Chicago Police Proposed Use-of-Force Policy: SHOOT YOUR PARTNER

Chicago's Police Superintendent "Special" Ed Johnson has released the final draft of a new Chicago Police "Use of Force" policy to the public.  What's more, it's been made available to the public for their input.  Yes, gentle readers, you too can read it and comment on it here until December 5th.  Chicago Police Use of Force Policy Draft.

Before you get all giddy, it's 41 pages long.  Yes, 41 pages.  Our legal minds came up with a single sentence description of when deadly force is justified:

So why does Special Ed Johnson need 41 pages and not one sentence, you ask?

They have strived to minimize the situations where officers may avail themselves to using force, and especially deadly force to save their lives or those of other innocents.  At the same time, the proposal maximizes the ability of police administrators to find some sort of fault in the actions of any officer who uses deadly force no matter what the provocation.  Here is an excerpt:

Red is our emphasis:

 E. Use of Force: Objectively Reasonable, Necessary, and Proportional. While the legal standard allows for force only to the degree that is objectively reasonable, necessary under the circumstances, and proportional to the threat or resistance of a subject (Graham V. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 1989), Department members are also required to follow the Department policy on the use of force which extends beyond what the law requires.

1. Department members will use the least amount of force reasonably necessary based on the totality of the circumstances to perform a lawful task, effect an arrest, overcome resistance, control a subject, or protect themselves or others from injury.

2. Objectively reasonable: The reasonableness of a particular use of force is based on the totality of circumstances known by the officer at the time of the use of force

a. Reasonableness must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the benefit of hindsight.

But you can rest assured administrators and politicians will use all the benefit of hindsight they can muster.  And "reasonalbleness" is a very fluid concept, depending upon the perspective of the person involved.

b. The reasonableness standard is an objective one: whether the Department member’s actions are objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting him or her, without regard to the member’s underlying intent or motivation.

c. Reasonableness is not capable of precise definition or mechanical application. The reasonableness standard must allow for the fact that Department members are often forced to make split-second decisions—in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, dynamic, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.

3. Necessary: Department members will use physical force only when no reasonably effective alternative appears to exist. Consistent with Department policy and training, Department members are required to employ strategies and tactics designed to provide members more response options, including creating more time and distance within which to exercise those options.

"required to employ strategies and tactics…  including creating more time and distance within which to exercise those options".  Translation:  Retreat.

4. Proportional: Department members will employ force in proportional response to the threat, actions, and level of resistance offered by a subject.

a. Proportional force does not require Department members to use the same type or amount of force as the subject.

b. A greater level of force may be objectively reasonable and necessary to counter a threat that is immediate and likely to result in death or serious physical injury.

c. Additionally, a lesser level of force may be appropriate under the circumstances. Using the same or greater level of force may not be necessary to counter a threat or the actions by a subject.

d. The use of excessive and unwarranted force is prohibited and will not be tolerated under any circumstances.

5. Additional guidance. For further guidance on when force is authorized, Department members will refer to the Department directive entitled “Response Options.”

Second City Cop nails it on the head:

So…if your partner is using, let's say, Deadly Force. And you, for whatever reason, decide that the use of Deadly Force is above and beyond what you would have used. You must intervene to stop the alleged misconduct. According to the Use of Force Model, Deadly Force is countered with…..Deadly Force.

So……shoot your partner?

We've worked with a lot of cops over the years. A few great ones, some not so great, most just honest guys and gals trying to get through the day, get home, drink a beer, see the kids' school play, get some sleep, whatever.

We can't recall ever wanting to actually kill them, but according to the Wicked Witch of the West Coast, we'll be required to "intervene" when witnessing misconduct, up to and including, shooting our partner to stop misconduct, disregarding the fact that two people can witness the same situation from different vantage points and come up with completely different interpretations of events.

Read that last paragraph one last time.  "we'll be required to "intervene" when witnessing misconduct, up to and including, shooting our partner to stop misconduct, disregarding the fact that two people can witness the same situation from different vantage points and come up with completely different interpretations of events."

Yep.  This is what it looks like to put politics above policing.

Is it any wonder why there is a dearth of applicants for the Chicago Police Department to hire?