minimizes their own exposure to assault.
All training must focus on certain major factors in officer assaults:
the officer's demeanor, attitude, and lack of skill in using proven
psychological techniques to control the behavior of enraged disputants.
Officers must have an opportunity to identify, analyze, and openly
discuss these factors.

In addition to training officers in conflict management, a greater focus
has been placed on developing written policies and procedures. These not
only provide guidance in the use of discretion, they set forth concepts
such as the need to have at least two officers respond to disturbance
calls. They provide the officers with alternatives to arrest and to
resolve problems. They also enable officers to use alternative
resources, such as spouse abuse shelters to aide in responding to the
situations. The combination of training and written guidelines helps
increase the level of confidence an officer has in handling domestic
situations. This minimizes the potential for resorting to force to
settle the situation---which may not fit the problem that caused the
disturbance in the first place.

### **Traffic Stops and Pursuits.** Police officers make thousands of traffic stops daily. Like other human beings, they have a tendency to become complacent when performing tasks that become routine. These circumstances create an environment where basic procedural mistakes are made that may result in the officer being assaulted or using force to resolve a problem that could have been avoided. The dilemma faced by police administrators lies in ensuring that officers avoid mistakes without introducing a level of fear that causes officers to overreact to nonthreatening situations.

While policies, procedures, and periodic refresher training are helpful,
the resolution of this problem rests with the officers themselves and
first-line supervisors. The day-to-day environment must be one that
reinforces adherence to basic procedures. The environment also needs to
reflect a value system which views using force as the least-preferred
method of problem resolution. The establishment of that environment, as
observed elsewhere, begins at the top of the organization. However, to
be effective, line officers and their supervisors must accept that
value.

Police pursuit situations have drawn considerable attention in recent
years because of well-publicized civil judgments against local
jurisdictions for negligence. This has caused many police departments to
examine and begin to adjust their policies towards participating in
high-speed chases. In addition to the potential for serious injury or
death and substantial property damage, these situations often end with
the pursued individual being subdued by force. Emotions run high in
pursuit situations because of their inherent dangers. Both officer and
suspect may engage in conduct that would not occur under normal
circumstances.

The pursuit situation is very difficult for police administrators to
address, and, in some cases, produces "lose-lose" conditions. Many
believe a "no-pursuit" policy would lead to more individuals taking a
chance on eluding an officer. At the same time, a no-pursuit policy will
not necessarily limit the department's liability---because some of these
cases may produce a failure-to-protect dilemma.

Therefore, policies must be developed that guide officer discretion. One
provision that often appears in departments' pursuit policies requires
that officers suspend the chase, when it reaches the point of creating a
greater problem than the initial reason for beginning the pursuit. For
maximum impact, this type of statement should be supplemented with real
examples of its application, and should be reinforced, even in those
times when a pursuit situation does not result in a crash.

### **Investigating Suspicious Persons.** Over the years, the concept of "suspicious person" has become less clearly defined as the individual right of freedom of movement has been reinforced. At one time, "suspicious" could mean merely encountering an individual of one race in a neighborhood populated by members of another race, at any time of the day. That evolved to a late-night situation and eventually to a requirement that other circumstances be present. The difficulty in the inability to clearly define and articulate "suspicious" is that it creates the perception of harassment on the part of the individual stopped and questioned. Obviously, this can quickly result in friction between officer and citizen, with the citizen resisting an arrest that is likely to be borderline at best.

Unfortunately, much of the formal police training in this area does not
adequately prepare an officer to deal with the ambiguities
involved---which may result in responses at one extreme or the other.
Either the police department is overly aggressive and develops a hostile
relationship with one group of citizens, or it is not aggressive enough,
and gives the impression of ambivalence or laziness. As in other areas,
practical guidelines for the use of discretion need to be prepared,
disseminated, and reinforced in daily operations. These guidelines have
to balance the individual's right to freedom of movement with the need
of the community to be free from crime.

### **Handling, Custody, and Transportation of Prisoners.** Police handling of individuals in custody results in a higher level of assault and fatalities than one might expect---given the presumption of police control in these circumstances. However, problems do occur, and experience shows that many times officers are assaulted and suspects injured during the booking process. In fact, injuries and deaths suffered by minorities, already in police custody, have prompted a number of serious police-community conflicts in recent years.

Studies in Baltimore County, Maryland, and Newport News, Virginia, to
cite just two examples, have shown that a significant number of
altercations occur in the environment where booking takes place.
Although the reasons for this are not immediately clear, separation of
the arresting officer and the suspect seems to result in fewer
incidents. Available data does not distinguish the proportion of such
incidents relating particularly to transportation. Nevertheless, an
evaluation of procedures and reinforcement of sound ones would
contribute to a reduction of conflict.

### **Handling People with Mental Impairment.** The treatment of mental illness has undergone radical revision in recent years. Where in-hospital treatment and confinement was once the norm, the emphasis has now shifted to out-patient and community-based programs as an approach towards recovery. As more and more people with special needs are returned to their respective communities, it becomes more important than ever for the police to develop a general familiarization with recommended approaches towards handing the mentally ill. Police departments must make a concerted effort to identify local resources that offer special services in the field of mental illness. They should also extend an invitation to area health professionals to participate in a program of in-service training for the benefit of those police officers who are most likely to confront citizens with one or more forms of mental illness.

The goal of such an effort is not to transform the police officer into a
diagnostician or professional psychiatrist, but to provide the officer
with a special understanding of, and empathy for, the problems of the
mentally ill. Channels of communication between the police, the mental
health professionals, and local treatment centers should be constantly
utilized and upgraded when necessary.

