Other LanguagesAgency's use-of-force policy is consistent with the AGO model policy:
No
Why agency's use-of force policy departs from the AGO model policy:
The City of Enumclaw Police Department is a progressive law enforcement agency, who welcomes reform efforts to help ensure the safety of all. We recognize the importance of policy-setting for our department and community and have adopted the Lexipol Policy manual. This policy manual is regularly updated with language based on local, state, and federal laws. These policies are consistent with other departments in our region, including permissible uses of force laws (RCW.10.120.020). It is our opinion, the policy manual of the Enumclaw Police Department is substantially similar and free from significant deviations from the Attorney Generals Model Policy, however, it is not identical and the specific policy deviations are identified below. There are many areas in the Attorney General’s Model Use of Force Policy that diverge from the language used in RCW 10.120.020. The City of Enumclaw Police Department has precisely adopted this law into its Use of Force Policy. We have been training our peace officers and updating our existing policies by strict application of this statutory language. Policy 300 Use of Force has been attached for reference. Our policy manual is available in its entirety upon request.
We will not be adopting the Washington State Office of the Attorney General’s Model Use of Force Policy, as it expands legal requirements beyond those contained in RCW 10.120.020 and federal law. For example, the term “shall” is used throughout, which is not included in any associated statutory law. Some of the language is vague and could be problematic for officers to understand and follow as a result. Subjective language in the model policy makes adherence and enforcement of the policy challenging to protect and preserve an officer’s ability to exercise discretion based on training and experience and circumstances known at the time of the incident.
The Enumclaw Police Department has this statutory language in its policy:
Policy 300 Use of Force
300.3 PERMISSIBLE USES OF FORCE RCW 10.120.020
(1) PHYSICAL FORCE. Except as otherwise provided under this section, a peace officer may use physical force against a person to the extent necessary to:
(a) Protect against a criminal offense when there is probable cause that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit the offense;
(b) Effect an arrest;
(c) Prevent an escape as defined under chapter 9A.76 RCW;
(d) Take a person into custody, transport a person for evaluation or treatment, or provide other assistance under chapter 10.77, 71.05, or 71.34 RCW;
(e) Take a minor into protective custody when authorized or directed by statute;
(f) Execute or enforce a court order authorizing or directing a peace officer to take a person into custody;
(g) Execute a search warrant;
(h) Execute or enforce an oral directive issued by a judicial officer in the courtroom or a written order where the court expressly authorizes a peace officer to use physical force to execute or enforce the directive or order; or
(i) Prevent a person from fleeing or stop a person who is actively fleeing a lawful temporary investigative detention, provided that the person has been given notice that he or she is being detained and is not free to leave;
(j) Take a person into custody when authorized or directed by statute; or
(k) Protect against an imminent threat of bodily injury to the peace officer, another person, or the person against whom force is being used.
(2) DEADLY FORCE. Except as otherwise provided under this section, a peace officer may use deadly force against another person only when necessary to protect against an immediate threat of serious physical injury or death to the officer or another person. For purposes of this subsection: "Immediate threat of serious physical injury or death" means that, based on the totality of the circumstances, it is objectively reasonable to believe that a person has the present and apparent ability, opportunity, and intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or another person.
(3) REASONABLE CARE. A peace officer shall use reasonable care when determining whether to use physical force or deadly force and when using any physical force or deadly force against another person. To that end, a peace officer shall:
(a) When possible, use all de-escalation tactics that are available and appropriate under the circumstances before using physical force;
(b) When using physical force, use the least amount of physical force necessary to overcome resistance under the circumstances. This includes a consideration of the characteristics and conditions of a person for the purposes of determining whether to use force against that person and, if force is necessary, determining the appropriate and least amount of force possible to effect a lawful purpose. Such characteristics and conditions may include, for example, whether the person: Is visibly pregnant, or states that they are pregnant; is known to be a minor, objectively appears to be a minor, or states that they are a minor; is known to be a vulnerable adult, or objectively appears to be a vulnerable adult as defined in RCW 74.34.020; displays signs of mental, behavioral, or physical impairments or disabilities; is experiencing perceptual or cognitive impairments typically related to the use of alcohol, narcotics, hallucinogens, or other drugs; is suicidal; has limited English proficiency; or is in the presence of children;
(c) Terminate the use of physical force as soon as the necessity for such force ends;
(d) When possible, use less lethal alternatives that are available and appropriate under the circumstances before using deadly force; and
(e) Make less lethal alternatives issued to the officer reasonably available for his or her use.
(4) A peace officer may not use any force tactics prohibited by applicable departmental policy, this chapter, or otherwise by law, except to protect his or her life or the life of another person from an imminent threat.
(5) Nothing in this section:
(a) Limits or restricts a peace officer's authority or responsibility to perform lifesaving measures or perform community caretaking functions to ensure health and safety including, but not limited to, rendering medical assistance, performing welfare checks, or assisting other first responders and medical professionals;
(b) Prevents a peace officer from responding to requests for assistance or service from first responders, medical professionals, behavioral health professionals, social service providers, designated crisis responders, shelter or housing providers, or any member of the public;
(c) Permits a peace officer to use physical force or deadly force in a manner or under such circumstances that would violate the United States Constitution or state Constitution; or
(d) Prevents a law enforcement agency or political subdivision of this state from adopting policies or standards with additional requirements for de-escalation and greater restrictions on the use of physical and deadly force than provided in this section.
Critical Decision Making
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Critical Decision Making
(1) Use of critical decision making can help officers achieve the expectations outlined in this manual.
When safe and feasible, when making or considering whether to make contact with a member
of the public, officers shall:
(a) Begin assessment and planning with available facts before arriving at the scene.
(b) Request available resources, as needed, such as a crisis intervention team or other
appropriate specialty unit or professionals.
(c) Collect information when on scene.
