Use of Force Incidents Use of Force Incidents per 1,000 Arrests All Use of Force Incidents By District

Similar documents
University of Texas System Police Use of Force Report

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT

Denver Police Department Operations Manual

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT

THIS ORDER CONSISTS OF THE FOLLOWING NUMBERED SECTIONS: 2. DEPUTY/COURT SECURITY ACTION (During Use Of Force/No Firearms) page 26

2007 Force Response Report

February 7, Chief of Police George Kral. Deputy Chief Cheryl Hunt Support and Administrative Services Division

C I T Y O F O A K L A N D. Memorandum

Subject LESS-LETHAL MUNITIONS AND CHEMICAL AGENTS. DRAFT 31 August By Order of the Police Commissioner

Maryland Chiefs of Police Association Maryland Sheriffs Association. Agency Guidelines For Use of Electronic Control Devices

Chief William Scott s Statement Regarding Conducted Energy Devices for the San Francisco Police Department

San Francisco Police Department 5.01 GENERAL ORDER Rev. 12/21/16

Boise Police Department. Office of Internal Affairs

ABRIDGED SUMMARY OF CATEGORICAL USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND FINDINGS BY THE LOS ANGELES BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS

Evansville Police Department 2017 Annual Web Report

ABRIDGED SUMMARY OF CATEGORICAL USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND FINDINGS BY THE LOS ANGELES BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS

January 29, Guiding Principles

SUBJECT: DUTY MANUAL ADDITION: DATE: October 18, 2017 L COMMAND OFFICER RESPONSIBILITY BY USE OF FORCE CATEGORY

TOTAL REVIEWS

USE OF FORCE/FIREARMS

Bend Pol ice Department Policies

1 PEW RESEARCH CENTER

I. POLICY. officers should use any force reasonably necessary to protect themselves or. such force. USE OF FORCE

TYPE OF ORDER NUMBER/SERIES ISSUE DATE EFFECTIVE DATE General Order /25/2014 9/25/2014

Student Right-To-Know Graduation Rates

SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDERS

Town of Manchester, Connecticut General Service Department. Request for Proposal Electronic Forms Software RFP No. 15/16-24

MINNEAPOLIS PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT

2014 Complaint Analysis

2014 RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT January 2014 December 2014

INTERNAL AFFAIRS REPORT. COLUMBIA POLICE DEPARTMENT Office of Professional Standards

Certified Armed Protection Specialist (CAPS) Program. Instructors: BSIS approved instructors with firearms, baton, taser instructor certification.

4-223 BODY WORN CAMERAS (06/29/16) (07/29/17) (B-D) I. PURPOSE

PERF Guiding Principles: Policy Red Text = MPD Assessment

MCOLES PoliceOne Academy Course Guide

ABRIDGED SUMMARY OF CATEGORICAL USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND FINDINGS BY THE LOS ANGELES BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS

BLAINE COUNTY. Job Description. Job Title: Patrol Deputy II. Department: Blaine County Sheriff s Office. Reports To: Patrol Sergeant

2018 IN-SERVICE TRAINING CALENDAR. Page 1 of 13

Principled Policing: The Mayor s 2016 Q3 & Q4 Police Accountability Report

Gainesville PD Special Weapons and Tactics Team SWAT

UPPER MERION TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE OFFICER PRELIMINARY APPLICATION POLICE OFFICER PRELIMINARY APPLICATION

Use of Force Statistics

Demographic Profile of the Active-Duty Warrant Officer Corps September 2008 Snapshot

Case: 1:15-cv SO Doc #: 142 Filed: 06/30/17 1 of 31. PageID #: 2953

Last Name First Name M.I. Name You Prefer. City State Zip Address. Daytime Phone Evening Phone Best Time to Call. City State If yes, where?

WINTER PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE. Title: Use of Force SOP #: 222. Effective: October 6, 2015 Pages: (20)

BODY WORN CAMERA - POLICY Denver Police Department

South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy - PoliceOne Academy Course Guide

ACTIVE SHOOTER HOW TO RESPOND

Use of Force Statistics

TCOLE - PoliceOne Academy Course Guide

May act as temporary supervisor or Watch Commander.