The police should also recognize that not all forms of mental illness
are permanent, nor are they completely debilitating. Some of the people
an officer encounters may, on the surface, appear to be functioning with
some degree of normalcy, but may still be under enormous pressure or
stress that is not readily discernible or articulated. Separating and
identifying the person who is affected by mental illness from the person
who is simply engaged in antisocial or criminal behavior requires a
special degree of skill and experience. It is imperative that officers
be provided with the necessary level of training that can elevate them
to that special degree of skill, or that arrangements be made so that
the services of mental health professionals are readily available to
officers in crisis situations.

As most law enforcement professionals know, the results of police
encounters with the mentally impaired have led to major police-community
confrontations in a number of cities. Fortunately, however, the
seriousness of this problem has been recognized, and innovative
approaches to it are being developed. For example, in April 1986, the
Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) issued guidelines to help police
departments handle encounters with the mentally impaired. The report
resulted from an 18-month study funded by the National Institute of
Justice and the Community Trust.36 

The PERF report also describes creative models used by three police
departments: Madison, Wisconsin; Birmingham, Alabama; and Galveston
County, Texas. While these programs illustrate markedly different
approaches, they may be helpful to police departments trying to improve
their own handling of the mentally impaired. In Madison, handling calls
involving the mentally ill is the responsibility of regular patrol
officers, who receive over 20 hours of mental health training. In
addition, officers can confer with the county's 24-hour emergency mental
health center before attempting to handle difficult cases. The Galveston
County Sheriffs Department uses a unit of six specially trained deputies
to respond to all mental health calls, thereby relieving regular
deputies of this responsibility. The Birmingham Police Department relies
on a community service unit consisting of social workers who come to the
scene of an encounter to assist officers in reaching a disposition of
the situation.

The City of Portland and Multnomah County, Oregon, have also experienced
several recent clashes between police and the community over police
handling of mentally impaired persons. Believing that the necessity for
police intervention was, in many instances, a manifestation of mentally
ill persons "falling through the cracks," Portland and Multnomah County
established a task force to develop a coordinated plan of action
involving all pertinent city and county agencies. A letter of agreement
indicating the responsibilities of these agencies has been included in
the appendices.

### **Hostage/Barricade Situations.** In recent years, most medium-to-large police agencies have developed teams of officers to respond to hostage/barricade encounters. These teams usually include negotiators and have established objectives of dealing with these situations without injury to anyone involved. Unfortunately, however, that is not always the result, and when the person or persons involved are members of a minority group, any force used is likely to be more controversial because of the general belief that the police practice a double standard. The tragic encounter between Philadelphia police and the MOVE group in 1985 is a case in point, and there are other, less well-publicized incidents that also racially polarized communities.

Most police hostage/barricade teams conduct frequent training and hold
debriefing sessions at the conclusion of an operation. These teams have
made significant contributions towards reducing the amount and degree of
force used by the police in addressing these problems. Agencies that
have not established this capability should do so if resources permit.
If not, the capability could be developed by combining resources or
through agreements with other municipal, county, or state agencies.

### **Drugs and Gangs.** One of the major areas of concern in policing is the violence that surrounds drug and gang activity. The increased number of handguns and other firepower, the role of organized criminals and youth gangs, and the amount of money involved in this activity have torn apart communities---created divisions within communities and between police and communities, particularly communities of color. Homicide rates, especially among minority youth, have also escalated.

Pressures and demands from different segments of the community have led
to calls for aggressive policing, even if it entails the violation of
individuals' rights. Field practices that violate accepted police
practices and procedures are too often condoned in the name of
expediency or pressure for immediate results. This issue represents a
significant challenge to police executives and a department's value
system.

The guidance the executive can provide on such a volatile issue begins
with the value system of the police department and the systems
established to put these values into operation. The community and law
enforcement must be involved in developing a comprehensive approach to
drugs and gangs that solicits the community's cooperation and support.
The police department must address both the criminal acts and the
community's fears or perceptions. Specialized training must be provided
to the officers in: effective techniques for investigating drug
activity, making arrests, developing intervention and diversion
programs, establishing racial and cultural awareness programs, and
developing broad based community support through such programs as a
citizens' crime watch and D.A.R.E. The relationship between police and
urban youth can become a positive partnership that includes police,
parents, schools, community and business leaders, clergy, and the media.
The relationship should be one that seeks both to prevent and to resolve
problems of crime and disorder based on cooperation, collaboration, and
mutual respect.37 

# Concluding Statement

It should be reemphasized that the principles of policing presented in
this publication, and summarized here, are not seen as either a panacea
or as the comprehensive, final word on reducing police-citizen violence.
These approaches are offered, first, in recognition that the level of
police-citizen violence remains a serious problem that requires
attention. Secondly, they are offered in the sincere belief that enough
has been learned through the experience of the last several years that a
useful contribution can be made by collecting some of that experience
and sharing it.

As pointed out elsewhere in this publication, citizens bear a part of
the responsibility for the tenor of relations with police. However, it
is the police role which is key because of the unique power that is a
part of it. To a significant extent, the progress that has been made in
reducing police-citizen violence has occurred because determined police
executives were willing to act where they saw policies or practices that
needed correcting---sometimes against considerable internal and external
opposition. Further improvement will also depend in a major way on the
willingness, and ability, of police executives to push for meaningful
change in their departments.

Thus, this publication is offered as a useful resource. But just as the
Community Relations Service does not regard this as the last word on the
subject, the agency also does not view the sharing of experience and
information as a one-way street. Copies of policies or descriptions of
innovative programs from police departments would be welcome submissions
by CRS. It is anticipated that the agency will continue exploring
approaches to avoiding police-citizen violence as part of its ongoing
conflict resolution responsibility, and will widely disseminate the most
useful information obtained. CRS will also continue to make its services
directly available to police agencies through technical assistance on
program development. That assistance is available upon request free of
charge.

