DRAFT REPORT OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE USE ... - Samuel Walker

Mr. Earl F. Martin
RE: REPORT TO USE OF FORCE COMMISSION
December 3, 2012
Page 8
program and the State's program would be prudent. Additionally, the Defensive Tactics Manual,
Section V which deals with "Neck Restraints", indicates the technique is classified as deadly force.
This is not the proper classification according to SPD policy as adopted on September 17, 2012 as
set forth in section 300.2.5 or as articulated in the Special Policy Update from Lexipol. The
designation of carotid or neck restraint techniques at the intermediate force level is more appropriate
and is supported by CJTC. The Defensive Tactics Manual should be consistent with the SPD policy
in this respect and with regard to the other force options as well. This is simply a matter of the
Defensive Tactics Manual referring to the current use of force policy sections that are in place at all
times. In practical terms this means that optimally, any time a new force policy is adopted by the
SPD, the defensive tactics instructors should review and update the Defensive Tactics Manual. The
updates should incorporate the revisions and specifically annotate with regard to the policy adoptions
that are being incorporated and the date of the updates to the Defensive Tactics Manual.
Additionally, the Defensive Tactics Manual needs to be revised to be clear that the use of pain
compliance techniques on purely passive resistors is not in accordance with current case law and the
recent policy updates from Lexipol.
Of significant concern for the SPD defensive tactics program is the supporting information
relating to legal concepts and federal civil rights throughout all of the documentation that was
provided for my review. All of the materials appeared to be in need of revision to bring the materials
up to date. For example, the force option scales used in the current version of the Defensive Tactics
Manual need attention or should be completely eliminated. The resistance scale in the current manual
for example breaks down the subject resistance into the following categories: compliant, passive
resistant, active resistant, assaultive and life threatening. The officer response side of the scale lists
the categories of force as: cooperative controls, contact controls, compliance techniques, defensive
tactics and deadly force. This is problematic in that officers are legally permitted to use deadly force
to prevent serious bodily injury (ie. great bodily injury) or death. Thus, the force options scale, if
SPD chooses to use one, should be modified so that the current legal concepts with regard to
non-deadly and non-deadly intermediate force (ie. pepperspray, ECD probe mode deployment and
baton strikes) are accurately represented on any such scale as being only appropriate in the face of
active resistance and where there is a threat of harm to officers or others.
The relevant case law in this area has made it clear that force is either non-deadly or deadly;
that within non-deadly force is a sub-category of force designated as intermediate force that includes
pepper spray, ECD probe deployment and baton strikes. Police canines and neck restraints also fall
within the non-deadly intermediate force level and, as stated above, intermediate force options
require active resistance with a threat of injury to officer or others. The SPD Use of Force Scale does
not depict these concepts accurately. It is also recommended that the phrase "less lethal" be removed
from all materials as well as all policies, which is consistent with guidance from the policy provider
Lexipol .