(d) Assess situations, threats, and risks.
(e) Identify options for conflict resolution.
(f) Determine a reasonable course of action.
(g) Review and re-assess the situation as it evolves.
(2) Nothing in this policy precludes officers from taking quick action when faced with a life-threatening
situation, such as an active shooter. When safe and feasible, officers shall not unnecessarily
jeopardize their own safety or the safety of others through tactical decisions that unreasonably
place themselves or others at risk including but not limited to (Washington State Office of the
Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy):
(a) Immediately approaching a person without proper evaluation of the situation.
(b) Leaving insufficient space between an officer and the person.
(c) Not providing time for a person to comply with commands.
(d) Unnecessarily escalating a situation.
The language contained throughout is problematic as it is too subjective and does not permit for officer discretion, and improperly places all accountability on the peace officer rather than taking into consideration the actions of the person against whom force is used.
De-Escalation
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
De-Escalation
When possible, officers shall use all available and appropriate de-escalation tactics prior to using physical force.
(1) Depending on the circumstances, officers have a number of de-escalation tactics to choose from, which include, but are not limited to:
(a) Employing tactical positioning and repositioning to maintain the benefit of distance and cover, such as backing away from the person to re-assess and determine which tactics to use;
(b) Placing barriers or using existing structures to provide a shield or other protection between officers and a person;
(c) Attempting to slow down or stabilize the situation to allow for the consideration and arrival of additional resources that may increase the likelihood of a safe resolution;
(d) Requesting and using available support and resources, such as a crisis intervention team, a designated crisis responder, other behavioral health providers, or back-up officers, including more experienced officers or supervisors;
(e) Using clear instructions and verbal persuasion;
(f) Employing verbal and non-verbal communication techniques to calm a person (such as, speaking slowly, regulating tone and body language, uncrossing one’s arms, minimizing hand gestures, and reducing bright, flashing lights and sirens);
(g) Attempting to communicate in non-verbal ways when verbal instructions would be inadequate (such as, when the person and officer speak different languages, or the person is unable to hear or understand instructions);
(h) Communicating in a way that demonstrates respect for people’s dignity (such as, clearly ex-plaining the officer’s actions and expectations; listening to the person’s questions and concerns and responding respectfully; and being neutral and fair when making decisions);
(i) When there are multiple officers, designating one officer to communicate in order to avoid competing or confusing commands; or
(j) Exhibiting patience while using all available and appropriate tactics and resources to provide as much time as needed to resolve the incident without using physical force.
Enumclaw Police Department is following the actual language in RCW. 10.120.020. Peace officers are tasked with enforcing the law; they are not judges or juries and they are not empowered to make subjective decisions about what is fair versus what is lawful. This invites subjective decision-making rather objectivity. Neutrality is more appropriate to their role.
Firearms
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Drawing and Pointing a Firearm
(a) Officers should only point a firearm at a person when deadly force is authorized.
(b) Officers should only draw a firearm in the low ready position (i.e., upholstered but out of the officer’s visual field) when the officer makes reasonable observations based on the totality of the circumstances that the situation may evolve to the point where deadly force would be authorized.
(c) When it is determined that the use of deadly force is not necessary, officers should, as soon as safe and feasible, lower, holster, or secure their firearm.
(d) Pointing a firearm at a person is a reportable use of force and its justification and circumstances shall be documented in accordance with procedures set by the statewide use of force data collection program. (RCW 10.118.030).
(4) When feasible, officers shall give a verbal warning that a firearm will be discharged.
(5) Prior to the decision to use a firearm, officers should consider field of fire, backdrop, bystanders, potential for ricochet, and other risks of life.
Prohibited Uses. Officers Shall Not Use a Firearm in the Following Circumstances:
Discharging or pointing a firearm at a person who presents a danger only to themselves and does not have the apparent ability, opportunity, and intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
Discharging or pointing a firearm at a person who presents a danger only to property and does not have the apparent opportunity or intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
Drawing a firearm is a basic tenet of doing a building search or a high risk traffic stop. These types of activities occur every day in numerous jurisdictions across this state. In jurisdictions that have the luxury of having numerous officers to participate in a high risk stop, some officers would have their firearms drawn and other officers would be designated to have a less lethal option drawn. This policy gives suspects who plan on pulling a gun the upper hand. Action always beats reaction, this is scientific fact. Various aspects of the Attorney General’s Policy are covered throughout our policy manual, for example, warning shots are not permitted.
Hobble Restraint
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Officers shall not connect a leg restraint to handcuffs or other types of restraints (i.e., hog tie an
Individual)
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language, as this deviates from our existing training, techniques and tools currently utilized to safely restrain a subject from harming themselves or others.
Electronic Control Weapons (Conducted Energy Weapons/Taser)
The Enumclaw Police Department has adopted the following language into its policy on conducted energy devices, consistent with the manufacture’s guide and training.
Policy 304 Conducted Energy Device
304.5.5 MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS OF THE TASER DEVICE
Officers should apply the TASER device for only one standard cycle and then evaluate the situation before applying any subsequent cycles. Multiple applications of the TASER device against a single individual are generally not recommended and should be avoided unless the officer reasonably believes that the need to control the individual outweighs the potentially increased risk posed by multiple applications.
If the first application of the TASER device appears to be ineffective in gaining control of an individual, the officer should consider certain factors before additional applications of the TASER device, including:
a. Whether the probes are making proper contact.
b. Whether the individual has the ability and has been given a reasonable opportunity to comply.
c. Whether verbal commands, other options or tactics may be more effective.
Officers should generally not intentionally apply more than one TASER device at a time against a single subject.
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Drive-stun mode should only be used when necessary to complete the incapacitation circuit where only one probe has attached to the person, where both probes attached in close proximity, or when no other less lethal options are available and appropriate.
An ECW shall be used for one standard discharge cycle of five seconds or less.