# Bibliography

Adcox, Ken, "Doing Bad Things for Good Reasons," *The Police Chief*,
January 2000, pp. 16--28.

Aspy, David N., and Cheryl Blalock Aspy, "Hate Crimes: What They Are,
Why They Happen, and Counselors' Roles in Preventing Them," chapter 18
in *Violence in American Schools: A Practical Guide for Counselors*, ed.
Daya Singh Sandhu and Cheryl Blalock Aspy (Alexandria, VA: American
Counseling Association, 2000), pp. 305--11.

Brown, Lee P., "Community Policing: A Practical Guide for Police
Officials," *Perspectives on Policing.* No. 12 (Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice; and Harvard
University, September 1989).

Brubaker, Larry C., "Deadly Force: A 20-Year Study of Fatal Encounters,"
*FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, April 2002, pp. 6--13.

Bulzomi, Michael J., "Indian Tribal Sovereignty: Criminal Jurisdiction
and Procedure," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, June 2001, pp. 24--32.

California Department of Justice, *Community Oriented Policing & Problem
Solving* (July 1995).

Carpenter, Michael, "Put It In Writing: The Police Policy Manual," *FBI
Law Enforcement Bulletin*, October 2000, pp. 1--5.

Carroll, Brian P., "Major Case Management: Key Components," *FBI Law
Enforcement Bulletin*, June 2001, pp. 1--4.

Charrier, Kim, "Marketing Strategies for Attracting and Retaining
Generation X Police Officers," *The Police Chief*, December 2000, pp.
45--51.

Close, Dale H., "How Chiefs Should Prepare for Nine Liability Risks,"
*The Police Chief*, June 2001, pp. 16--27.

Coles, Catherine, and George Kelling, "Is the Rigorous Enforcement of
Anti-nuisance Laws a Good Idea?," *Insight* (New York: Manhattan
Institute for Policy Research, 1997).

Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, *Standards for
Law Enforcement Agencies* (Fairfax, VA, 1984).

Daane, Diane M., and James E. Hendricks, "Liability for Failure to
Adequately Train," *The Police Chief*, Vol. 58, No. 11 (November 1991),
pp. 26--29.

Davis, Ronald L, *A NOBLE Perspective: Racial Profiling---A Symptom of
Bias-Based Policing* (Alexandria, VA: National Organization of Black Law
Enforcement Executives, May 3, 2001).

Delattre, Edwin J., and Daniel L. Schofield, "Combating Bigotry in Law
Enforcement," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, June 1996, pp. 27--32.

Duffy, James E., and Alan C. Brantley, "Militias: Initiating Contact,"
*FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, July 1997, pp. 22--26.

Durose, Matthew R., Patrick A. Langan, Lawrence A. Greenfield, Steven K.
Smith, and David J. Levin, "Contacts Between Public and the Police"
(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, 1999).

Engelson, Wade, "The Organizational Values of Law Enforcement Agencies:
The Impact of Field Training Officers in the Socialization of Police
Recruits to Law Enforcement Organizations," *Journal of Police and
Criminal Psychology*, Vol. 14, No.2 (Fall 1999).

Finn, Peter, *Citizen Review of Police: Approaches and Implementation*
(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, March 2001).

Fishbein, Diana, "The Comprehensive Care Model: Providing a Framework
for Community Policing," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, May 1998, pp.
1--5.

Fletcher, Ronald M., "Civilian Oversight of Police Behavior," *Journal
of Intergroup Relations*, Vol. 19, No. 3 (Fall 1992), pp. 7--12.

Geller, William A., "15 Shooting Reduction Techniques: Controlling the
Use of Deadly Force by and Against Police Officers," *The Police Chief,*
Vol. 52, No. 8 (August 1985), pp. 56--58.

Glensor, Ronald W., and Kenneth Peak, "Lasting Impact: Maintaining
Neighborhood Order," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, March 1998, pp.
1--7.

Goldstein, Herman, *Policing a Free Society* (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger,
1977).

Herman, Susan, "Law Enforcement and Victim Services: Rebuilding Lives,
Together," *The Police Chief*, May 2002, pp. 34--37.

Hill, Rodney, and Joan Logan, "Civil Liability and Mental Illness: A
Proactive Model to Mitigate Claims," *The Police Chief*, June 2001, pp.
29--32.

Hoang, Francis Q., "Addressing School Violence: Prevention, Planning,
and Practice," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, August 2001, pp. 18--23.

Hochstetler, Steven, "Community Oriented Policing Concepts: Increasing
Community and Officer Involvement," *Law and Order*, April 2002, pp.
34--36.

Hudson, David, "Assuring Police Officer Performance: Whose Job Is It?,"
*The Police Chief*, December 2000, pp. 26--27.

Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department, *Report of
the Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department* (Los
Angeles, July 9, 1991).

International Association of Chiefs of Police, *Hate Crime in America:
Recommendations from the 1998 IACP Summit*" (Alexandria, VA, January
1999).

---------, *Police Accountability and Citizen Review: A Leadership
Opportunity for Police Chiefs*, (Alexandria, VA, November 2000).

---------, "Police Leadership in the 21st Century," *The Police Chief*,
pp. 57--73.

---------, "Police Traffic Stops Summit II," March 2001.

---------, *Police Use of Force in America 2001* (Alexandria, VA, 2001).

---------, "Pursuit," model policy developed by the Highway Safety
Committee (AHS018.a96), approved at the 103rd Annual Conference of the
International Association of Chiefs of Police, Phoenix, October 30,
1996.

---------, *Responding to Hate Crimes: A Police Officer's Guide to
Investigation and Prevention* (Alexandria, VA, 1999).

---------, *Recommendations from the First IACP Forum on Professional
Traffic Stops* (Alexandria, VA, April 1999).

