Police Officer Preparation & Law Enforcement Resource - Archive

Hello all,
I was browsing another explorer board and I saw a thread in which an explorer discussed how he caught a kid stealing from a store and commanded him to put what he stole on the counter then called the police. This of course led to a bunch of explorers commenting about how they would have forced him to stay until police arrived, some even going as far as to say they would "throw him against the wall and hold him there until police arrived." This seriously concerned me as an explorer so I decided to discuss it here.

First off, you ARE NOT police officers. Sure, you have training in law enforcement techniques, such as D.T. and arrest techniques. This does not, however, mean you are a sworn police officer, nor does it give you any more authority than any other civilian. By attempting to apprehend a criminal, regardless of the crime, you are asking for trouble. Especially if you physically force someone to stay at the scene. Since you do not have arrest authority you are asking for a lawsuit or even criminal charges for assault, unlawful imprisonment, etc.

Second, confronting suspects is dangerous, even for "insignificant" crimes such as shoplifting. When you attempt to restrain a suspect its like your cornering a wild animal, they will do whatever they can to avoid going to jail. Please don't risk getting yourself hurt trying to get your moment of fame. Plus i'm pretty sure the responding officers won't be as pleased with you as you think they will be (though i'm sure some of the LEO's on here could shed some light on that.)

Third, acting in such a reckless manner reflects poorly upon yourself, your department, and the explorer program in general. I know such behavior in our post would not be tolerated and would quickly result in your dismissal from the program, and I hope that other posts would act the same.

So what is the role of an explorer when it comes to crimes in progress? Explorers are trained to be professional witnesses. You should gather as much information as you can (description of suspects, detailed account of what occurred, direction of travel, vehicle descriptions, etc) and then report it to the police. If you want to make a difference and help apprehend a criminal, then report it. Stay on the scene to provide as much information as possible to law enforcement. Do anything you can to help, but don't try and be an LEO, because your not.

O.k. my rant is over, but please stay safe and use common sense.

PoliceOneTV - Will to Win: Jared Reston (http://www.policeone.com/policeonetv/videos/3592582-will-to-win-jared-reston/)
Second, confronting suspects is dangerous, even for "insignificant" crimes such as shoplifting.

Case in point:

Video Link: Jared Reston (http://www.policeone.com/policeonetv/videos/3592582-will-to-win-jared-reston/)

Story/interview with a polcie officer who chased a shoplifting suspect who stole some pants. No criminal record, and the suspect tried to kill Officer Reston to get away. He nearly succeeded.

-Citicop.

I am a former explorer, current loss prevention supervisor I still don't go hands on (company policy) however even if I could go hands on, why would you? It's just stuff!

If sworn police officers shouldn't do more than be a good witness, I think it goes without saying that would be the same for explorers. I would never get involved in a larceny case when off duty, even in my jurisdiction. I urge the same of explorers.

This is very informative! I have been Exploring for almost three months (I am getting my uniform in January, by the way) and have been wondering about how I should act if I see something like that going on. I mean, I knew I shouldn't do it, but this really enforces it.

haha hell no, i'd never get hands on with someone except for a few situations. Otherwise i'd simply dial 911 and report said shoplifter or go to loss prevention and give them a heads up, antics like this make us explorers look like cowboys and idiots who are overstepping our boundaries significantly. That being said the few situations i'd jump in would be when i feel someone's life is truly in danger like i stumble upon someone getting the **** kicked out of them or i see an officer in a losing battle with some guy, or if i see someone with a gun or knife and who is actually clearly using said weapon or going to on a person in an unlawful manner and i actually have a chance to prevent it by involving myself.

In response to a few reply's, I would like to say that I understand that you want to help if someone is in a life threatening situation, and most people would try and help in that case. Please keep in mind though that going into a losing fight doesn't help anyone, and just gives police a worse situation to deal with. If this life threatening situation in which you want to intervene involves ANY sort of weapon, don't get involved. The risk to yourself is to great, and you might just make the situation worse. The BEST thing you can do in that situation is call 911 as quickly as possible and provide the call taker with the information they require as efficiently as possible. I speak from experience when I say that when a call goes out over the air for an assault in progress involving a weapon, police will be there very quickly. That helps end the situation much better than running into a fight against someone with a knife or gun and getting hurt or killed. Just keep that in mind.