This section of policy alone should be expected to get more officers hurt or killed than any other one in this draft. The use of the drive-stun is one of the most safe and effective ways to deal with an active resistive or assaultive suspect. Taking this away from officers is going to cause incalculable numbers of injuries to officers and suspects. This is highly dangerous policy, taking away tools from officers increases the risk to the officer, suspects and the community. This could be problematic for officers or deputies in rural areas. There are officers/deputies who work in WA who may not have backup available for an hour or longer.
We will not be adopting the Washington State Office of the Attorney General’s Model Use of Force Policy, as it expands legal requirements beyond those contained in RCW 10.120.020 and federal law. For example, the term “shall” is used throughout, which is not included in any associated statutory law. Some of the language is vague and could be problematic for officers to understand and follow as a result. Subjective language in the model policy makes adherence and enforcement of the policy challenging to protect and preserve an officer’s ability to exercise discretion based on training and experience and circumstances known at the time of the incident.
The Enumclaw Police Department has this statutory language in its policy:
Policy 300 Use of Force
300.3 PERMISSIBLE USES OF FORCE RCW 10.120.020
(1) PHYSICAL FORCE. Except as otherwise provided under this section, a peace officer may use physical force against a person to the extent necessary to:
(a) Protect against a criminal offense when there is probable cause that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit the offense;
(b) Effect an arrest;
(c) Prevent an escape as defined under chapter 9A.76 RCW;
(d) Take a person into custody, transport a person for evaluation or treatment, or provide other assistance under chapter 10.77, 71.05, or 71.34 RCW;
(e) Take a minor into protective custody when authorized or directed by statute;
(f) Execute or enforce a court order authorizing or directing a peace officer to take a person into custody;
(g) Execute a search warrant;
(h) Execute or enforce an oral directive issued by a judicial officer in the courtroom or a written order where the court expressly authorizes a peace officer to use physical force to execute or enforce the directive or order; or
(i) Prevent a person from fleeing or stop a person who is actively fleeing a lawful temporary investigative detention, provided that the person has been given notice that he or she is being detained and is not free to leave;
(j) Take a person into custody when authorized or directed by statute; or
(k) Protect against an imminent threat of bodily injury to the peace officer, another person, or the person against whom force is being used.
(2) DEADLY FORCE. Except as otherwise provided under this section, a peace officer may use deadly force against another person only when necessary to protect against an immediate threat of serious physical injury or death to the officer or another person. For purposes of this subsection: "Immediate threat of serious physical injury or death" means that, based on the totality of the circumstances, it is objectively reasonable to believe that a person has the present and apparent ability, opportunity, and intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or another person.
(3) REASONABLE CARE. A peace officer shall use reasonable care when determining whether to use physical force or deadly force and when using any physical force or deadly force against another person. To that end, a peace officer shall:
(a) When possible, use all de-escalation tactics that are available and appropriate under the circumstances before using physical force;
(b) When using physical force, use the least amount of physical force necessary to overcome resistance under the circumstances. This includes a consideration of the characteristics and conditions of a person for the purposes of determining whether to use force against that person and, if force is necessary, determining the appropriate and least amount of force possible to effect a lawful purpose. Such characteristics and conditions may include, for example, whether the person: Is visibly pregnant, or states that they are pregnant; is known to be a minor, objectively appears to be a minor, or states that they are a minor; is known to be a vulnerable adult, or objectively appears to be a vulnerable adult as defined in RCW 74.34.020; displays signs of mental, behavioral, or physical impairments or disabilities; is experiencing perceptual or cognitive impairments typically related to the use of alcohol, narcotics, hallucinogens, or other drugs; is suicidal; has limited English proficiency; or is in the presence of children;
(c) Terminate the use of physical force as soon as the necessity for such force ends;
(d) When possible, use less lethal alternatives that are available and appropriate under the circumstances before using deadly force; and
(e) Make less lethal alternatives issued to the officer reasonably available for his or her use.
(4) A peace officer may not use any force tactics prohibited by applicable departmental policy, this chapter, or otherwise by law, except to protect his or her life or the life of another person from an imminent threat.
(5) Nothing in this section:
(a) Limits or restricts a peace officer's authority or responsibility to perform lifesaving measures or perform community caretaking functions to ensure health and safety including, but not limited to, rendering medical assistance, performing welfare checks, or assisting other first responders and medical professionals;
(b) Prevents a peace officer from responding to requests for assistance or service from first responders, medical professionals, behavioral health professionals, social service providers, designated crisis responders, shelter or housing providers, or any member of the public;
(c) Permits a peace officer to use physical force or deadly force in a manner or under such circumstances that would violate the United States Constitution or state Constitution; or
(d) Prevents a law enforcement agency or political subdivision of this state from adopting policies or standards with additional requirements for de-escalation and greater restrictions on the use of physical and deadly force than provided in this section.
Critical Decision Making
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Critical Decision Making
(1) Use of critical decision making can help officers achieve the expectations outlined in this manual.
When safe and feasible, when making or considering whether to make contact with a member
of the public, officers shall:
(a) Begin assessment and planning with available facts before arriving at the scene.
(b) Request available resources, as needed, such as a crisis intervention team or other
appropriate specialty unit or professionals.
(c) Collect information when on scene.
(d) Assess situations, threats, and risks.
(e) Identify options for conflict resolution.
(f) Determine a reasonable course of action.
(g) Review and re-assess the situation as it evolves.
(2) Nothing in this policy precludes officers from taking quick action when faced with a life-threatening
situation, such as an active shooter. When safe and feasible, officers shall not unnecessarily
jeopardize their own safety or the safety of others through tactical decisions that unreasonably
place themselves or others at risk including but not limited to (Washington State Office of the
Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy):
(a) Immediately approaching a person without proper evaluation of the situation.