Johnson, Richard R., "The Psychological Influence of the Police
Uniform," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, March 2001, pp. 27--32.

Kelling, George L., "Cutting Crime, Keeping Our Rights," *New York
Times*, April 1, 2000.

---------, "Policing Under Fire," *Wall Street Journal*, March 23, 1999.

Kelling, George L., and Mark H. Moore, "The Evolving Strategy of
Policing," *Perspectives on Policing.* No. 4 (Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice; and Harvard
University, November 1988).

Kobolt, James, "Vehicle Stops Involving Extremist Group Members," *FBI
Law Enforcement Bulletin*, December 1999, pp. 18--23.

Kramer, Michael, "Designing an Individualized Performance Evaluation
System: A Values-Based Process," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, March
1998, pp. 20--26.

Kruger, Karen J., "Collecting Statistics in Response to Racial Profiling
Allegations," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, May 2002, pp. 8--12.

Kurz, David L., "Strategic Planning and Police-Community Partnership in
a Small Town," *The Police Chief*, December 2000, pp. 28--36.

Lathrop, Sam W., "Reviewing Use of Force: A Systemic Approach," *FBI Law
Enforcement Bulletin*, October 2000, pp. 16--20.

Lober, Richard E., "Value-Based Leadership and the Role of Internal
Affairs," *The Police Chief*, May 2002, pp. 54--57.

Masterson, Michael, and Dennis Stevens, "Madison Speaks Up: Measuring
Community Policing Performance," *Law and Order* Vol. 49, No. 10
(October 2001), pp. 99--100.

Mastrofski, Stephen D., "Policing for People," *Ideas in American
Policing* (Washington, DC: Police Foundation, March 1999).

Matulia, Kenneth J*A Balance of Forces*, Executive Summary
(Gaithersburg, MD: International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1982).

Mills, Marcia C., and John G. Stratton, "The MMPI and the Prediction of
Police Job Performance," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, February 1982,
pp. 10--15.

Milton, Catherine H., and Jeanne W. Halleck, James Lardner, and Gary L.
Albrecht, *Police Use of Deadly Force* (Washington, DC: Police
Foundation, 1977).

Moore, Mark H., "Problem Solving and Community Policing," chapter 18 in
*Community Policing: Contemporary Readings*, ed. Geoffrey P. Alpert and
Alex Piquero (Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1998), pp. 327--75.

Morrison, Greg, and Joseph Airey, "Special Event Safety and Security:
Protecting the World Alpine Ski Championships," *FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletin***,** April 2002, pp. 1--5.

Murphy, Gerald R., *Special Care: Improving Police Response to Mentally
Disabled* (Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum, 1986).

National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standard and Goals,
*Police* (Washington, DC, 1973).

National Sheriff's Association, "Model on Law Enforcement and Mental
Health Partnerships," video, June 2002.

Osofsky, Howard J., "Developing a Partnership to Enhance Police
Recruitment and Retention," *The Police Chief*, January 2001, pp.
38--46.

Petrowski, Thomas, D., "Miranda Revisited: *Dickerson v. United
States*," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, August 2001, pp. 25--32.

Petterson, Werner, "A Summary of Civilian Oversight" Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Justice, Community Relations Service, 1993).

Police Executive Research Forum, *The American Law Enforcement Chief
Executive: A Management Profile* (Washington, DC, 1985).

Ramirez, Deborah, Jack McDevitt, and Amy Ferrell, *A Resource Guide on
Racial Profiling Data Collection Systems: Promising Practices and
Lessons Learned,* NCJ 184768 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, November 2000).

Ramsey, Charles H., "Organizational Change: Preparing a Police
Department for Community Policing in the 21st Century," *The Police
Chief*, March 2000, pp. 16--55.

Ribera, Anthony D., "How One Police Chief Coped with Crisis," *The
Police Chief*, May 2002, pp. 53--61.

Rostow, Cary D., Robert D. Davis, Judith P. Levy, and Sarah Brecknock,
"Civil Liability and Psychological Services in Law Enforcement
Administration," *The Police Chief***,** June 2001, pp. 36--43.

Rubinstein, Jonathan, *City Police* (New York: Farrar, Straus, and
Giroux, 1973).

Sawyer, Suzie, "Strength Through Support: COPS Programs Help Victims
Become Survivors," *The Police Chief*, May 2002, pp. 38--39.

Scharf, Peter, and Arnold Binder, *The Badge and the Bullet: Police Use
of Deadly Force* (New York: Praeger, 1983).

Sheehan, Donald C., and Vincent B. Van Hasselt, "Identifying Law
Enforcement Stress Reactions Early," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*,
September 2003, p. 15.

SK Video Productions, *Road Stop Ethics*, video prepared for the
Community Policy Consortium, February 25, 2000.

Skogan, Wesley G., Susan M. Hartnett, Jill DuBois, Jennifer T. Comey,
Karla Twedt-Ball, and J. Erik Gudell, "Public Involvement: Community
Policing in Chicago" (Chicago: Northwestern University, Institute for
Policy Research, September 2000).

Skolnick, Jerome H., *Justice Without Trial: Law Enforcement in
Democratic Society* (New York: Wiley, 1966).

---------, "On Democratic Policing," *Ideas in American Policing*
(Washington, DC: Police Foundation, August 1999).

Staszak, Dennis, "Making the Most of Press Interviews," *FBI Law
Enforcement Bulletin*, May 2002, p. 19.

Stine, Joseph J., "A Ballistic Vest Against Lawsuits: Protecting
Yourself and Your Department Against Civil Liability," *The Police
Chief*, June 2001, pp. 44--47.

Stewart-Brown, Recheal, "Community Mobilization: The Foundation for
Community Policing," *FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin*, June 2001, pp.
9--17.

