Use Of Force

Yes. Officers are trained on the importance of communication, as a means of defusing an encounter, and the use of space and shielding to allow for more time to de-escalate, when possible. The Everett Police Department was the first agency outside of the Criminal Justice Training Center (CJTC) to host Washington State’s new patrol tactics instructor class, which emphasizes ways to safely minimize use of force encounters through de-escalation and other means. CJTC certified four Everett Police officers as instructors for patrol tactics, and they were asked to further develop the curriculum and train these techniques to our officers and to police agencies across the region.

EPD Policy 15.2:
Officers need to take into consideration a person’s mental state, medical condition, emotions and potential state of intoxication before using force, whenever feasible. When safe, under the totality of the circumstances, and when time and circumstances permit, officers should attempt de-escalation tactics in order to decrease the likelihood of the need for force. Attempts at de-escalation should be documented in their reports.

 EPD Policy 15.3:
It is the policy of the Everett Police Department that officers shall use only that amount and duration of force which is objectively reasonable and necessary to perform a lawful duty, given the facts and circumstances perceived by the officer at the time of the event, including whether a reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist. When safe, under the totality of the circumstances, and when time and circumstances permit, officers should attempt de-escalation tactics in order to decrease the likelihood of the need for force. Nothing in this policy shall be construed as to permit, excuse or justify the use of excessive force or force that is beyond that which is objectively reasonable. 

Yes. Washington State law, Everett Police Department policy and long-standing court rulings require that a warning is given by police officers, if feasible, prior to the use of deadly force.

Policy also requires for warnings to be given prior to the use of pepper spray or the Taser, when feasible.

Furthermore, officers are trained to document any verbal warnings given during all use of force incidents. If they do not give one, they are directed to explain why in their report.

EPD Policy 15.4 and Revised Code of Washington 9A.16.040(2):
In considering whether to use deadly force under subsection (1)(c) of this section, to arrest or apprehend any person for the commission of any crime, the peace officer must have probable cause to believe that the suspect, if not apprehended, poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or a threat of serious physical harm to others. Among the circumstances which may be considered by peace officers as a ‘threat of serious physical harm’ are the following:

a.  The suspect threatens a peace officer with a weapon or displays a weapon in a manner that could be reasonably construed as threatening; or 

b.  There is probable cause to believe the suspect has committed any crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm. 

Under these circumstances deadly force may also be used if necessary, to prevent escape from the officer, where, if feasible, some warning is given provided that the officer meets the good faith standard of this section.

Verbal Warning
A verbal warning shall precede the use of deadly force, when feasible.

In all but the most extreme circumstances, officers are required to use lower force options to effect an arrest. This would not apply in those rare instances where someone’s life is in immediate danger. Furthermore, as indicated above, officers are trained and required to use de-escalation tactics, when feasible.

EPD Policy 15.3:
It is the policy of the Everett Police Department that officers shall use only that amount and duration of force which is objectively reasonable and necessary to perform a lawful duty, given the facts and circumstances perceived by the officer at the time of the event, including whether a reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist. When safe, under the totality of the circumstances, and when time and circumstances permit, officers should attempt de-escalation tactics in order to decrease the likelihood of the need for force. Nothing in this policy shall be construed as to permit, excuse or justify the use of excessive force or force that is beyond that which is objectively reasonable. 

EPD Policy 15.4:
Deadly Force – Definitions and Legal Standards - Reasonableness
“Deadly force” means the intentional application of force through the use of firearms or any other means reasonably likely to cause death or serious physical injury. [RCW 9A.16.010(2)] Everett Police officers shall utilize deadly force only when necessary and justified to effect lawful objectives. In all but the most extreme circumstances, officers are required to use lower force options to effect an arrest. This would not apply in those rare instances where someone’s life is in immediate danger.

Yes. Our use of force policy requires that officers intercede when they observe another officer using unreasonable force.

EPD Policy 15.3:
Any officer present and observing another officer using force that is clearly beyond that which is objectively reasonable under the circumstances shall, when in a position to do so, intercede to cease the use of unreasonable force. An officer who observes another employee use force that exceeds the degree of force permitted by policy or law shall promptly report these observations to a supervisor. 

Our policy generally prohibits firing from or at a moving vehicle, except in the most extreme cases, when the officer reasonably believes there is an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or a third party.

EPD Policy 15.4:
Firing at, from, or into a Moving Vehicle
Firing at, from, or into a moving vehicle is prohibited, except where the officer reasonably believes that there is an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to a third party if the officer does not do so and that it is the only reasonable means of protecting the officer and/or a third party. An officer choosing to fire from a moving vehicle or at a fleeing vehicle must be fully prepared to justify this extreme action. Officers should avoid, when possible, moving into the path of a moving vehicle, and should avoid using that action as a reason for firing at the vehicle. If the totality of the situation allows for it, officers should first consider their safety and move out of the path of a moving vehicle. 

