Instances where police officers shoot a citizen are the most traumatic to the police officer, the public, and to the potential image of the police agency. When a police officer is involved in a situation where deadly force is used, an investigation normally follows to avoid the impression of misconduct and issues concerning whether the shooting was justified, and to maintain the creditability of law enforcement actions. The investigation also seeks to identify potential errors in policies, supervision, or training. This investigation constitutes a post-shooting review of the officer’s actions.
There are no standard procedures in post-shooting reviews. Although there are many common elements, most departments follow their own set of protocols and procedures. Agencies may also have different units within the department that are in charge of these types of investigations. Most investigations are conducted in a formal manner and are designed to be completed as early as possible to reach a decision on the validity of the officer’s actions, to determine if any criminal or administrative actions need to be taken, and to bring closure for the community and those involved.
When a weapon is discharged, the officer involved must immediately contact and inform his or her supervisor. The officer is normally required to give up his or her weapon and file a written report explaining the circumstances of the shooting. The senior officer on scene will seize the weapon and take all precautions necessary to maintain the security of the scene. The supervising officer is usually responsible for conducting a preliminary investigation, which calls for collecting and securing physical evidence, recording activities such as people at the scene and procedures taken by police officers, and identifying people entering and leaving the crime scene. The senior officer will usually also conduct on-site interviews with the parties involved (including the officer in question), and inform the chief or sheriff, internal affairs, and the prosecuting attorney’s office.
Depending on the size of the police agency, the preliminary investigation is followed by a more detailed investigation by officers of the internal affairs and/or detective unit. The first step in this type of investigation is to verify that all evidence is present, to advise officers not to discuss the matter to avoid rumors, and to respond to the officers’ mental state. The officers involved in the shooting may be given leave time to recuperate and deal with any trauma or anguish they might face. Sometimes officers are ordered to take leave until the investigation is completed. Information gathered at this stage includes the time and date, weather, names of all officers involved, time of the dispatch call, type of call and whether officers were alerted to potential weapons or violence, detailed information of all people involved, and detailed information of all the witnesses.
Investigators will typically return to the scene of the shooting and visualize or recreate all or parts of the events that took place. This process enables the investigators to understand how the circumstances came about and if the use of deadly force was necessary. The investigators will also examine the backgrounds of all parties involved for previous actions that may be relevant. The investigators will also contact the coroner’s office for its findings if the shooting resulted in death. The coroner’s office will be helpful in understanding the wounds relevant to the position of the weapon and the position of both the officer and the person(s) involved. The coroner can also determine if other physical force was used.
The investigator will also maintain contact with the other investigators who may be examining other elements of the incident. Investigators will consider whether the situation could have been dealt with in another way and whether errors were made on the part of the officer. After understanding the circumstances and looking over all the evidence, the investigators will then interview all the officers, parties, and witnesses involved. This is a crucial point in the investigation because it enables investigators to get all sides of the story and attempt to determine what happened.
Officers involved in shooting incidents are typically questioned in one or both of two ways. The first way officers may be questioned is in relation to a potential criminal case as a result of their actions. This is somewhat rare, however. More often, officers are questioned pursuant to the case of New Jersey v. Garrity. The Garrity case held that information officers reveal during the course of an administrative investigation cannot be used against them in a criminal trial. This is an effort to make sure officers feel free to speak to investigators in these important matters.
Even under Garrity, officers have a right to refuse to answer questions, but their refusal can be grounds for disciplinary actions leading to dismissal, regardless of the outcome of the case. Again, this is in an effort to make sure officers tell investigators all they know and are completely truthful about the incident. After analyzing all the evidence and interviews, the investigator will report the findings to whomever will be responsible for making a final determination.
In larger law enforcement agencies, a special panel of individuals may be formed to investigate and/or reach a decision. This panel may be variously called a shooting team, shooting review board, or a citizen review board. The panel, although differing from agency to agency, usually consists of a senior person in the agency (assistant chief or chief deputy), supervisors, administrative officers, and sometimes citizens. In some circumstances, depending of the size of the police agency, the shooting review board might be the primary investigative body, replacing the use of an internal unit in the shooting investigation; or units within the department will conduct the investigation and the panel will decide the outcome. The role of the shooting review panel is to evaluate whether the shooting was justifiable, if procedures were followed, and if there is a need to change department policies and training methods.
Some agencies have several departments that work together to investigate a shooting incident. A typical example of the post-shooting process may be taken from the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), which established a model policy as a guideline for police agencies. The policy states that the overall investigation should be led by the internal affairs, detective division, or the homicide unit. In larger agencies, a criminal investigation and an administrative investigation may be conducted to ensure that training and supervision was adequate and department policies were followed. These investigations will also seek to determine whether criminal activity was involved on the part of the officer in question.
The supervising officer is in charge at the scene of the shooting until the investigating officers arrive, who then take responsibility for the criminal and administrative investigations. It is the responsibility of the investigators to take statements from the officers involved and update their supervisor(s), the chief of police, and the prosecuting attorney’s office. After the investigations are finished, the investigators will send the report(s) to the chief of police for review.
Both the criminal investigation and the administrative investigation are often then sent to a board/panel (as discussed earlier), which then evaluates and reviews the use of deadly force. It attempts to determine whether the discharge of the weapon was necessary and/or justified. All shootings must be reviewed within a reasonable amount of time, which should be predetermined by the agency. The board may address the effectiveness of the training, the accuracy of the investigation, the adequacy of the supervision, and how to better handle similar situations in the future. After reviewing and discussing the reports, recommendations are sent to the chief of police for consideration of disciplinary actions or changes that needs to be made in training, supervision, or policy.
Regardless of whether a police agency follows this procedure or something simpler, it is vital that agencies have a strong post-shooting review process. Both the officers involved and the community must have confidence that police actions are justified and within the limits of law and policy. Further, research has shown that a strong use-of-force policy coupled with an understanding by officers that the chief or sheriff will back up the policy is the best method of controlling improper use of force. A post-shooting review is one element of the policy and process of ensuring officers’ actions are properly evaluated and a decision made about whether the shooting was justified.