U.S. Department of Justice, "Principles for Promoting Police Integrity:
Examples of Promising Police Practices and Polices" (Washington, DC,
January 2001).

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, *A
Policymaker's Guide to Hate Crimes*, NCJ 162304 (Washington, DC, March
1997).

U.S. Department of Justice, Community Relations Service, "CRS and
Community-Oriented Policing," concept paper (Washington, DC, 1993).

U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, *Law
Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted,* Uniform Crime Reports
(Washington, DC, 2001).

---------, "Learning Module Two: Bias-Motivated Crimes---Definitions and
Procedures," *Training Guide for Hate Crime Data Collection*
(Washington, DC, 1991). pp. 14--20.

U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, "Community
Policing: Chicago's Experience," *National Institute of Justice
Journal,* April 1999.

---------, "Community Policing in Action: Lessons from an Observational
Study," *Research Preview*, June 1998.

Vicchio, Stephen J., "Ethics and Police Integrity," *FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletin*, July 1997, pp. 8--12.

Walker, Samuel, Carol Archbold, and Leigh Herbst, *Mediating Citizen
Complaints Against Police Officers: A Guide for Police and Community
Leaders* (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented
Policing Services, 2002).

Walker, Samuel, and Betsy Wright Kreisel, "Varieties of Citizen Review:
The Implications of Organizational Features of Complaint Review
Procedures for Accountability of the Police," *American Journal of
Police*, Vol. 15, No. 3 (1996), pp. 65--89. \[**Note:** *American
Journal of Police* has merged into the new publication *Policing*.
Abstracts and articles from the *American Journal of Police* may be
accessed from www.emeraldinsight.com/alp.htm.\]

Walter, Lisa, "Eradicating Racial Stereotyping from Terry Stops: The
Case for an Equal Protection Exclusionary Rule," *University of Colorado
Law Review*, Vol. 71, No. 1, pp. 255--94.

Webb, Vincent J., and Charles M. Katz, "Citizen Ratings of the
Importance of Community Policing Activities," chapter 22 in *Community
Policing: Contemporary Readings*, ed. Geoffrey P. Alpert and Alex
Piquero (Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1998), pp. 427--44.

Weisburd, David, Rosann Greenspan, Edwin E. Hamilton, Kellie A. Bryant,
and Hubert Williams, "The Abuse of Police Authority: A National Study of
Police Officers' Attitudes," Research in Brief, (Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, May 2000).

Williams, Hubert, and Patrick V. Murphy, "The Evolving Strategy of
Policing: A Minority View," *Perspectives on Policing,* No. 13
(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice; and Harvard University, January 1990).

Zhao, Jihong, "The Future of Policing in a Community Era," chapter 16 in
*Crime and Justice in America: Present Realities and Future Prospects*,
2nd ed., ed. Wilson R. Palacios, Paul F. Cromwell, and Roger G. Dunham
(Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2002), pp. 191--204.

Zhao, Jihong, Nicholas P. Lovrich, and T. Hank Robinson, "Community
Policing: Is It Changing the Basic Functions of Policing: Findings from
a Longitudinal Study of 200+ Municipal Police Agencies," *Journal of
Criminal Justice*, Vol. 29 (2001), pp. 365--77.

# Appendices

The purpose of these appendices is to provide guidelines for the
development of effective police agency mechanisms to address the issues
referenced by the members of the task force which prepared this
publication. Some of the provisions of the materials presented here may
well conflict with state law, municipal ordinances, or collective
bargaining agreements. The Community Relations Service believes however,
that these materials will serve as a balancing factor as the reader
reviews similar policies now in effect in his or her own agency.

### **Appendix A. Role of Police**

1\. "The Evolving Strategy of Police: A Minority View" 57

2\. "On Democratic Policing" 73

### **Appendix B. Community Policing**

1\. "CRS and Community-Oriented Policing" 83

2\. "Community Policing: A Practical Guide for Police Officials" 91

3\. "Policing for People" 103

### **Appendix C. Bias-Based Policing**

1\. "Policing Under Fire" 117

2\. "Cutting Crime, Keeping Our Rights" 119

3\. "Is the Rigorous Enforcement of Anti-nuisance Laws a Good Idea?" 121

### **Appendix D. Use of Force and Alternatives**

1\. *Police Use of Force in America 2001,* Executive Overview 127

2\. *Police Use of Force: Addressing Community Racial Tensions* 137

3\. "Deadly Force: A 20-Year Study of Fatal Encounters" 143

4\. "15 Shooting Reduction Techniques: Controlling the Use of

Deadly Force by and Against Police Officers" 151

5\. "Reasonable and Unreasonable Fear in Police Encounters" 155

### **Appendix E. Citizen Complaints and Other Redress Systems**

1\. *Police Accountability and Citizen Review: A Leadership*

*Opportunity for Police Chiefs* 163

2\. "Police Agency Handling of Complaints: A Model Policy Statement" 187

3\. Policy and Procedure: Receipt of Citizen Complaints;

Conduct of Internal Investigations 199

4\. "A Summary of Civilian Oversight" 213

**Appendix F. Municipal Liability**

1\. "Liability for Failure to Adequately Train" 217

### **Appendix G. Public Information**

1\. Policy and Procedure: News Media Information Release Policy 223

### **Appendix H. Hate and Bias-Motivated Crimes**

1\. "Learning Module Two: Bias-Motivated Crimes---

Definitions and Procedures" 231

2\. *Racial and Religious Violence: A Law Enforcement Guidebook* 239

3\. *Responding to Hate Crimes: A Police Officer's Guide to*

*Investigation and Prevention* 271

4\. *Hate Crime in America: Recommendations from the*

*1998 IACP Summit* 279

### **Appendix I. Areas of Special Concern**

1\. Letter of Agreement Between Agencies Involved in Responding

to the Mentally Disabled, Multnomah County, Oregon 289

2\. Pursuit Model Policy 299

# Pull Quotes

Peel's first principle of policing was "The duty of police is to prevent
crime and disorder."