(b) Leaving insufficient space between an officer and the person.
(c) Not providing time for a person to comply with commands.
(d) Unnecessarily escalating a situation.
The language contained throughout is problematic as it is too subjective and does not permit for officer discretion, and improperly places all accountability on the peace officer rather than taking into consideration the actions of the person against whom force is used.
De-Escalation
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
De-Escalation
When possible, officers shall use all available and appropriate de-escalation tactics prior to using physical force.
(1) Depending on the circumstances, officers have a number of de-escalation tactics to choose from, which include, but are not limited to:
(a) Employing tactical positioning and repositioning to maintain the benefit of distance and cover, such as backing away from the person to re-assess and determine which tactics to use;
(b) Placing barriers or using existing structures to provide a shield or other protection between officers and a person;
(c) Attempting to slow down or stabilize the situation to allow for the consideration and arrival of additional resources that may increase the likelihood of a safe resolution;
(d) Requesting and using available support and resources, such as a crisis intervention team, a designated crisis responder, other behavioral health providers, or back-up officers, including more experienced officers or supervisors;
(e) Using clear instructions and verbal persuasion;
(f) Employing verbal and non-verbal communication techniques to calm a person (such as, speaking slowly, regulating tone and body language, uncrossing one’s arms, minimizing hand gestures, and reducing bright, flashing lights and sirens);
(g) Attempting to communicate in non-verbal ways when verbal instructions would be inadequate (such as, when the person and officer speak different languages, or the person is unable to hear or understand instructions);
(h) Communicating in a way that demonstrates respect for people’s dignity (such as, clearly ex-plaining the officer’s actions and expectations; listening to the person’s questions and concerns and responding respectfully; and being neutral and fair when making decisions);
(i) When there are multiple officers, designating one officer to communicate in order to avoid competing or confusing commands; or
(j) Exhibiting patience while using all available and appropriate tactics and resources to provide as much time as needed to resolve the incident without using physical force.
Enumclaw Police Department is following the actual language in RCW. 10.120.020. Peace officers are tasked with enforcing the law; they are not judges or juries and they are not empowered to make subjective decisions about what is fair versus what is lawful. This invites subjective decision-making rather objectivity. Neutrality is more appropriate to their role.
Firearms
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Drawing and Pointing a Firearm
(a) Officers should only point a firearm at a person when deadly force is authorized.
(b) Officers should only draw a firearm in the low ready position (i.e., upholstered but out of the officer’s visual field) when the officer makes reasonable observations based on the totality of the circumstances that the situation may evolve to the point where deadly force would be authorized.
(c) When it is determined that the use of deadly force is not necessary, officers should, as soon as safe and feasible, lower, holster, or secure their firearm.
(d) Pointing a firearm at a person is a reportable use of force and its justification and circumstances shall be documented in accordance with procedures set by the statewide use of force data collection program. (RCW 10.118.030).
(4) When feasible, officers shall give a verbal warning that a firearm will be discharged.
(5) Prior to the decision to use a firearm, officers should consider field of fire, backdrop, bystanders, potential for ricochet, and other risks of life.
Prohibited Uses. Officers Shall Not Use a Firearm in the Following Circumstances:
Discharging or pointing a firearm at a person who presents a danger only to themselves and does not have the apparent ability, opportunity, and intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
Discharging or pointing a firearm at a person who presents a danger only to property and does not have the apparent opportunity or intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
Drawing a firearm is a basic tenet of doing a building search or a high risk traffic stop. These types of activities occur every day in numerous jurisdictions across this state. In jurisdictions that have the luxury of having numerous officers to participate in a high risk stop, some officers would have their firearms drawn and other officers would be designated to have a less lethal option drawn. This policy gives suspects who plan on pulling a gun the upper hand. Action always beats reaction, this is scientific fact. Various aspects of the Attorney General’s Policy are covered throughout our policy manual, for example, warning shots are not permitted.
Hobble Restraint
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Officers shall not connect a leg restraint to handcuffs or other types of restraints (i.e., hog tie an
Individual)
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language, as this deviates from our existing training, techniques and tools currently utilized to safely restrain a subject from harming themselves or others.
Electronic Control Weapons (Conducted Energy Weapons/Taser)
The Enumclaw Police Department has adopted the following language into its policy on conducted energy devices, consistent with the manufacture’s guide and training.
Policy 304 Conducted Energy Device
304.5.5 MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS OF THE TASER DEVICE
Officers should apply the TASER device for only one standard cycle and then evaluate the situation before applying any subsequent cycles. Multiple applications of the TASER device against a single individual are generally not recommended and should be avoided unless the officer reasonably believes that the need to control the individual outweighs the potentially increased risk posed by multiple applications.
If the first application of the TASER device appears to be ineffective in gaining control of an individual, the officer should consider certain factors before additional applications of the TASER device, including:
a. Whether the probes are making proper contact.
b. Whether the individual has the ability and has been given a reasonable opportunity to comply.
c. Whether verbal commands, other options or tactics may be more effective.
Officers should generally not intentionally apply more than one TASER device at a time against a single subject.
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Drive-stun mode should only be used when necessary to complete the incapacitation circuit where only one probe has attached to the person, where both probes attached in close proximity, or when no other less lethal options are available and appropriate.
An ECW shall be used for one standard discharge cycle of five seconds or less.
This section of policy alone should be expected to get more officers hurt or killed than any other one in this draft. The use of the drive-stun is one of the most safe and effective ways to deal with an active resistive or assaultive suspect. Taking this away from officers is going to cause incalculable numbers of injuries to officers and suspects. This is highly dangerous policy, taking away tools from officers increases the risk to the officer, suspects and the community. This could be problematic for officers or deputies in rural areas. There are officers/deputies who work in WA who may not have backup available for an hour or longer.
