FORCE SCIENCE® INSTITUTE, Ltd.
!
124 East Walnut Street - Suite 120
Mankato, MN 56001 USA
T: 507-387-1290 F: 507-387-1291
Force Science® News #270
To register for a free, direct-delivery subscription to Force Science® News, please
visit www.forcescience.org. Articles are sent twice per month via e-mail. For
reprint or mass distribution permission, please e-mail: editor@forcescience.org.
New study explores link between CEW policies, police shootings
In this issue:
I. New study explores link between CEW policies, police shootings
II. Controversy sparks anew over alleged risks of prone positioning
III. Readers write: Excited delirium, body cams, new training center
I. New study explores link between CEW policies, police shootings
In a new study that carries important caveats, a research team of
criminologists has found that agencies with the most permissive CEW
policies--allowing deployment against even passive resisters--have
significantly lower rates of fatal officer-involved shootings than agencies
with highly restrictive policies.
"As the researchers themselves point out, this study does not necessarily
prove that a minimally restrictive policy causes shootings to diminish,"
cautions Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Institute,
which did not participate in the study. "It just establishes an interesting
statistical correlation. An agency should not necessarily alter its policy on
conducted electrical weapons solely because of this study."
The study, conducted by four criminal justice faculty members led by Dr.
Frank Ferdik of the University of West Florida, examined data on fatal
police shootings and on more than 12,100 TASER CEW uses from "a
nationally representative sample" of 259 American municipal PDs and fullservice SOs.
!1
Analyzing department policies and actual field applications, the researchers
found that "a policy or practice that allowed the use of a [CEW] in probe,
drive, or either mode on passive resisters" (i.e., the least restrictive
deployment) results in "substantially more" uses of the electrical weapon
and "is substantially and significantly associated with decreases in the
number of fatal police shootings."
Specifically, compared with departments that permitted use only against
"combative" subjects--the most restrictive policy--the decreases in fatal OIS
rates ranged from 61% to 66%, the group found.
That outcome might be expected, given that CEWs are "intended to reduce
citizen deaths resulting from police use of force," Ferdik writes.
However, the findings included some results that raise additional questions.
For example, Ferdik reports, "We found...that a policy or practice that
allowed the use of [CEWs]...on actively resistive suspects (tensing/pulling
away) is significantly associated with increases in the number of fatal police
shootings," compared to departments with combative-only restrictions.
In other words, "only the least restrictive policy appears to be associated
with reductions in fatal shootings."
In addition, the researchers found that departments that required annual
retraining in the use of CEWs experienced "significant reductions" in the
rate of OISs. But agencies that required "more hours of initial [CEW]
training" had "significant increases in fatal shootings."
"More rigorous" research is needed to explain these "counterintuitive"
findings, the researchers say. If more investigation provides clarification and
confirms that "less restrictive policies reduce police fatal shootings," then a
"reasonable recommendation would be to loosen existing restrictions on
[CEW] use during use-of-force encounters," Ferdik writes.
The study, "The Influence of Agency Policies on Conducted Energy Device
Use and Police Use of Lethal Force," is published in Police Quarterly. A free
abstract, plus a link for ordering a paid, full report of the results, is available
by clicking here.
!2
Our thanks to Dr. Mark Kroll, adjunct professor of biomedical engineering at
the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis and a frequent defense expert
for law enforcement, and to Atty. Michael Brave, member/manager of
LAAW International LLC and national/international litigation counsel to
TASER International, Inc., for helping to facilitate this report and the one
that follows below.
II. Controversy sparks anew over alleged risks of prone positioning
A Canadian anesthesiologist has attempted to revive the controversy about
alleged risks associated with the prone positioning of arrestees, only to draw
an emphatic rebuke from a team of experts on the subject.