Every police department has its own unique culture.

Police executives have a responsibility to create a departmental culture
based on articulated values.

Departmental policies, practices, and procedures should reflect the
department's stated values. The department should ensure that the
community has full knowledge and understanding of these values.

Attempts to minimize violent encounters between the police and the
community must focus on the police since their likelihood of exercising
control over these interactions is much greater.

As in other "cultures," members are socialized (conditioned) to
understand and accept the norms of the group. Values influence what the
norms of a group are.

Departmental policies should be based on articulated department values.

The perception of bias-based policing decreases the trust between law
enforcement and the community necessary for effective community-oriented
and problem-solving policing.

Hate crimes and incidents impact more than the immediate victims. Other
members of the attacked group feel targeted, the public as a whole feels
violated, and community tensions are heightened.

The community should understand what constitutes unprofessional conduct
and, above all, must have a reasonable understanding of the procedures
for investigating and adjudicating cases of use of deadly force.

Police officers tend to become the kind of police officers they are
socialized to be.

Departmental policies based on identified group values are more likely
to be understood and followed.

Positive change in the police-community violence cycle will occur more
easily if the community is involved in the change process.

The goals of community policing may include: enhanced quality of life in
neighborhoods, reduction of fear, increased order, crime control, crime
prevention, and citizen satisfaction with police services.

The entire community, represented by traditional and nontraditional
agencies and groups alike, should be called upon to identify local
concerns that fall within the purview of the police department.

Written directives for common response situations should be clear and
easy to implement, regularly updated, and constantly reviewed by every
member of the organization.

Clearly stating the department's position on each instance of deadly
force in a timely and sensitive manner reduces community tensions.

# Footnotes

1George L. Kelling and Mark H. Moore, "The Evolving Strategy of
Policing," *Perspectives on Policing*, No. 4 (Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice; and Harvard
University, November 1988).

2Hubert Williams and Patrick V. Murphy, "The Evolving Strategy of
Policing: A Minority View," *Perspectives on Policing*, No. 13
(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice; and Harvard University, January 1990) Williams and Murphy
describe some gaps in this general understanding of policing with
respect to minorities.

3*The Law Enforcement Code of Ethics* was developed in 1957 by a
committee under the auspices of the International Association of Chiefs
of Police.

4Jerome H. Skolnick, *Justice Without Trial: Law Enforcement in
Democratic Society* (New York: Wiley, 1966), p. 67.

5Jonathan Rubinstein, *City Police* (New York: Farrar, Straus, and
Giroux, 1973), p. 319.

6The National Commission on Law Observance and Law Enforcement, better
known as the Wickersham Commission, issued a series of 14 reports on
criminal justice and related subject in 1931. Number 14 was its *Report
on Police*. The commission's chairman was U.S. Attorney General George
W. Wickersham.

7President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of
Justice, *Task Force Report: The Police* (Washington, DC, 1967), pp.
126--27.

8National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals,
*Police* (Washington, DC, 1973), p. 369.

9Police Executive Research Forum, *The American Law Enforcement Chief
Executive: A Management Profile* (Washington, DC, 1985), p. 108.

10Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, *Standards
for Law Enforcement Agencies* (Fairfax, VA, 1984), pp. 32-37.

11Catherine H. Milton, et al., *Police Use of Deadly Force* (Washington,
DC: Police Foundation, 1977), p. 105.

12Kenneth J. Matulia, *A Balance of Forces*, Executive Summary
(Gaithersburg, MD: International Association of Chiefs of Police, 1982),
p. 25.

13Herman Goldstein, *Policing a Free Society* (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger,
1977), pp. 273--79. Copyright by the Board of Regents, University of
Wisconsin. Reprinted with the permission of the University of Wisconsin
Law School.

14Peter Scharf and Arnold Binder, *The Badge and the Bullet: Police Use
of Deadly Force* (New York: Praeger, 1983), p. 178.

15Samuel Walker and Betsy Wright Kreisel, "Varieties of Citizen Review:
The Implications of Organizational Features of Complaint Review
Procedures for Accountability of the Police," *American Journal of
Police*, Vol. 15, No. 3 (1996), p. 65.

16International Association of Chiefs of Police, *Police Accountability
and Citizen Review: A Leadership Opportunity for Police Chiefs*
(Alexandria, VA, November 2000).

17"Police Agency Handling of Complaints: A Model Police Statement by the
Police Executive Research Forum," *Police Management Today* (September
1981), pp. 88--98.

18Walker and Kreisel, p. 66.

19Peter Finn, *Citizen Review of Police: Approaches and Implementation*
(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of
Justice, March 2001).

20Ronald M. Fletcher, "Civilian Oversight of Police Behavior," *Journal
of Intergroup Relations*, Vol. 19, No. 3 (Fall 1992), pp. 7--12.

21Diane M. Daane and James E. Hendricks, "Liability for Failure to
Adequately Train," *The Police Chief*, Vol. 58, No. 11 (November 1991),
pp. 26--29.

22Ronald L. Davis, *A NOBLE Perspective: Racial Profiling---A Symptom of
Bias-Based Policing* (Alexandria, VA: National Organization of Black Law
Enforcement Executives, May 3, 2001), p. 4.

23Davis, p. 7.

24George L Kelling, "Cutting Crime, Keeping Our Rights," *New York
Times* (April 1, 2000).