ACTIVE SHOOTER HOW TO RESPOND. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Washington, DC

CELL AND AREA EXTRACTIONS (Critical Policy)

South Carolina Law Enforcement Census 2009: Less-Lethal Technology and Useof-Force

Police Force Analysis System Summary Report

ABRIDGED SUMMARY OF CATEGORICAL USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND FINDINGS BY THE LOS ANGELES BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS OFFICER-INVOLVED SHOOTING

U.S. v. Police Department of Baltimore City, case no. 1:17-cv JKB Initial Comments on Baltimore Police Department s Use of Force Policies

This is the first annual report on the status of the Los Angeles Police Department s Categorical and Non-Categorical Use of Force incidents for 2008.

Reno Police. Department. Annual Internal Affairs Report. Your Police, Our Community

This policy provides guidelines for the use of body-worn video cameras (BWC) by members

Chief Linda J. Stump

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT INTERIM POLICY AND PROCEDURE TESTING AND EVALUATION PHASE

Exhibit 1 Racial Profiling Quarterly Report October 1, 2014 thru December 31, 2014

1. Officers carrying weapons on or off duty must meet the below listed requirements. 1) Be commissioned as a State Constable

Signature: Signed by GNT Date Signed: 10/28/2013

MIDDLETON POLICE DEPARTMENT 7341 Donna Drive Middleton, WI 53562

Documenting the Use of Force

OPNAVINST N95 8 May Subj: HUMAN ELECTRO-MUSCULAR INCAPACITATION DEVICES

CHAPTER 9 USE OF FORCE / FIREARMS

Full Class Listing Class Hours Cost OUR

Hertfordshire Constabulary Use of Force Recorded Use of Force by Month

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM YEAR 2016/17

BERKELEY POLICE DEPARTMENT. DATE ISSUED: September 13, 2017 GENERAL ORDER C-64 PURPOSE

Third Quarter Rank Recommended. Page 1 of 6

ABRIDGED SUMMARY OF CATEGORICAL USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND FINDINGS BY THE LOS ANGELES BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS

FY 2017 Peace Corps Early Termination Report GLOBAL

The leading digital media company for Public Safety & Local Government

North Carolina Department of Public Safety

GENERAL ORDER PORT WASHINGTON POLICE DEPARTMENT

POLICE DEPARTMENT TOWN OF HOPKINTON 406 Woodville Road Hopkinton, RI FAX

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY REALIGNMENT. Data Collection Efforts

USE OF FORCE ANNUAL REPORT

1 1/1/2018 1/2/2018 1/3/2018 1/4/2018 1/5/2018

WHITMAN COUNTY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

II. Definitions... Page 1 V. Cross References... Page 6 III. Regulations... Page 2 VI. Attachments... Page 6

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY DATA FORM Please Return to: City of Geneva Human Resources 22 South First Street Geneva, IL 60134

January 22, Submitted by

EMPLOYEE REPORT OF INJURY INCIDENT

) ) ) CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

Demographic Profile of the Officer, Enlisted, and Warrant Officer Populations of the National Guard September 2008 Snapshot

Lebanon School District

Fort Bend County M A S T E R G A R D E N E R A P P L I C A T I O N

ABRIDGED SUMMARY OF CATEGORICAL USE OF FORCE INCIDENT AND FINDINGS BY THE LOS ANGELES BOARD OF POLICE COMMISSIONERS OFFICER-INVOLVED SHOOTING

Instructions for completion and submission

TEXARKANA, TEXAS POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDERS MANUAL. Amended Date December 1, 2015

LONDONDERRY POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES


Critical Incidents. Goals. Types of Critical Incidents. Dan Malmgren

Transcription:

Force Incidents 2015 2018 1. Reasons for Force For each use of force, there must be a reason for why force was used. However, it is also department policy to document injuries which happened prior to and during custody on the same form (DPD Form 12), regardless of cause. Force Event Type 2015 2016 2017 2018 Injury Prior To Arrest 140 104 90 79 Injury While In Custody 88 84 74 101 UOF During Arrest 555 523 524 506 2. Force Incidents per 1,000 Arrests All Force Incidents By District 2015 2016 2017 2018 District District 1 125 5,295 23.6 117 5,028 23.3 122 4,912 24.8 123 4,754 25.9 District 2 103 4,728 21.8 100 4,244 23.6 106 4,357 24.3 91 3,973 22.9 District 3 108 3,577 30.2 93 3,689 25.2 82 4,062 20.2 63 4,234 14.9 District 4 133 4,571 29.1 118 4,565 25.8 105 3,978 26.4 136 4,398 30.9 District 5 74 2,723 27.2 62 2,617 23.7 61 2,483 24.6 60 2,749 21.8 District 6 226 7,917 28.5 207 7,827 26.4 183 8,006 22.9 194 7,918 24.5 District 7 (DIA) 9 149 60.4 9 235 38.3 20 282 70.9 13 268 48.5 Total 783 28,960 27 711 28,205 25.2 688 28,080 24.5 679 28,294 24.0 These include all use of force incidents, including those marked as "injury prior to arrest" and "injury while in custody". Arrests only include those made in the City and County of Denver. Police Department/Department of Public Safety 1331 Cherokee Denver, CO 80204 www.denvergov.org/police p. 720-913-6014 f. 720-913-7018

3. Force Incidents During Arrest per 1,000 Arrests All Force Incidents By District 2015 2016 2017 2018 District Use of Use of District 1 95 5,295 17.9 85 5,028 16.9 91 4,912 18.5 95 4,754 20.0 District 2 80 4,728 16.9 63 4,244 14.8 86 4,357 19.7 71 3,973 17.9 District 3 64 3,577 17.9 65 3,689 17.6 61 4,062 15.0 49 4,234 11.6 District 4 91 4,571 19.9 91 4,565 19.9 78 3,978 19.6 99 4,398 22.5 District 5 46 2,723 16.9 46 2,617 17.6 48 2,483 19.3 41 2,749 14.9 District 6 166 7,917 21.0 161 7,827 20.6 139 8,006 17.4 137 7,918 17.3 District 7 8 149 53.7 9 235 38.3 13 282 46.1 10 268 37.3 (DIA) Total 550 28,960 19.0 519 28,205 18.4 516 28,080 18.4 492 28,294 17.4 This table only includes those uses of force which were documented as effected during an arrest. Arrests only include those made in the City and County of Denver. 4. Force Incidents per Officer Force Incidents per officer 2015 2016 2017 2018 0 885 943 927 975 1 337 301 318 301 2 132 143 156 142 3 69 65 72 77 4 42 36 25 23 >=5 36 23 30 40 Total DPD Officers 1501 1511 1528 1558 Officers who were documented as using one or more types of force during a Force incident. Officers who were only witnesses to the incident or specifically documented not using force were not counted as having participated in the use of force event. This may include officers who were injured during the incident but did not use force themselves. - 2 -

5. Force Incidents captured on BWC Captured on Body Worn Camera 2015 2016 2017 2018 BWC 0 108 552 457 NO BWC 783 603 136 229 % Captured on BWC 0% 15.2% 80.2% 66.6% This counts all Force Incidents, including those listed as Injury Prior to Arrest and Injury While In Custody. If there was no specific indication that the event was captured on BWC, it is marked as not captured, regardless of the officers having a BWC or not. 6. Force Incidents During Arrest captured on BWC Captured on Body Worn Camera 2015 2016 2017 2018 BWC 0 106 448 454 NO BWC 555 417 76 52 % Captured on BWC 0% 20.3% 85.5% 89.7% This only includes those uses of force which were documented as effected during an arrest. If there was no specific indication that the event was captured on BWC, it is marked as not captured, regardless of the officers having a BWC or not. - 3 -

7. Officer Race/Ethnicity vs Subject Race/Ethnicity These tables capture all Force incidents, not just those that occurred while effecting an arrest. Each officer involved is counted. Each incident may have multiple officers and subjects, so numbers will not add up to the total count of Force incidents. Officer and subject race/ethnicity information is self reported. 2015 Officer Race Subject Race Native American Asian Black Hispanic Unknown White Total Asian 0 0 0 2 0 7 9 Black 6 11 46 61 1 229 354 Hispanic 6 6 21 49 0 164 246 Native American 0 0 1 2 0 6 9 Unknown 0 1 4 3 0 16 24 White 3 14 34 111 3 388 553 Total 15 32 106 228 4 810 1195 2016 Officer Race Subject Race Native American Asian Black Hispanic Unknown White Total Asian 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 Black 4 11 35 59 1 204 314 Hispanic 3 5 14 41 0 165 228 Native American 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 Unknown 0 1 4 3 0 16 24 White 6 15 37 107 3 328 496 Total 13 33 90 210 4 718 1068 2017 Officer Race Subject Race Native American Asian Black Hispanic Unknown White Total Asian 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 Black 0 7 35 80 1 235 358 Hispanic 3 6 23 60 1 171 264 Native American 0 1 0 1 0 3 5 Unknown 1 1 3 9 0 21 35 White 4 13 29 107 1 344 498 Total 8 28 91 257 3 775 1162 2018 Officer Race Subject Race Native American Asian Black Hispanic Unknown White Total Asian 0 1 1 7 0 11 20 Black 3 4 26 69 2 191 295 Hispanic 0 4 11 45 0 141 201 Native American 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 Unknown 0 0 0 7 0 20 27 White 6 11 36 140 3 393 589 Total 9 20 74 269 5 757 1134 8. Officer Force level vs Subject Race/Ethnicity - 4 -

Tier I level of force are those less likely to cause serious bodily injury or death, such as Takedown or strikes using hand, foot, etc., Pepper spray or other chemical agent, ECW (Taser), RIPP Restraint or other less lethal weapons such as Pepper Ball rounds or 40mm impact rounds. Tier II level of force includes lethal force or force likely to cause serious bodily injury such as Police Service Dog, Handgun, Rifle, or Shotgun Totals do not include incidents where no force was used by officers. 2015 Tier I of Total Tier II of Total Total 519 100.00% 46 100.00% Asian 4 0.77% 0 0.00% Black 155 29.87% 19 41.30% Hispanic 105 20.23% 15 32.61% Native American 3 0.58% 1 2.17% Unknown 0 0.00% 1 2.17% White 252 48.55% 10 21.74% 2016 Tier I of Total Tier II of Total Total 443 100.00% 55 100.00% Asian 3 0.68% 0 0.00% Black 128 28.89% 8 14.55% Hispanic 84 18.96% 19 34.55% Native American 1 0.23% 0 0.00% Unknown 0 0.00% 0 0.00% White 227 51.24% 28 50.91% 2017 Tier I of Total Tier II of Total Total 489 100.00% 43 100.00% Asian 1 0.20% 0 0.00% Black 138 28.22% 8 18.60% Hispanic 117 23.93% 13 30.23% Native American 4 0.82% 0 0.00% Unknown 0 0.00% 0 0.00% White 229 46.83% 22 51.16% 2018 Tier I of Total Tier II of Total Total 467 100.00% 45 100.00% Asian 6 1.28% 3 6.67% Black 120 25.70% 7 15.56% Hispanic 94 20.13% 14 31.11% Native American 2 0.43% 0 0.00% Unknown 11 2.36% 1 2.22% White 234 50.11% 20 44.44% - 5 -