The specific term "use of force continuum" commonly refers to a police force model that restricts the most severe types of force to the most extreme situations. Our use of force model meets these restrictions, and our policy is grounded in the concept of only using that amount of force that is reasonable and necessary given the facts and circumstances at the time of the event.

We also has specific policies on the use of the Taser, (AKA: Conducted Electrical Weapon), pepper spray (AKA: OC or oleoresin capsicum spray), baton and firearms.

EPD Policy 15.3:
It is the policy of the Everett Police Department that officers shall use only that amount and duration of force which is objectively reasonable and necessary to perform a lawful duty, given the facts and circumstances perceived by the officer at the time of the event, including whether a reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist. When safe, under the totality of the circumstances, and when time and circumstances permit, officers should attempt de-escalation tactics in order to decrease the likelihood of the need for force. Nothing in this policy shall be construed as to permit, excuse or justify the use of excessive force or force that is beyond that which is objectively reasonable. 

 EPD Policy 15.2:
The force used must be “objectively reasonable” under the Graham v. Connor standard [(1989) 490 U.S. 386, 109 S.Ct. 1865]. The Graham court states: “Determining whether the force used … is ‘reasonable’… requires a careful balancing of the nature and quality of the intrusion … against the countervailing governmental interests at stake.” The test of reasonableness requires “…careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case, including the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether he [or she] is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.” The reasonableness of a particular use of force “must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight

 EPD Policy 16.1:

• Level I: Any counter joint, hair hold, pressure point, pain compliance, ground or body control, push or pull for a takedown, or any of these Level I tactics to accomplish a takedown.
• Level II: Taser application, OC application, use of chemical irritants, less lethal impact munitions, any strikes using hands, elbows, feet, knees, or impact weapons (ASP, flashlight, weapon of opportunity) for blows to the body, or any one of these Level II tactics to accomplish a takedown.
• Level III: Firearms or strikes with impact weapons which amount to potentially deadly force (head).

Yes. Careful and consistent use of force reporting gives the Everett Police Department an opportunity to review situations involving use of force and to update policies and training, as necessary. This process is important to maintaining effective and constitutional policing and to preserving the public trust. Policy requires that all use of force incidents are fully documented in a report, to include those situations where force is used to compel a person to comply with an officer’s direction.

Supervisors are notified and respond to use of force incidents when an injury occurs or there is complaint of pain by the subject contacted. In these incidents (and all others where higher levels of force are used) supervisors complete a use of force review packet, which is submitted and reviewed by each level of the employee’s chain of command, up through the Deputy Chief.

Each supervisor independently reviews the reports and photos and evaluates the reasonableness of the application of force. The evaluations provide the involved employee with feedback on their performance, and if necessary, lead to additional training, counseling and/or discipline. This process allows for a very thorough examination of an officer’s action when use of force is used.

EPD Policy 16.1:
A reportable use of force is defined as any incident in which an on-duty department employee, or off-duty employee whose occupation is a factor, uses any deadly force, any less-lethal control device, K9 contact, fleeing vehicle, or any physical force. Examples include, but are not limited to, use of force to:

•  Compel a person to comply with the employee’s direction; or,
• Prevent the escape or overcome resistance by a subject during an arrest or detention; or,
• Defend any person from an aggressive action by a subject.

 Level I use of force: Any counter joint, hair hold, pressure point, pain compliance, ground or body control, push or pull for a takedown, or any of these Level I tactics to accomplish a takedown.

 Level II use of force: Taser application, OC application, use of chemical irritants, less lethal impact munitions, any strikes using hands, elbows, feet, knees, or impact weapons (ASP, flashlight, weapon of opportunity) for blows to the body, or any one of these Level II tactics to accomplish a takedown.

 Level III use of force: Firearms, or strikes with impact weapons which amount to potentially deadly force (head).

 …

 Each officer involved in the incident will complete a case report or additional narrative report containing a detailed description of the circumstances surrounding the use of force.

Yes. Our policy mandates that officers move a subject that complains of any breathing difficulty to a position where it easier to breathe, at the earliest safe opportunity. They will also provide any necessary first aid, and request aid personnel for a medical evaluation.

EPD Policy 15.5:
Medical assistance/first aid shall be provided or facilitated at the earliest safe opportunity to injured persons at a scene controlled by Everett Police officers. This includes subjects who have sustained injury, express any complaints of injury, been rendered unconscious, or the officer suspects has been injured. If the subject complains of breathing difficulty or appears to be in respiratory distress, officers will, at the earliest safe opportunity, move them to a position where it is easier to breathe, provide any necessary first aid, and request aid personnel for a medical evaluation (see also Section 16.1, “Reportable Use of Force”).