The physician is Alain Michaud, affiliated with a hospital in Roberval,
Quebec. In published correspondence to the Journal of Forensic and Legal
Medicine, he presents an argument sometimes advanced by plaintiffs'
attorneys in lawsuits against police involving arrest-related deaths. Namely,
that applying pressure to the back of a proned-out, struggling suspect can
compress the inferior vena cava blood vessel to the extent that blood from
the legs and abdomen cannot get back to the heart, thus provoking a fatal
cardiac disruption. He links the problem especially to individuals
experiencing the excited delirium syndrome (ExDS).
INSISTENT CHALLENGE. The anesthesiologist challenges a study
published earlier in the Journal which disputed the hypothesis that "weight
force" applied to "the center of [a suspect's] back" could cause a "sudden
cardiovascular collapse" from significantly diminished blood return to the
heart.
That study was too limited, Michaud argues, because, among other things, it
did not adequately factor in the impact of physical exertion and
psychological stress that invariably accompany ExDS encounters on the
street.
Restraining a "hyperactive individual" in the prone position on a hard
surface, he insists, "will impede free expansion of the chest and the
abdomen" during inhalation and "may interfere with cardiopulmonary"
function. Indeed, he says, even the weight of one knee applied to the back of
a subject in the throes of ExDS "should alter the venus [blood] return
significantly."
!3
Moreover, he writes, a "tight hogtie position could also reduce the venous
return directly and indirectly by different mechanisms."
Citing several papers written by others, Michaud concludes that the prone
position should not be ruled out "as a contributing or precipitating factor in
fatal ExDS." Police, he says, should consider "developing restraint
techniques that would not impede abdominal and chest expansion...in the
lateral position."
Michaud's letter can be read in full, for a fee, by clicking here.
SHARP REBUTTAL. Four researchers involved in the study Michaud
criticizes have fired back with a lengthy letter of their own. This team--Drs.
Gary Vilke, Theodore Chan, Davut Savaser, and Tom Neuman--are
physicians with the Dept. of Emergency Medicine at the University of
California-San Diego.
"It is highly doubtful that Dr. Michaud's letter would ever survive peer
review," they write, because he "relies on speculative theories" supported
mainly by "reports of questionable applicability and no true experimental
literature" and also "mischaracterizes many of his cited references,...often
leaving out key details" to support his assertions.
The team points out that Michaud presents "no data" to support his claim
that a single knee to the back of an excited delirium subject can significantly
hamper blood flow. Although this is presented as fact, it appears in reality to
be merely his "conjecture" and "speculation," they write.
"Dr. Michaud completely fails to mention five other experimental papers," in
addition to their own study, "that directly contradict his thesis," the
researchers continue. These studies dealt with back weight up to 225 pounds,
"with no reports of any adverse effects such as blood pressure drops" or
heart distress symptoms "that would be consistent with marked reductions in
cardiac output....
"To be blunt, Dr. Michaud ignores common sense. Were as little as one knee
in the back sufficient to cause such a dangerous reduction in cardiac output,
there would be significant death rates among rugby or football players."
In contrast, the team notes, "there is now abundant evidence that even
relatively minor degrees [of structural heart disease] is associated with an
!4
increased incidence of sudden death." This risk factor, they conclude, is far
more worthy of focus and exploration than the "unfounded and unsupported
theory" of prone positioning adversely affecting blood flow.
The rebuttal can be accessed in full, for a fee, by clicking here.
An abstract of the study at the core of the Journal's letter exchange can be
viewed free of charge by clicking here. The title is "The effect of the prone
maximal restraint position with and without weight force on cardiac output
and other hemodynamic measures."
ANOTHER VOICE. Another observer weighing in recently on the alleged
risks of prone positioning is Dr. Michael Graham, a professor of pathology
at St. Louis University and chief medical examiner for the city of St. Louis.
Graham includes the subject in a broad, 24-page review of factors often
associated with arrest-related deaths published in Academic Forensic
Pathology, the official journal of the National Assn. of Medical Examiners.
In light of existing research on the subject, Graham concludes that "in the
vast majority of cases, it is unlikely" that the extent and duration of
compression of an arrestee's chest, back, or abdomen during prone
positioning "are sufficient to cause or contribute to death."