How agency's use-of-force policy is consistent with RCW 10.120.020:
The City of Enumclaw Police Department is a progressive law enforcement agency, who welcomes reform efforts to help ensure the safety of all. We recognize the importance of policy-setting for our department and community and have adopted the Lexipol Policy manual. This policy manual is regularly updated with language based on local, state, and federal laws. These policies are consistent with other departments in our region, including permissible uses of force laws (RCW.10.120.020). It is our opinion, the policy manual of the Enumclaw Police Department is substantially similar and free from significant deviations from the Attorney Generals Model Policy, however, it is not identical and the specific policy deviations are identified below. There are many areas in the Attorney General’s Model Use of Force Policy that diverge from the language used in RCW 10.120.020. The City of Enumclaw Police Department has precisely adopted this law into its Use of Force Policy. We have been training our peace officers and updating our existing policies by strict application of this statutory language. Policy 300 Use of Force has been attached for reference. Our policy manual is available in its entirety upon request.
We will not be adopting the Washington State Office of the Attorney General’s Model Use of Force Policy, as it expands legal requirements beyond those contained in RCW 10.120.020 and federal law. For example, the term “shall” is used throughout, which is not included in any associated statutory law. Some of the language is vague and could be problematic for officers to understand and follow as a result. Subjective language in the model policy makes adherence and enforcement of the policy challenging to protect and preserve an officer’s ability to exercise discretion based on training and experience and circumstances known at the time of the incident.
The Enumclaw Police Department has this statutory language in its policy:
Policy 300 Use of Force
300.3 PERMISSIBLE USES OF FORCE RCW 10.120.020
(1) PHYSICAL FORCE. Except as otherwise provided under this section, a peace officer may use physical force against a person to the extent necessary to:
(a) Protect against a criminal offense when there is probable cause that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit the offense;
(b) Effect an arrest;
(c) Prevent an escape as defined under chapter 9A.76 RCW;
(d) Take a person into custody, transport a person for evaluation or treatment, or provide other assistance under chapter 10.77, 71.05, or 71.34 RCW;
(e) Take a minor into protective custody when authorized or directed by statute;
(f) Execute or enforce a court order authorizing or directing a peace officer to take a person into custody;
(g) Execute a search warrant;
(h) Execute or enforce an oral directive issued by a judicial officer in the courtroom or a written order where the court expressly authorizes a peace officer to use physical force to execute or enforce the directive or order; or
(i) Prevent a person from fleeing or stop a person who is actively fleeing a lawful temporary investigative detention, provided that the person has been given notice that he or she is being detained and is not free to leave;
(j) Take a person into custody when authorized or directed by statute; or
(k) Protect against an imminent threat of bodily injury to the peace officer, another person, or the person against whom force is being used.
(2) DEADLY FORCE. Except as otherwise provided under this section, a peace officer may use deadly force against another person only when necessary to protect against an immediate threat of serious physical injury or death to the officer or another person. For purposes of this subsection: "Immediate threat of serious physical injury or death" means that, based on the totality of the circumstances, it is objectively reasonable to believe that a person has the present and apparent ability, opportunity, and intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or another person.
(3) REASONABLE CARE. A peace officer shall use reasonable care when determining whether to use physical force or deadly force and when using any physical force or deadly force against another person. To that end, a peace officer shall:
(a) When possible, use all de-escalation tactics that are available and appropriate under the circumstances before using physical force;
(b) When using physical force, use the least amount of physical force necessary to overcome resistance under the circumstances. This includes a consideration of the characteristics and conditions of a person for the purposes of determining whether to use force against that person and, if force is necessary, determining the appropriate and least amount of force possible to effect a lawful purpose. Such characteristics and conditions may include, for example, whether the person: Is visibly pregnant, or states that they are pregnant; is known to be a minor, objectively appears to be a minor, or states that they are a minor; is known to be a vulnerable adult, or objectively appears to be a vulnerable adult as defined in RCW 74.34.020; displays signs of mental, behavioral, or physical impairments or disabilities; is experiencing perceptual or cognitive impairments typically related to the use of alcohol, narcotics, hallucinogens, or other drugs; is suicidal; has limited English proficiency; or is in the presence of children;
(c) Terminate the use of physical force as soon as the necessity for such force ends;
(d) When possible, use less lethal alternatives that are available and appropriate under the circumstances before using deadly force; and
(e) Make less lethal alternatives issued to the officer reasonably available for his or her use.
(4) A peace officer may not use any force tactics prohibited by applicable departmental policy, this chapter, or otherwise by law, except to protect his or her life or the life of another person from an imminent threat.
(5) Nothing in this section:
(a) Limits or restricts a peace officer's authority or responsibility to perform lifesaving measures or perform community caretaking functions to ensure health and safety including, but not limited to, rendering medical assistance, performing welfare checks, or assisting other first responders and medical professionals;
(b) Prevents a peace officer from responding to requests for assistance or service from first responders, medical professionals, behavioral health professionals, social service providers, designated crisis responders, shelter or housing providers, or any member of the public;
(c) Permits a peace officer to use physical force or deadly force in a manner or under such circumstances that would violate the United States Constitution or state Constitution; or
(d) Prevents a law enforcement agency or political subdivision of this state from adopting policies or standards with additional requirements for de-escalation and greater restrictions on the use of physical and deadly force than provided in this section.
Critical Decision Making
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Critical Decision Making
(1) Use of critical decision making can help officers achieve the expectations outlined in this manual.
When safe and feasible, when making or considering whether to make contact with a member
of the public, officers shall:
(a) Begin assessment and planning with available facts before arriving at the scene.
(b) Request available resources, as needed, such as a crisis intervention team or other
appropriate specialty unit or professionals.
(c) Collect information when on scene.
(d) Assess situations, threats, and risks.
(e) Identify options for conflict resolution.
(f) Determine a reasonable course of action.