9. Force level used by officer vs subject resistance level These tables only include those use of force incidents occurring while effecting an arrest. Subjects may exhibit different levels of resistance during the encounter and afterward. Each use of force incident could have both tier I and tier II force used as the officers' response is escalated, or no Tier I nor Tier II force if no force was used. Tier I level of force are those less likely to cause serious bodily injury or death, such as Takedown or strikes using hand, foot, etc., Pepper spray or other chemical agent, ECW (Taser), RIPP Restraint or other less lethal weapons such as Pepper Ball rounds or 40mm impact rounds. Tier II level of force includes lethal force or force likely to cause serious bodily injury such as Police Service Dog, Handgun, Rifle, or Shotgun Total Incidents also includes those incidents where no force was used, however a report was mandated by policy. 2015 Tier I Tier II Total Incidents with that level of Subject Resistance 45 Psych Intimidation 5 100.0% 0 0.0% 5 46 Verbal Non Compliance 29 100.0% 0 0.0% 29 47 Defensive Resistance 154 99.4% 3 1.9% 155 48 Active Aggression 201 99.5% 4 2.0% 202 49 Agg Active Aggression 30 88.2% 8 23.5% 34 50 No Resistance 14 87.5% 1 6.3% 16 51 Passive Resistance 28 93.3% 1 3.3% 30 52 Combative After Custody 37 100.0% 0 0.0% 37 53 Foot Pursuit 64 97.0% 11 16.7% 66 54 Vehicle Pursuit 20 100.0% 15 75.0% 20 55 Attempt to Flee/Escape 59 100.0% 15 25.4% 59 56 Actively 10 100.0% 0 0.0% 10 57 Assault/Resisted Arrest 21 91.3% 2 8.7% 23 2016 Tier I Tier II Total Incidents with that level of Subject Resistance 45 Psych Intimidation 3 100.0% 0 0.0% 3 46 Verbal Non Compliance 22 100.0% 3 13.6% 22 47 Defensive Resistance 129 97.0% 2 1.5% 133 48 Active Aggression 150 98.7% 4 2.6% 152 49 Agg Active Aggression 32 84.2% 11 28.9% 38 50 No Resistance 6 100.0% 1 16.7% 6 51 Passive Resistance 13 72.2% 2 11.1% 18 52 Combative After Custody 24 88.9% 0 0.0% 27 53 Foot Pursuit 90 100.0% 11 12.2% 90 54 Vehicle Pursuit 19 100.0% 13 68.4% 19 55 Attempt to Flee/Escape 64 97.0% 23 34.8% 66 56 Actively 7 87.5% 2 25.0% 8 57 Assault/Resisted Arrest 29 93.5% 1 3.2% 31-6 -

2017 Tier I Tier II Total Incidents with that level of Subject Resistance 45 Psych Intimidation 9 90.0% 0 0.0% 10 46 Verbal Non Compliance 33 100.0% 0 0.0% 33 47 Defensive Resistance 161 100.0% 1 0.6% 161 48 Active Aggression 171 99.4% 5 2.9% 172 49 Agg Active Aggression 24 85.7% 6 21.4% 28 50 No Resistance 7 77.8% 0 0.0% 9 51 Passive Resistance 26 100.0% 2 7.7% 26 52 Combative After Custody 26 96.3% 0 0.0% 27 53 Foot Pursuit 88 100.0% 18 20.5% 88 54 Vehicle Pursuit 9 90.0% 4 40.0% 10 55 Attempt to Flee/Escape 91 96.8% 25 26.6% 94 56 Actively 4 100.0% 1 25.0% 4 57 Assault/Resisted Arrest 29 93.5% 2 6.5% 31 2018 Tier I Tier II Total Incidents with that level of Subject Resistance 45 Psych Intimidation 2 100.0% 0 0.0% 2 46 Verbal Non Compliance 18 94.7% 0 0.0% 19 47 Defensive Resistance 139 100.0% 0 0.0% 139 48 Active Aggression 189 97.4% 3 1.5% 194 49 Agg Active Aggression 23 76.7% 8 26.7% 30 50 No Resistance 8 100.0% 1 12.5% 8 51 Passive Resistance 19 95.0% 4 20.0% 20 52 Combative After Custody 15 100.0% 0 0.0% 15 53 Foot Pursuit 60 96.8% 7 11.3% 62 54 Vehicle Pursuit 7 100.0% 5 71.4% 7 55 Attempt to Flee/Escape 71 100.0% 22 31.0% 71 56 Actively 13 86.7% 6 40.0% 15 57 Assault/Resisted Arrest 31 96.9% 0 0.0% 32-7 -

10. Methodology Records were retrieved from the IA Pro database. These records include information copied over from paper forms which are filled out by officers according to the department's operations manual and training. In cases where information appeared to be inconsistent or incorrect, the IA department was notified and corrections, if needed, were made. Typically, these were cases where the information in two sections were swapped, such as gender and race, where a white male was listed as having race of male and sex of white. Once corrections were made, data was re pulled to ensure that the corrections were in the system. Each Force Incident may contain one or more suspects and one or more officers. Additionally, each suspect may exhibit multiple levels of resistance and officers may use multiple levels of force during the incident. - 8 -