2020.11.09 Public Safety Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

force. Instead, courts have settled on the finding by the Supreme Court in Graham v Connor (1989)—that the force used by an officer should be "objectively reasonable" given the totality of the circumstances known to the officer. Lexipol applies the same Graham reasonableness standard to all uses of force, including deadly force. This does not mean, however, that officers shouldn't consider other alternatives before using deadly force when they can—they should, and Lexipol policy supports doing so. Lexipol policies make it clear that officers may only use reasonable force, and, in a number of situations, recommend or prescribe actions and alternatives that make it less likely an officer will need to use deadly force. Warning Before Deadly Force Best practice regarding warnings before deadly force reflects both legal precedent and historical experience—generally, officers are expected to provide verbal warnings in deadly force situations whenever it is feasible and safe to do so. However, some police reform groups recommend requiring a verbal warning in every instance where deadly force might be used. The Supreme Court has addressed verbal warnings in the context of fleeing felons, but not before every use of force. In Tennessee v. Garner, the Court required a verbal warning before the use of deadly force to stop a fleeing felon under certain circumstances where the verbal warning was "feasible." Some lower courts consider whether verbal warnings were used prior to the application of deadly force when determining whether force is "objectively reasonable;' but none explicitly require the use of verbal warnings prior to the use of deadly force. Lexipol policy has traditionally aligned with Supreme Court precedent, stating that a verbal warning should precede the use of deadly force to stop a fleeing subject, where feasible. Recognizing this could be read to imply that warnings aren't appropriate in other circumstances, Lexipol amended the policy in July 2020 to clarify that warnings should be used whenever reasonable before deploying deadly force. Ultimately, training is vital to lower the likelihood of death or serious injury to officers, suspects, and other citizens in any encounter. Duty to Intervene Police officers throughout the U.S. are entrusted with making ethical decisions every day. In some instances, the ethical decision involves whether to intervene during a colleague's use of force. This decision requires moral and ethical courage, something that policy can influence only to a certain degree. Yet, clear policy establishes the expectations, defines the conditions, and describes the responsibilities. Police reformers have called for agencies to adopt duty to intervene policies as a way to reduce excessive force. Lexipol has long included duty to intercede in its Use of Force Policy, focusing on two essential elements—stopping unreasonable force from happening and reporting it afterwards, even if the second officer was not able to intervene. In the spirit of continuous quality improvement, in