25David N. Aspy and Cheryl Blalock Aspy, "Hate Crimes: What They Are,
Why They Happen, and Counselors' Roles in Preventing Them," chapter 18
in *Violence in American Schools: A Practical Guide for Counselors*, ed.
Daya Singh Sandhu and Cheryl Blalock Aspy (Alexandria, VA: American
Counseling Association, 2000), p. 310.

26U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, *A
Policymaker's Guide to Hate Crimes* (Washington, DC, December 1997).

27Wade Engelson, "The Organizational Values of Law Enforcement Agencies:
The Impact of Field Training Officers in the Socialization of Police
Recruits to Law Enforcement Organizations," *Journal of Police and
Criminal Psychology*, Vol. 14, No.2 (Fall 1999), p. 17.

28Vincent J. Webb and Charles M. Katz, "Citizen Ratings of the
Importance of Community Policing Activities," chapter 22 in *Community
Policing: Contemporary Readings*, ed. Geoffrey P. Alpert and Alex
Piquero (Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1998).

29"Community Policing in Action: Lessons from an Observational Study,"
*National Institute for Justice: Research Preview*, June 1998.

30U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, "Community
Policing: Chicago's Experience," *National Institute of Justice
Journal,* April 1999.

31Webb and Katz, pp. 430--43, 439.

32Michael Masterson and Dennis Stevens, "Madison Speaks Up: Measuring
Community Policing Performance," *Law and Order* Vol. 49, No. 10
(October 2001), pp. 99--100.

33California Department of Justice, *Community Oriented Policing &
Problem Solving* (July 1995), pp. 4--10.

34Matthew R. Durose, et al., *Contacts Between Public and the Police*
(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, 1999).

35"From 1992 through 2001, 34.4 percent of the victim officers were
involved in arrest situations when slain, 16.2 percent were
investigating suspicious persons, and 15.6 percent were responding to
disturbance calls. Additionally, 15.1 percent of the fallen officers
were involved in traffic pursuits/stops and 13.7 percent were caught in
ambush situations," U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of
Investigation, *Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted,* Uniform
Crime Reports (Washington, DC, 2001), p. 4.

36Gerald R. Murphy, *Special Care: Improving Police Response to Mentally
Disabled* (Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum, 1986).

37U.S. Department of Justice, Community Relations Service, *Police and
Urban Youth Relations: An Antidote to Racial Violence* (Washington, DC,
September 1995).

## Responding to Incidents Involving Allegations of Excessive Use of Force: A Checklist to Guide Police Executives

Years of good policing practices and community trust can be jeopardized
by a single act of, or perception of, police excessive use of force
(EUF). When an EUF incident occurs, police executives should be prepared
to take appropriate and carefully considered action to promote peace,
maintain community trust, and sustain departmental morale. When there
are allegations of EUF, the department's officers and staff, as well as
the community they serve, must be assured of a fair and impartial
investigation. Community tensions and violence may develop in the
aftermath of an incident involving use of force or other police conduct.
This checklist of immediate steps suggests actions to take right after
an incident. The checklist of other actions identifies steps that can
help create positive police-community relationships---the best
protection against violent community reaction to an EUF incident.

Immediate Steps

**I. Provide Information Promptly**

-   Advise the Mayor, County Executive, and other officials, key civic
    and community leaders and clergy about the situation.

-   Provide what information you can to the public about the incident
    and the circumstances which prompted police action, but avoid any
    negative comments about the suspect(s) or victim(s).

-   Avoid making any prejudgments about the officers' conduct before you
    have complete information and the investigation is completed.

**II. Get an Investigation Underway Promptly**

-   Advise the family of the involved person(s) and the public about the
    investigation, including its scope, resources allocated, and
    projected timetables.

-   Publicly clarify departmental policies governing the status of the
    involved officer(s) while the investigation is underway.

-   Announce publicly your willingness to cooperate with investigations
    by other agencies (local, State, and Federal).

-   Hold periodic meetings with community leaders to advise them of the
    progress of the investigation and any other developments.

-   Take precautions to avoid new incidents or confrontations.

**III. Enlist the Community's Help and Support**

-   Brief community leaders and ask for their help in defusing community
    tensions by getting accurate information to the community,
    organizing community street patrols, and scheduling neighborhood
    meetings.

-   Conduct dialogues with community groups to help establish a common
    understanding of the legal and administrative requirements of EUF
    investigations.

-   Survey community perspectives and invite commentary and any
    expression of concerns about police arrests, stops, ticketing,
    profiling, and other issues.

**IV. Anticipate and Plan for the Announcement of the Results of
Investigations**

-   Brief the family, their associates, and community leaders on the
    results of the investigation before making a public announcement.
    Seek their assistance in keeping the community peaceful.

-   Arrange, where possible, for at least two hour advance notice of
    public announcement of the decision by a grand jury, district
    attorney, or court.

-   Be ready to implement a contingency plan in the event that the
    announcement may lead to community tension or unrest.

-   Meet with leaders of protest activities to secure agreement on the
    scope and limits of marches, flash points, demonstration sites, use
    of marshals, and other ground rules.

-   Deploy sufficient resources to contain any disruptive activity or
    disorder.

**Other Actions**

Below is a list of questions which police leaders should review
periodically to assure adequacy of policies and procedures governing
issues involving police use of force.

-   Does the department have a written, legally sound and publicly
    understood policy governing the circumstances for appropriate use of
    force? Were community representatives consulted in the drafting or
    review of this document?

-   Does the department keep accurate records of incidents of the use of
    force? Are these records reviewed regularly for trends, officer
    patterns, and other potential areas of concern?

-   What are the attitudes of the department's officers and staff about
    use-of-force issues?

-   Are these attitudes consistent with the department's policies? Is
    additional orientation or training required?

