De-escalation is hardly a new concept, but in the wake of several recent police encounters with tragic outcomes, the media and some civilian groups have zeroed in on it. Responding to this scrutiny, some law enforcement agencies are reworking their use of force policies to stress the need for officers to take measures to defuse situations before resorting to force.
De-escalation tactics are an essential tool for patrol officers. But mandating de-escalation is a slippery slope that can have the reverse effect, endangering officers who may hesitate to use reasonable use of force. In this session, we’ll explore how agencies can effectively incorporate de-escalation principles into policy without creating confusing or inconsistent policies.
- What recent high-profile incidents, including those involving Officer Stephen Mader and Philando Castile, tell us about the complexities of de-escalation
- 5 key policies that should reflect de-escalation principles
- How to craft policy language that supports de-escalation principles while remaining consistent with Graham v. Connor
- What police executives need to know about liability associated with failure to train officers on de-escalation tactics.
Laura Scarry Ken Wallentine
Partner, DeAno and Scarry Special Agent
Legal Support Attorney Utah Attorney Lexipol General's Office
Senior Legal Advisor Lexipol