(g) Review and re-assess the situation as it evolves.
(2) Nothing in this policy precludes officers from taking quick action when faced with a life-threatening
situation, such as an active shooter. When safe and feasible, officers shall not unnecessarily
jeopardize their own safety or the safety of others through tactical decisions that unreasonably
place themselves or others at risk including but not limited to (Washington State Office of the
Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy):
(a) Immediately approaching a person without proper evaluation of the situation.
(b) Leaving insufficient space between an officer and the person.
(c) Not providing time for a person to comply with commands.
(d) Unnecessarily escalating a situation.
The language contained throughout is problematic as it is too subjective and does not permit for officer discretion, and improperly places all accountability on the peace officer rather than taking into consideration the actions of the person against whom force is used.
De-Escalation
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
De-Escalation
When possible, officers shall use all available and appropriate de-escalation tactics prior to using physical force.
(1) Depending on the circumstances, officers have a number of de-escalation tactics to choose from, which include, but are not limited to:
(a) Employing tactical positioning and repositioning to maintain the benefit of distance and cover, such as backing away from the person to re-assess and determine which tactics to use;
(b) Placing barriers or using existing structures to provide a shield or other protection between officers and a person;
(c) Attempting to slow down or stabilize the situation to allow for the consideration and arrival of additional resources that may increase the likelihood of a safe resolution;
(d) Requesting and using available support and resources, such as a crisis intervention team, a designated crisis responder, other behavioral health providers, or back-up officers, including more experienced officers or supervisors;
(e) Using clear instructions and verbal persuasion;
(f) Employing verbal and non-verbal communication techniques to calm a person (such as, speaking slowly, regulating tone and body language, uncrossing one’s arms, minimizing hand gestures, and reducing bright, flashing lights and sirens);
(g) Attempting to communicate in non-verbal ways when verbal instructions would be inadequate (such as, when the person and officer speak different languages, or the person is unable to hear or understand instructions);
(h) Communicating in a way that demonstrates respect for people’s dignity (such as, clearly ex-plaining the officer’s actions and expectations; listening to the person’s questions and concerns and responding respectfully; and being neutral and fair when making decisions);
(i) When there are multiple officers, designating one officer to communicate in order to avoid competing or confusing commands; or
(j) Exhibiting patience while using all available and appropriate tactics and resources to provide as much time as needed to resolve the incident without using physical force.
Enumclaw Police Department is following the actual language in RCW. 10.120.020. Peace officers are tasked with enforcing the law; they are not judges or juries and they are not empowered to make subjective decisions about what is fair versus what is lawful. This invites subjective decision-making rather objectivity. Neutrality is more appropriate to their role.
Firearms
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Drawing and Pointing a Firearm
(a) Officers should only point a firearm at a person when deadly force is authorized.
(b) Officers should only draw a firearm in the low ready position (i.e., upholstered but out of the officer’s visual field) when the officer makes reasonable observations based on the totality of the circumstances that the situation may evolve to the point where deadly force would be authorized.
(c) When it is determined that the use of deadly force is not necessary, officers should, as soon as safe and feasible, lower, holster, or secure their firearm.
(d) Pointing a firearm at a person is a reportable use of force and its justification and circumstances shall be documented in accordance with procedures set by the statewide use of force data collection program. (RCW 10.118.030).
(4) When feasible, officers shall give a verbal warning that a firearm will be discharged.
(5) Prior to the decision to use a firearm, officers should consider field of fire, backdrop, bystanders, potential for ricochet, and other risks of life.
Prohibited Uses. Officers Shall Not Use a Firearm in the Following Circumstances:
Discharging or pointing a firearm at a person who presents a danger only to themselves and does not have the apparent ability, opportunity, and intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
Discharging or pointing a firearm at a person who presents a danger only to property and does not have the apparent opportunity or intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
Drawing a firearm is a basic tenet of doing a building search or a high risk traffic stop. These types of activities occur every day in numerous jurisdictions across this state. In jurisdictions that have the luxury of having numerous officers to participate in a high risk stop, some officers would have their firearms drawn and other officers would be designated to have a less lethal option drawn. This policy gives suspects who plan on pulling a gun the upper hand. Action always beats reaction, this is scientific fact. Various aspects of the Attorney General’s Policy are covered throughout our policy manual, for example, warning shots are not permitted.
Hobble Restraint
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Officers shall not connect a leg restraint to handcuffs or other types of restraints (i.e., hog tie an
Individual)
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language, as this deviates from our existing training, techniques and tools currently utilized to safely restrain a subject from harming themselves or others.
Electronic Control Weapons (Conducted Energy Weapons/Taser)
The Enumclaw Police Department has adopted the following language into its policy on conducted energy devices, consistent with the manufacture’s guide and training.
Policy 304 Conducted Energy Device
304.5.5 MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS OF THE TASER DEVICE
Officers should apply the TASER device for only one standard cycle and then evaluate the situation before applying any subsequent cycles. Multiple applications of the TASER device against a single individual are generally not recommended and should be avoided unless the officer reasonably believes that the need to control the individual outweighs the potentially increased risk posed by multiple applications.
If the first application of the TASER device appears to be ineffective in gaining control of an individual, the officer should consider certain factors before additional applications of the TASER device, including:
a. Whether the probes are making proper contact.
b. Whether the individual has the ability and has been given a reasonable opportunity to comply.
c. Whether verbal commands, other options or tactics may be more effective.
Officers should generally not intentionally apply more than one TASER device at a time against a single subject.
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Drive-stun mode should only be used when necessary to complete the incapacitation circuit where only one probe has attached to the person, where both probes attached in close proximity, or when no other less lethal options are available and appropriate.
An ECW shall be used for one standard discharge cycle of five seconds or less.
