Experienced LEO opinions wanted.

[UNM1136]

Teaching articulation to new cops (and just plain talking to people in general) is one of the greatest challenges in LE training.

My agency is hiring recruits for the first time in over a decade. Those laterals spoiled me. These recruits are wierd. I take my kids phones away if they are in public and staring at them as they walk. They are expected to put their back to a wall or have a seat, preferably with their back to a wall, if they are using their phone in a manner that requires them to visually focus on it. Recruit training is far better than it was when I went through, but these kids seem to think the world stops when they look at their phone. Several times I have had to promise to give them a five minute break every hour or two to check their phone.

I recently had a recruit for second phase that had academy training, followed by a month of OJT who had never written a criminal complaint. Another recruit told me his other FTOs forbade him from mentioning them in reports so the FTO doesn't have to go to court.

When reviewing field performance, reports, and complaints the quickest words that piss me off: ascertained, proceeded, advised, subdued, be advised (over the radio). Any recruit starting a report with "I, Officer XYZ" gets it kixked back. "I then" gets over used, and 10-codes misused. Our agency uses 10-41 or just 41 for neighbor. I have had people use "41-hood". 10 codes are for brevity. Count sylables.

Sorry. A few pet peeves.

pat

[BobM]

My agency is hiring recruits for the first time in over a decade. Those laterals spoiled me. These recruits are wierd. I take my kids phones away if they are in public and staring at them as they walk. They are expected to put their back to a wall or have a seat, preferably with their back to a wall, if they are using their phone in a manner that requires them to visually focus on it. Recruit training is far better than it was when I went through, but these kids seem to think the world stops when they look at their phone. Several times I have had to promise to give them a five minute break every hour or two to check their phone.

I recently had a recruit for second phase that had academy training, followed by a month of OJT who had never written a criminal complaint. Another recruit told me his other FTOs forbade him from mentioning them in reports so the FTO doesn't have to go to court.

When reviewing field performance, reports, and complaints the quickest words that piss me off: ascertained, proceeded, advised, subdued, be advised (over the radio). Any recruit starting a report with "I, Officer XYZ" gets it kixked back. "I then" gets over used, and 10-codes misused. Our agency uses 10-41 or just 41 for neighbor. I have had people use "41-hood". 10 codes are for brevity. Count sylables.

Sorry. A few pet peeves.

pat

You forgot “this officer “.

[feudist]

Not dismissing or criticizing the book at all, but the problem with books on 4th amendment issues, as well as some other topics, is that the law changes frequently and does not change uniformly across judicial circuits. As an example, in some jurisdictions, the "armed and dangerous" suspicion warranting a frisk means suspicion a person is armed and also dangerous, while in others, the courts feel armed = dangerous. Various courts are also now struggling with whether being armed justifies a Terry stop in a state where gun carry is lightly regulated vs. severely regulated. In a related area, just last yer the Supreme Court issued an opinion that says or suggests that an application of physical force means a person is seized, even if they don't yield to that force / continue flight. A fairly limited situation that may not often mean much, but my point is that, unless updated frequently, any book on judicially-created law can be out of date quickly. That is why a La Fave S&S 6th edition set sells for $1200 new but a 4th or 5th edition is $300-$400, and why there are annual updates to the set. I revise my academy teaching materials at least twice a year due to state and federal opinions.

Not saying you should not buy the book; just a cautionary note. And I guess while I am being Mr. negative, I have seen numerous "felon in possession" cases get dumped due to unjustified or poorly articulated frisks, and conducting a search or seizure without RS can get your POST certification suspended or revoked where I live.

It isn't getting easier.

One real issue is that, ultimately, RAS and PC are opinions.

A veteran officer will have one that will differ from a rookie. A defense attorney will differ from a Prosecutor. And Judges vary by state, party affiliation and time of the month.

So it can become simply a power struggle that can leave departments trying to cya, sometimes at the expense of the officer.

[DDTSGM]

You forgot “this officer “.

'I then responded to 17th and Adams' would always get a note asking 'How, with a wave, or some type of arousal?'

[jnc36rcpd]

I could live with third person narratives, but didn't tolerate mixing who you were. One could be "Officer Smith" or use the King's English first person, but you better not mix them. I didn't mind, used, and still do use some of the goofy words that rightfully enrage UNM, In some circumstances, they were appropriate, but usually not. Nonetheless, I do respond places on a call and ascertain things during an investigation. In most cases, however, simpler language is better. "Subdued" is acceptable only if reinforced by more specific language.

At times over the years, despite my august rank of sergeant, I was the only one on scene who was both reasonably articulate and could type. I wrote many charging documents because, as much as the young troops needed to learn this stuff, we'd be there for days if we didn't get this arrest process moving. Those were always done third person since they were turned over to a working cop to review and present to the district court commissioner.

While actually not required and I have no idea where it started, I never minded starting a statement of charges with "Your affiant" though I switched immediately to first person. Of course, I never minded that every statement of charges ended mentioning that the defendant had violated the peace, government, and dignity of the State of Maryland. We don't have a lot of peace, pretty poor government, and are pretty undignified, but you better not violate that stuff!

[BehindBlueI's]

Various courts are also now struggling with whether being armed justifies a Terry stop in a state where gun carry is lightly regulated vs. severely regulated.

Being visibly armed, openly or poorly concealed, is *not* a reason for a stop in my state. It was a bit of a gray area for awhile, but the courts have decided that you can't stop someone for a handgun to see if they have a license. The argument is that you can't stop someone for driving to see if they have a license, either. Note you *can* stop someone for fishing to see if they have a license, because it's written into the law about fishing licenses. This is a nonsensical argument, IMO, as you can't write "ignore the 4th amendment when for this code" into the law and it matter. But there we are.

When reviewing field performance, reports, and complaints the quickest words that piss me off: ascertained, proceeded, advised, subdued, be advised (over the radio). Any recruit starting a report with "I, Officer XYZ" gets it kixked back. "I then" gets over used, and 10-codes misused. Our agency uses 10-41 or just 41 for neighbor. I have had people use "41-hood". 10 codes are for brevity. Count sylables.

Sorry. A few pet peeves.

pat

The "I, <rank> <name> of the <department>, ..." format is how we are trained to both make reports and probable causes. We can supplement existing reports/PCs, so it makes it immediately apparent which officer wrote what both in electronic and printed formats. For arrests, especially regarding fleeing or resisting, "while in full police uniform" and/or "while driving a fully marked police vehicle/semi-marked police vehicle" was immediately after if applicable.


We also dropped ten codes for the most part, I though post-9/11 most places have due to their lack of standardization. 10-41 for us is one we still use, but it's marking on duty with 10-42 being marking off.

[UNM1136]

The "I, <rank> <name> of the <department>, ..." format is how we are trained to both make reports and probable causes. We can supplement existing reports/PCs, so it makes it immediately apparent which officer wrote what both in electronic and printed formats. For arrests, especially regarding fleeing or resisting, "while in full police uniform" and/or "while driving a fully marked police vehicle/semi-marked police vehicle" was immediately after if applicable.

If that were the reason I could get behind it. Normally, like early career radio traffic it is filler when someone doesn't know what to say, but just has to say something, and wants to sound official. Or pretentious.

My first paragraph establishes date/time, assignment (patrol, plain clothes, surveillance, supervision, training), general location and initial dispatch. In statements of probable cause when I started there was a lot of "the undersigned affiant" and whatnot expected. I started dialing it back to plain english about 15 years ago. It got some raised eyebrows at first, but many of my end users warmed up once they saw my testimony. Very laid back, courteous, eye contact, hand gestures, common language, no jargon. Easy to understand. Essentially I am telling a story to a bunch of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty. The DA's office loves putting me in front of juries, Grand and petit.

For felony complaints, warrants, and statements of probable cause I use some of the pro-forma language, but try to be as simple as possible. We are converting to new software this week, but the last one had very poor spelling and grammar checking. I am scared shitless of using "ascertained" and "proceeded" to try to sound professional and then having very unprofessional spelling and grammar issues. I know "to, two, and too", and "your and you're" but I kick back a lot of reports from cops that don't. When doing dope stuff there were long discussions about "burned" and "burnt".

I almost always write in the first person. Misdemeanor arrest warrants, complaints and summons have not needed a statement of probable cause if the officer writes a strong, detailed complaint that contains their PC. That was a change many years ago (16-17) to reduce paperflow through the largest, busiest court in the state. Bernalillo County has the only Metropolitan Court in the state due to population. Metro court takes the Municipal and Magistrate court system that all counties have and combines them.

On a side note a pet peeve of mine is as a hunter I "bone" or "bone out" my animal. I do all my own butchering, and have a peice of college paper that says I have been trained and should be reasonably capable. Over the years a bunch of people didn't care to know or use the correct term began to debone their animals. The wrong term has been used so much for so long everyone believes it is the correct term, including several dictionaries. I bone the animal with a boning knife, after I skin it with a skinning knife. I do not deskin animals. But I have clearly lost that fight with our culture.

Back to my first point. My current squad is 50% probationary cops that graduated the academy last spring. I would vastly prefer if we would stop using 10 codes. But this last crop of rookies has some serious issues with radio discipline. 10-4 is an acknowledgement. Depending on context it can mean yes, I heard you, I know, typical stuff. So I get "yeah, 10-4". 10-25 is "make contact with" so I get "I made 25 with" or "I'll go make 25 with" instead of just "25 the victim". It is my position that they are not thinking about their transmission before they key up. 10 codes still get a written test on FTO and are really important when our in car computers are used for us to generate our own calls for service in the CAD system. These kids key the mic and then go into stream of consciousness blabbering as they try to figure out what they want to say. When I went through that was not acceptable, and as an FTO I do not find it acceptable.

pat

[jd950]

The U.S. Constitution gets treated differently, not only in different jurisdictions, but with different judges and and panels, even in the same jurisdiction. That fact erodes confidence in the courts and the Constitution. It also makes it hard to convince trainees to have full respect for Constitutional limitations. Some ask if judges and lawyers can manipulate the constitution in court, then why can't cops do it on the street? Tough to answer sometimes.

The courts will sometimes tighten or expand boundaries to obtain a result, and that can make for confusing case law. Truth is, you can "get away" with more mistakes in cases involving serious crimes or particularly bad people. But then there are judges with anti-cop bias, and/or personal prejudices they cannot get past.

Some of the Terry decisions involving firearms are being impacted by Second Amendment positions of some courts/judges and that is going to lead to more conflict in the circuits. The Supreme Court may need to come out with clear guidance on some of this, even though I am sure it does not want to.

[Bolt_Overide]

Do y'all feel like things have changed a lot as far as rapport with the public?

[gtmtnbiker98]

Do y'all feel like things have changed a lot as far as rapport with the public?

100% geographic based. I have yet to see in my part of Ohio any strains regarding public support.