Sophisticated studies, he notes, have failed to confirm a risk of fatal
breathing or cardiac problems induced by prone positioning with either
hogtying or weight force.
In another section of his report, Graham explores research findings regarding
the role of CEWs in arrest-related deaths, again concluding that no causal
relationship has been established. He also describes relevant factors in
deaths associated with neck restraint, excited delirium, and short-term
physical exertion by suspects with the sickle cell trait.
A link for purchasing Graham's full article, titled "Investigation of Deaths
Temporally Associated with Law Enforcement Apprehension," can be
accessed by clicking here.
III. Readers write: Excited delirium, body cams, new training center
Life saved by recognition of ExDS symptoms
!5
Quick success story:
Recently at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, officers were dispatched to
a disorderly subject being denied boarding on an Alaska Airline flight due to
unruly behavior and intoxication. The responding supervisor, Sgt. Dan
Flynn, a Force Science Analysis graduate, arrived as officers were struggling
to handcuff the subject and immediately recognized many of the signs of
Excited Delirium, which had been covered by Dr. Christine Hall in the
certification course. These included excessive strength, profuse sweating,
exceptional tolerance of pain, attempts to self-cool, extreme aggression, and
rapid breathing.
The fire department aid team that responded was unfamiliar with Excited
Delirium Syndrome (ExDS) and Sgt. Flynn had to educate them on why they
needed ALS for this grave medical emergency while he was helping four
officers and four firefighters restrain the handcuffed subject.
When ALS arrived, the lead paramedic was highly complementary and
readily explained the subject was likely moments from death due to his rapid
heart rate, extreme blood pressure, and elevated body temperature. The rapid
request and intervention of ALS saved the subject's life and saved our
agency from enduring the scrutiny of an in-custody death investigation.
Talking with Sgt. Flynn on scene afterwards, he directly credited his Force
Science certification for his ability to readily identify the ExDS symptoms.
That knowledge made the difference in the lives of the responders on scene
and saved the life of a soldier and combat veteran having a significant
medical emergency.
Cmdr. Jeff Selleg
Airport Division/Explosive Detection K9
Port of Seattle PD
VP, Washington State Tactical Officers Assn.
Body cam report "very useful"
Thanks for the excellent report "10 limitations of body cams..." [FSN #265,
9/23/14]. Very useful! The body cam is a huge success in Europe but it has
its limitations and it's necessary and important to know them.
Capt. Bernd Pokojewski (ret.)
Hesse State Police
!6
Frankfurt, Germany
A day maker
Great piece on the St. Louis Police Officers Assn. training politicians on the
realities of the street [FSN #269, 11/19/14]. Made my day!
Faisal Farid
Agent Supervisor
Ohio Dept. of Taxation
Criminal Investigations Division
Columbus, OH
International kudos on new Training & Research Center
Great news about the new facility. What a fantastic concept!
Hilary Carmichael, BSc
Professional Standards
New Scotland Yard
London (England) Metro Police
The new facility sounds like a terrific venue to operate from. I called on
Force Science to vindicate officers in a bogus complaint when I was our
Professional Standards sergeant, and I have used the CD entitled
"Hollywood vs. Reality," which features Force Science personnel, to explain
force-on-force encounters to my CJ students at Illinois State University.
The work you do is important and complicated, and I appreciate the effort
and dedication of your cadre.
Det. Sgt. Randall Wikoff
Bloomington (IL) PD
Congrats!!!
Ron Libby, Project Manager
U.S. Dept. of State
Diplomatic Security
Washington, DC
!7
The new Force Science training centre is very exciting for the law
enforcement profession. Thank you for all you have done and all you
continue to do for law enforcement professionals everywhere.
Brian Willis
President, Winning Mind Training
Calgary, AB, Canada
Awesome! Thank you for all you do to look out for our LE community.
Capt. Darin Southworth
Investigations Division
Lansing (MI) PD
That is great news and very exciting! Congratulations!
Sgt. Guy Furoy
Tactical & Rescue Unit
Peel (Ont.) Regional Police
Canada
!8