This section of policy alone should be expected to get more officers hurt or killed than any other one in this draft. The use of the drive-stun is one of the most safe and effective ways to deal with an active resistive or assaultive suspect. Taking this away from officers is going to cause incalculable numbers of injuries to officers and suspects. This is highly dangerous policy, taking away tools from officers increases the risk to the officer, suspects and the community. This could be problematic for officers or deputies in rural areas. There are officers/deputies who work in WA who may not have backup available for an hour or longer.
We will not be adopting the Washington State Office of the Attorney General’s Model Use of Force Policy, as it expands legal requirements beyond those contained in RCW 10.120.020 and federal law. For example, the term “shall” is used throughout, which is not included in any associated statutory law. Some of the language is vague and could be problematic for officers to understand and follow as a result. Subjective language in the model policy makes adherence and enforcement of the policy challenging to protect and preserve an officer’s ability to exercise discretion based on training and experience and circumstances known at the time of the incident.
The Enumclaw Police Department has this statutory language in its policy:
Policy 300 Use of Force
300.3 PERMISSIBLE USES OF FORCE RCW 10.120.020
(1) PHYSICAL FORCE. Except as otherwise provided under this section, a peace officer may use physical force against a person to the extent necessary to:
(a) Protect against a criminal offense when there is probable cause that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit the offense;
(b) Effect an arrest;
(c) Prevent an escape as defined under chapter 9A.76 RCW;
(d) Take a person into custody, transport a person for evaluation or treatment, or provide other assistance under chapter 10.77, 71.05, or 71.34 RCW;
(e) Take a minor into protective custody when authorized or directed by statute;
(f) Execute or enforce a court order authorizing or directing a peace officer to take a person into custody;
(g) Execute a search warrant;
(h) Execute or enforce an oral directive issued by a judicial officer in the courtroom or a written order where the court expressly authorizes a peace officer to use physical force to execute or enforce the directive or order; or
(i) Prevent a person from fleeing or stop a person who is actively fleeing a lawful temporary investigative detention, provided that the person has been given notice that he or she is being detained and is not free to leave;
(j) Take a person into custody when authorized or directed by statute; or
(k) Protect against an imminent threat of bodily injury to the peace officer, another person, or the person against whom force is being used.
(2) DEADLY FORCE. Except as otherwise provided under this section, a peace officer may use deadly force against another person only when necessary to protect against an immediate threat of serious physical injury or death to the officer or another person. For purposes of this subsection: "Immediate threat of serious physical injury or death" means that, based on the totality of the circumstances, it is objectively reasonable to believe that a person has the present and apparent ability, opportunity, and intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the peace officer or another person.
(3) REASONABLE CARE. A peace officer shall use reasonable care when determining whether to use physical force or deadly force and when using any physical force or deadly force against another person. To that end, a peace officer shall:
(a) When possible, use all de-escalation tactics that are available and appropriate under the circumstances before using physical force;
(b) When using physical force, use the least amount of physical force necessary to overcome resistance under the circumstances. This includes a consideration of the characteristics and conditions of a person for the purposes of determining whether to use force against that person and, if force is necessary, determining the appropriate and least amount of force possible to effect a lawful purpose. Such characteristics and conditions may include, for example, whether the person: Is visibly pregnant, or states that they are pregnant; is known to be a minor, objectively appears to be a minor, or states that they are a minor; is known to be a vulnerable adult, or objectively appears to be a vulnerable adult as defined in RCW 74.34.020; displays signs of mental, behavioral, or physical impairments or disabilities; is experiencing perceptual or cognitive impairments typically related to the use of alcohol, narcotics, hallucinogens, or other drugs; is suicidal; has limited English proficiency; or is in the presence of children;
(c) Terminate the use of physical force as soon as the necessity for such force ends;
(d) When possible, use less lethal alternatives that are available and appropriate under the circumstances before using deadly force; and
(e) Make less lethal alternatives issued to the officer reasonably available for his or her use.
(4) A peace officer may not use any force tactics prohibited by applicable departmental policy, this chapter, or otherwise by law, except to protect his or her life or the life of another person from an imminent threat.
(5) Nothing in this section:
(a) Limits or restricts a peace officer's authority or responsibility to perform lifesaving measures or perform community caretaking functions to ensure health and safety including, but not limited to, rendering medical assistance, performing welfare checks, or assisting other first responders and medical professionals;
(b) Prevents a peace officer from responding to requests for assistance or service from first responders, medical professionals, behavioral health professionals, social service providers, designated crisis responders, shelter or housing providers, or any member of the public;
(c) Permits a peace officer to use physical force or deadly force in a manner or under such circumstances that would violate the United States Constitution or state Constitution; or
(d) Prevents a law enforcement agency or political subdivision of this state from adopting policies or standards with additional requirements for de-escalation and greater restrictions on the use of physical and deadly force than provided in this section.
Critical Decision Making
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Critical Decision Making
(1) Use of critical decision making can help officers achieve the expectations outlined in this manual.
When safe and feasible, when making or considering whether to make contact with a member
of the public, officers shall:
(a) Begin assessment and planning with available facts before arriving at the scene.
(b) Request available resources, as needed, such as a crisis intervention team or other
appropriate specialty unit or professionals.
(c) Collect information when on scene.
(d) Assess situations, threats, and risks.
(e) Identify options for conflict resolution.
(f) Determine a reasonable course of action.
(g) Review and re-assess the situation as it evolves.
(2) Nothing in this policy precludes officers from taking quick action when faced with a life-threatening
situation, such as an active shooter. When safe and feasible, officers shall not unnecessarily
jeopardize their own safety or the safety of others through tactical decisions that unreasonably
place themselves or others at risk including but not limited to (Washington State Office of the
Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy):
(a) Immediately approaching a person without proper evaluation of the situation.
(b) Leaving insufficient space between an officer and the person.
(c) Not providing time for a person to comply with commands.