-   Does the department have a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
    governing its response to allegations of EUF? Does the SOP caution
    against making any premature judgments about the circumstances of
    the EUF incident and actions of the involved officer?

-   Does the SOP include arranging prompt assistance, including
    community resources, for the family of any alleged victims? Does the
    SOP provide for timely updates on the resources committed, and
    progress and results of any investigation?

-   Does the department have established contacts with all levels of
    community leadership who can be called upon in times of crisis?

-   What training is made available to officers on alternatives to use
    of force, including conflict resolution, problem solving, and
    communications skills?

-   Does the department have a written complaint procedure that is
    simple to activate and requires a minimum of forms?

-   How does the department respond to public reports of use of force?
    How is the department's response viewed by its staff and the
    community it serves?

-   Does the department have a SOP on involving community leadership in
    ongoing discussion of community/police concerns? How do patrol
    officers and all other ranks participate in the discussions?

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Has the department developed a mission statement and set of
    department values? Are community leaders aware of the values of the
    department?

## Checklist for Effective Policing 

A department's overall operation and management performance is critical
and it can determine its needs by utilizing the following checklist. Has
the police department established?

-   Set of values

-   Policy on avoiding violence between police and citizens

-   Community policing as a philosophy

-   Policy on use of force and alternatives to force

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Accreditation program

-   Effective citizen complaint procedures and other redress systems

-   Affirmative action and recruitment policy

-   Programs to reach new immigrant and other population needs

-   Community and cultural diversity training

-   Ongoing internal/external training programs

-   Two-tier process for reviewing hate crime incidents

-   Racial bias unit/civil rights officer

-   Policy and procedures to reduce violence between police and citizens
    in the nine identified areas of concern

-   Programs to obtain continued feedback from minority communities

-   Negotiation v. confrontation skills (conflict management approach)

-   Officer involvement in community activities (e.g., police athletic
    league)

-   Desired department culture

-   Minority representation in specialized units within the department

**CRS Offices**

## CRS National Office

**Community Relations Service**

600 E Street, NW, Suite 6000

Washington, DC 20530

202-305-2935

202-305-3009 (Fax)

**www.usdoj.gov/crs**

## Regional Offices

**New England Regional Office (Region I)**

***(ME, VT, NH, MA, CT, RI)***

Community Relations Service

408 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 222

Boston, MA 02110

617-424-5715; 617-424-5727 (Fax)

**Northeast Regional Office (Region II)**

***(NY, NJ, VI, PR)***

Community Relations Service

26 Federal Plaza, Suite 36-118

New York, NY 10278

212-264-0700; 212-264-2143 (Fax)

**Mid-Atlantic Regional Office (Region III)**

***(DC, DE, MD, PA, VA, WV)***

Community Relations Service

2nd and Chestnut Streets, Suite 208

Philadelphia, PA 19106

215-597-2344; 215-597-9148 (Fax)

**Southeast Regional Office (Region IV)**

***(AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN)***

Community Relations Service

75 Piedmont Avenue, NE, Suite 900

Atlanta, GA 30303

404-331-6883; 404-331-4471 (Fax)

**Midwest Regional Office (Region V)**

***(IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI)***

Community Relations Service

55 W. Monroe Street, Suite 420

Chicago, IL 60603

312-353-4391; 312-353-4390 (Fax)

**Southwest Regional Office (Region VI)**

***(AR, LA, NM, OK, TX)***

Community Relations Service

1420 W. Mockingbird Lane, Suite 250

Dallas, TX 75247

214-655-8175; 214-655-8184 (Fax)

**Central Regional Office (Region VII)**

***(IA, KS, MO, NE)***

Community Relations Service

1100 Main Street, Suite 320

Kansas City, MO 64105-2112

816-426-7434; 816-426-7441 (Fax)

**Rocky Mountain Regional Office (Region VIII)**

***(CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY)***

Community Relations Service

1244 Speer Boulevard, Suite 650

Denver, CO 80204-3584

303-844-2973; 303-844-2907 (Fax)

**Western Regional Office (Region IX)**

***(AZ, CA, GU, HI, NV)***

Community Relations Service

888 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 1880

Los Angeles, CA 90017

213-894-2941; 213-894-2880 (Fax)

**Northwest Regional Office (Region X)**

***(AK, ID, OR, WA)***

Community Relations Service

915 Second Avenue, Suite 1808

Seattle, WA 98174

206-220-6700; 206-220-6706 (Fax)

## Field Offices

Community Relations Service

51 SW First Avenue, Suite 624

Miami, FL 33130

305-536-5206; 305-536-6778 (Fax)

Community Relations Service

211 W. Fort Street, Suite 1404

Detroit, MI 48226

313-226-4010; 313-226-2568 (Fax)

Community Relations Service

515 Rusk Avenue, Suite 12605

Houston, TX 77002

713-718-4861; 713-718-4862 (Fax)

Community Relations Service

120 Howard Street, Suite 790

San Francisco, CA 94105

415-744-6565; 415-744-6590 (Fax)

#  

# CRS Customer Service Standards

Our goal is to provide sensitive and effective conflict prevention and
resolution services. CRS will meet the following standards:

• We will clearly explain the process that CRS uses to address racial
and ethnic conflicts and our role in that process.

• We will provide opportunities for all parties involved to contribute
to and work toward a solution to the racial or ethnic conflict.

• If you are a participant in a CRS training session or conference, you
will receive timely and useful information and materials that will
assist you in preventing or minimizing racial and ethnic tensions.

• We will be prepared to respond to major racial or ethnic crisis
situations within 24 hours from the time when your community notifies
CRS or CRS becomes aware of the crisis.

• In non-crisis situations, we will contact you within three days of
when your community notifies CRS or when CRS becomes aware of the
situation to discuss your request for CRS services.

*(August 2001)*