If sworn police officers shouldn't do more than be a good witness, I think it goes without saying that would be the same for explorers. I would never get involved in a larceny case when off duty, even in my jurisdiction. I urge the same of explorers.

case in point:
Walmart video shows assault that ended in shooting (http://www.azcentral.com/community/gilbert/articles/2009/08/20/20090820gilbert-walmart-video-shows-assault-before-officer-shoots-man-in-groin.html)

Officer Biggs was off-duty with his family in a Walmart in partial uniform when he became involved. He ended up shooting one of the suspects. His department IA recommended he be fired for violating policy (I believe he was wearing his police shirt/badge, no vest, no radio, non-regulation pants, no duty belt, and of course, no hat - Greg on Patrol, in other words) - he was being picked up from work by his wife and stopped at Walmart when he tried to stop the shoplifters). The chief disregarded the firing recommendation and demoted him to dispatcher. They also sent the matter to the POST board for review as well (they declined any action). The officer is now trying to get his sworn LEO job back with that department (I suspect he would find it difficult to get a job with another department unless he received his standing back with his current department).

The suspects were scumbags and unarmed. He went hands on to detain the female and it went to 2 on 1. He went to his firearm as that was his only available next option (except maybe disengaging but it's not clear that was possible). The threat of the firearm did not stop them from being aggressive and he shot the male subject. The shooting was legally justified but I doubt those scumbags or the merchandise they stole was worth his career (or the hassle to get his career back).

Personally, I think that once he identified himself as a police officer and told the suspect they were under arrest, his mindset was they were not getting away. He was well within his authority to do it but every little escalation with no available resources put him in a bad spot. He felt he needed to act probably as a result of someone recognizing him as a police officer with partial uniform and alerting him of a crime. He's actually lucky it was only two in the parking lot and they were unarmed. Walmart doesn't care enough about their property to hire off-duty officers so it's very clear to me that off-duty officers shouldn't volunteer to do that work for free especially if they are short on equipment and resources.

I don't work for Walmart.

It isn't that they.don't care , its that they don't want to spend the money to hire off duty officers because they would have to ay them more than their average LP.


It is cheaper to absorb the loss of retail theft then to pay real cops to do security.

I don't work for Walmart.

It isn't that they.don't care , its that they don't want to spend the money to hire off duty officers because they would have to ay them more than their average LP.


It is cheaper to absorb the loss of retail theft then to pay real cops to do security.

I don't work for Walmart.

It isn't that they.don't care , its that they don't want to spend the money to hire off duty officers because they would have to ay them more than their average LP.


It is cheaper to absorb the loss of retail theft then to pay real cops to do security.

My point was that they don't care enough. That's economic for them not care. Stopping a shoplifter while off-duty is an admirable trait and a strong sense of right and wrong very present in police officers especially when the subject challenges their authority. It's just not worth it, though. The property is just property and companies like Walmart know it. Courts know it. Even police departments with restrictive "pursuit polices" know it. Just my non-leo 0.02.

Really good thread. I'm an Explorer Lieutenant, and have been with explorers for three years. I would not risk giving up the reputation I've worked so hard to obtain over a few stolen goods.

I've seen a fair share of Explorers though that think being an Explorer gives them super powers. YOU'RE WRONG. You're an Explorer to learn and observe, so that when you do become an officer you have more insight and even a little more experience. If you are ever in a situation, do what you're supposed to do, observe and contact law enforcement. When they get there, tell them that you're an Explorer and tell them exactly what happened and be as descriptive as possible.

I myself have been in a few situations where LE intervention was needed, but i stayed off to the side and contacted LEO's. Once they were on scene and the scene was secure, I then stepped in.

Stay safe guys.