(d) Unnecessarily escalating a situation.
The language contained throughout is problematic as it is too subjective and does not permit for officer discretion, and improperly places all accountability on the peace officer rather than taking into consideration the actions of the person against whom force is used.
De-Escalation
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
De-Escalation
When possible, officers shall use all available and appropriate de-escalation tactics prior to using physical force.
(1) Depending on the circumstances, officers have a number of de-escalation tactics to choose from, which include, but are not limited to:
(a) Employing tactical positioning and repositioning to maintain the benefit of distance and cover, such as backing away from the person to re-assess and determine which tactics to use;
(b) Placing barriers or using existing structures to provide a shield or other protection between officers and a person;
(c) Attempting to slow down or stabilize the situation to allow for the consideration and arrival of additional resources that may increase the likelihood of a safe resolution;
(d) Requesting and using available support and resources, such as a crisis intervention team, a designated crisis responder, other behavioral health providers, or back-up officers, including more experienced officers or supervisors;
(e) Using clear instructions and verbal persuasion;
(f) Employing verbal and non-verbal communication techniques to calm a person (such as, speaking slowly, regulating tone and body language, uncrossing one’s arms, minimizing hand gestures, and reducing bright, flashing lights and sirens);
(g) Attempting to communicate in non-verbal ways when verbal instructions would be inadequate (such as, when the person and officer speak different languages, or the person is unable to hear or understand instructions);
(h) Communicating in a way that demonstrates respect for people’s dignity (such as, clearly ex-plaining the officer’s actions and expectations; listening to the person’s questions and concerns and responding respectfully; and being neutral and fair when making decisions);
(i) When there are multiple officers, designating one officer to communicate in order to avoid competing or confusing commands; or
(j) Exhibiting patience while using all available and appropriate tactics and resources to provide as much time as needed to resolve the incident without using physical force.
Enumclaw Police Department is following the actual language in RCW. 10.120.020. Peace officers are tasked with enforcing the law; they are not judges or juries and they are not empowered to make subjective decisions about what is fair versus what is lawful. This invites subjective decision-making rather objectivity. Neutrality is more appropriate to their role.
Firearms
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Drawing and Pointing a Firearm
(a) Officers should only point a firearm at a person when deadly force is authorized.
(b) Officers should only draw a firearm in the low ready position (i.e., upholstered but out of the officer’s visual field) when the officer makes reasonable observations based on the totality of the circumstances that the situation may evolve to the point where deadly force would be authorized.
(c) When it is determined that the use of deadly force is not necessary, officers should, as soon as safe and feasible, lower, holster, or secure their firearm.
(d) Pointing a firearm at a person is a reportable use of force and its justification and circumstances shall be documented in accordance with procedures set by the statewide use of force data collection program. (RCW 10.118.030).
(4) When feasible, officers shall give a verbal warning that a firearm will be discharged.
(5) Prior to the decision to use a firearm, officers should consider field of fire, backdrop, bystanders, potential for ricochet, and other risks of life.
Prohibited Uses. Officers Shall Not Use a Firearm in the Following Circumstances:
Discharging or pointing a firearm at a person who presents a danger only to themselves and does not have the apparent ability, opportunity, and intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
Discharging or pointing a firearm at a person who presents a danger only to property and does not have the apparent opportunity or intent to immediately cause death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
Drawing a firearm is a basic tenet of doing a building search or a high risk traffic stop. These types of activities occur every day in numerous jurisdictions across this state. In jurisdictions that have the luxury of having numerous officers to participate in a high risk stop, some officers would have their firearms drawn and other officers would be designated to have a less lethal option drawn. This policy gives suspects who plan on pulling a gun the upper hand. Action always beats reaction, this is scientific fact. Various aspects of the Attorney General’s Policy are covered throughout our policy manual, for example, warning shots are not permitted.
Hobble Restraint
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Officers shall not connect a leg restraint to handcuffs or other types of restraints (i.e., hog tie an
Individual)
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language, as this deviates from our existing training, techniques and tools currently utilized to safely restrain a subject from harming themselves or others.
Electronic Control Weapons (Conducted Energy Weapons/Taser)
The Enumclaw Police Department has adopted the following language into its policy on conducted energy devices, consistent with the manufacture’s guide and training.
Policy 304 Conducted Energy Device
304.5.5 MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS OF THE TASER DEVICE
Officers should apply the TASER device for only one standard cycle and then evaluate the situation before applying any subsequent cycles. Multiple applications of the TASER device against a single individual are generally not recommended and should be avoided unless the officer reasonably believes that the need to control the individual outweighs the potentially increased risk posed by multiple applications.
If the first application of the TASER device appears to be ineffective in gaining control of an individual, the officer should consider certain factors before additional applications of the TASER device, including:
a. Whether the probes are making proper contact.
b. Whether the individual has the ability and has been given a reasonable opportunity to comply.
c. Whether verbal commands, other options or tactics may be more effective.
Officers should generally not intentionally apply more than one TASER device at a time against a single subject.
Enumclaw Police Department did not adopt the following language from the Washington State Office of the Attorney General Model Use of Force Policy:
Drive-stun mode should only be used when necessary to complete the incapacitation circuit where only one probe has attached to the person, where both probes attached in close proximity, or when no other less lethal options are available and appropriate.
An ECW shall be used for one standard discharge cycle of five seconds or less.
This section of policy alone should be expected to get more officers hurt or killed than any other one in this draft. The use of the drive-stun is one of the most safe and effective ways to deal with an active resistive or assaultive suspect. Taking this away from officers is going to cause incalculable numbers of injuries to officers and suspects. This is highly dangerous policy, taking away tools from officers increases the risk to the officer, suspects and the community. This could be problematic for officers or deputies in rural areas. There are officers/deputies who work in WA who may not have backup available for an hour or longer.
Date policy last updated: