HELP!! Question about handcuffing and excessive force!

[stevenseq]

Yes, we are taught that handcuffing is a level of force. These are the reasons that I chose to handcuff in this particular situation:

- Was he acting more nervous than you woud expect the keyholder to be? Yes. Subject approached me at a quick pace. I asked them to please keep their distance until I find out what is going on (approx. 5ft distance).
- unable to make eye contact with me.
- Could not stand still. Seemed a bit nervous.
- Did he approach from a wierd area like from around back with no cars out in the parking lot? Yes. Approached from behind a pillar at a quick pace.
- Asked to keep hands out of pockets 3 times before handcuffing. Kept moving hands back toward jacket pockets.
- Unable to ID himself? Yes. subject was unable to present ID.
- When asked who was inside of the business, RP was unable to maintain eye contact or provide a prompt answer. Looked away then looked back and gave me the name, "John Jones"... an employee who was previously fired.
- When I asked about "John Jones" and when he was fired, subject stated something to the effect of, "uhh, like a few weeks ago?" If you were the owner/manager, wouldnt you know when your employees were fired? Particularly if it happened as recently as when they told me?
- I don't know if this was part of the scenario, but when looking at me, the subject appeared to almost be "looking through me". It was if they had that "thousand yard stare".

For those reasons, I got that feeling in my stomach and the hair on the back of my neck stood up. I decided for my own safety and that of my partners, that I was going to temporarily handcuff this individual until I could verify that this person had no weapons.

[scott715us]

Thank you all for the insight.

Among other reasons, I handcuffed my subject while doing a terry pat because during questioning, the subject repeatedly put their hands in their pockets after being asked to keep them out. The encounter was consensual and explained that she was not being arrested and was free to leave. I explained the handcuffs were for safety reasons.

I appreciate the help. I realize that another 6 months in the academy will be strenuous, however, this is the career choice that I have made and it is what I want to do with my life and because of that, I'll come back and come back strong!

They're not necessarily free to leave if they have handcuffs on, but if it's an investigative detention they're not under arrest either. Based on your statement, I believe there was enough to articulate a Terry pat-down based on the call and the fact that she continuously put her hands in her pocket after being asked not to. I'm in agreement with the others that this should have been done at the beginning of the encounter.

Handcuffs are not considered use of force here and not under PPCT that I'm aware of. It worries me that people consider this a use of force situation. For those that do, is it your agency policy to fill out a use of force report when you handcuff someone? I hope not. To me that just opens up a big can of worms. The legal justification doesn't involve the handcuffing, but the the pat-down itself. Like I said, handcuffing later in the scenario weakens the reason for the pat-down. If you were so concerned about her that it required a stop and frisk, then why wait later?

I'll have to hunt down the case law I read last year, but it was in regards to a civil rights law suit where the court sided with the defendant and awarded damages to them, against the individual LEO's, and the agency itself for handcuffing a few people because they simply thought they were suspects, with no real articuable reasoning (such as this one)

I'm sure there's more to it than that. In order to win a 1983 suit (federal civil rights violation) against an agency/LEOs that are normally immune, it has to be some gross conduct on their part.

I had a supervisor in my agency that adamantly told officers that they should never put handcuffs on a person unless they were under arrest. That mentality will get someone hurt.

[Citicop]

Handcuffs are not considered use of force here and not under PPCT that I'm aware of.

I was always trained that proper application of handcuffs was considered "Soft Empty Hand Control" in PPCT. Therefore, they were appropriate to use against any verbal noncompliance.

-Citicop.

[cntryboy0531]

Yes, we are taught that handcuffing is a level of force. These are the reasons that I chose to handcuff in this particular situation:

- Was he acting more nervous than you woud expect the keyholder to be? Yes. Subject approached me at a quick pace. I asked them to please keep their distance until I find out what is going on (approx. 5ft distance).
- unable to make eye contact with me.
- Could not stand still. Seemed a bit nervous.
- Did he approach from a wierd area like from around back with no cars out in the parking lot? Yes. Approached from behind a pillar at a quick pace.
- Asked to keep hands out of pockets 3 times before handcuffing. Kept moving hands back toward jacket pockets.
- Unable to ID himself? Yes. subject was unable to present ID.
- When asked who was inside of the business, RP was unable to maintain eye contact or provide a prompt answer. Looked away then looked back and gave me the name, "John Jones"... an employee who was previously fired.
- When I asked about "John Jones" and when he was fired, subject stated something to the effect of, "uhh, like a few weeks ago?" If you were the owner/manager, wouldnt you know when your employees were fired? Particularly if it happened as recently as when they told me?
- I don't know if this was part of the scenario, but when looking at me, the subject appeared to almost be "looking through me". It was if they had that "thousand yard stare".

For those reasons, I got that feeling in my stomach and the hair on the back of my neck stood up. I decided for my own safety and that of my partners, that I was going to temporarily handcuff this individual until I could verify that this person had no weapons.

Now, that's a litte more reasonable to feel the need to handcuff someone. It all comes down to articulation.

[Outshined]

Yes. I was talking with one of my T.O. told us that when he was in the academy, there was a guy who failed a remedial test two days before graduation. The next day he was bounced out. The day before graduation.

If that is to happen to me, I do understand and I also appreciate how they gave me the opportunity to try to make a defense. Some would say differently, but I know that the Coordinator is not a bad guy and I know that he is not doing this to be evil or malicious. I understand fully that there is a STANDARD and that standard MUST be upheld, even if my score is only two points off.

It's tough to fathom doing it over again, especially when I'm only 4 days away from graduation, but I'm not a quitter and if I have to, I will come back and I will come back strong. Thats just the way it is =)

Is this a self sponsor academy?

[stevenseq]

Is this a self sponsor academy?

Yes. We have only one affiliate.

[scott715us]

I was always trained that proper application of handcuffs was considered "Soft Empty Hand Control" in PPCT. Therefore, they were appropriate to use against any verbal noncompliance.

-Citicop.

Yea, found that out after digging through the ole PPCT folders. Thanks for the correction.

[tcop733]

You search the building by yourself?
And, I can articulate just about anything when it comes to officer safety, especially temporarily restraining the two things that bad guys use to kill us (hands).
I understand we must think fast in pressure filled situations, but holy over-analyzing Batman.
Keep it simple stupid.

[G35 Mass]

Well?????