Post-shooting Police statement

[jcreek]

So I was at work today, taking my armed security recertification class and the instructor mentioned something I hadn't heard of or though of before concerning how to handle talking to police after having to use deadly force.

The way he laid it out, he said there were three basic options. The first: spill your guts as soon as police arrive on scene, while adrenaline is still pumping and you're still in shock. This could cause you to possibly misstate incorrectly recall a detail, such as how many shots were fired, possibly causing you to lose credibility in the investigators eyes.

The second was to immediately lawyer up. This would cause police to detain you based on the facts present, and possibly haul you in in handcuffs for questioning. Keep in mind, he's talking about on-duty shootings. In his eyes, if there are bystanders or media present, and they see a guy in a uniform (or anyone for that matter) being hauled away in handcuffs, it immediately gives them the impression that he is the bad guy and could cause a huge trial by media influencing the outcome.

The third option he mentioned was the one I hadn't thought of before. When the police start to question you, immediately tell them you are still feeling the effects of shock (elevated heart rate and blood pressure, possible shortness of breath) and request to be taken to the hospital to be examined and treated. This does two things. One, you leave the scene in an ambulance looking like a victim to the media, rather than in handcuffs looking like a suspect. Two, since you have made it clear you are not in the proper mental capacity to give a statement, anything you say until cleared by a physician is inadmissible in court.

I have mixed feelings about his thoughts and was wondering your opinions.

I've been in several high adrenaline situations. I also know my memory, and I trust my ability to calm down quickly from a high intensity situation and give clear, concise facts, much more than I trust my ability to recall the same facts a day or two later when I finally give a statement.

Also, our company works very closely with police. I don't know how accurate his assumption is that if a security officer chose to seek legal counsel after a shooting, that they would be handcuffed and hauled away unless the facts at the scene clearly pointed to something more sinister than a SD situation. I think our local PD would have a little more tact than that and realize we are one the same side and I'm just trying to make the best legal decision possible.

 

[Mr Man]

Don't hold your breath with the local PD. They play politics just like the FBI and State police. I do like the third option, though.

 

[Treo]

Two, since you have made it clear you are not in the proper mental capacity to give a statement, anything you say until cleared by a physician is inadmissible in court.

Can you site an actual statute or case law that supports this?

Most of what you’ve posted here is a rehash of what Masaad Ayoob has said on this topic previously.
His take is that you point out witnesses and evidence to the police (officer those people were witnesses / Officer there is the bad guy’s gun) and then tell them that you are in no condition to make a statement at this time and you’d like to receive medical care and speak to your attorney but that you will be happy to make a statement and they’ll have your complete cooperation in 24 hours.


What is your company policy? What has your company done in the past?

 

[tricolordad]

Can you site an actual statute or case law that supports this?

Most of what you’ve posted here is a rehash of what Masaad Ayoob has said on this topic previously.
His take is that you point out witnesses and evidence to the police (officer those people were witnesses / Officer there is the bad guy’s gun) and then tell them that you are in no condition to make a statement at this time and you’d like to receive medical care and speak to your attorney but that you will be happy to make a statement and they’ll have your complete cooperation in 24 hours.


What is your company policy? What has your company done in the past?

Can you cite an actual statute or case law that refutes what Masaad Ayoob has said?

 

[Treo]

Can you cite an actual statute or case law that refutes what Masaad Ayoob has said?

Why would I? What Ayoob says is simply his opinion which is not the same as stating authoritatively that something is or isn’t admissible in a court of law.

 

[DHinNC]

Personally, option 3 seems like the one that is likely to produce a more favorable outcome. Face it, when you're pumped up with adrenaline during the event, the body shifts to "fight or flee" mode without conscious control. I think that allowing the time to get over the shakes that come after the adrenaline rush, you're probably much better off to be able to decompress and think through that stressful situation.

 

[keith4298]

So I was at work today, taking my armed security recertification class and the instructor mentioned something I hadn't heard of or though of before concerning how to handle talking to police after having to use deadly force.

The way he laid it out, he said there were three basic options. The first: spill your guts as soon as police arrive on scene, while adrenaline is still pumping and you're still in shock. This could cause you to possibly misstate incorrectly recall a detail, such as how many shots were fired, possibly causing you to lose credibility in the investigators eyes.

The second was to immediately lawyer up. This would cause police to detain you based on the facts present, and possibly haul you in in handcuffs for questioning. Keep in mind, he's talking about on-duty shootings. In his eyes, if there are bystanders or media present, and they see a guy in a uniform (or anyone for that matter) being hauled away in handcuffs, it immediately gives them the impression that he is the bad guy and could cause a huge trial by media influencing the outcome.

The third option he mentioned was the one I hadn't thought of before. When the police start to question you, immediately tell them you are still feeling the effects of shock (elevated heart rate and blood pressure, possible shortness of breath) and request to be taken to the hospital to be examined and treated. This does two things. One, you leave the scene in an ambulance looking like a victim to the media, rather than in handcuffs looking like a suspect. Two, since you have made it clear you are not in the proper mental capacity to give a statement, anything you say until cleared by a physician is inadmissible in court.

I have mixed feelings about his thoughts and was wondering your opinions.

I've been in several high adrenaline situations. I also know my memory, and I trust my ability to calm down quickly from a high intensity situation and give clear, concise facts, much more than I trust my ability to recall the same facts a day or two later when I finally give a statement.

Also, our company works very closely with police. I don't know how accurate his assumption is that if a security officer chose to seek legal counsel after a shooting, that they would be handcuffed and hauled away unless the facts at the scene clearly pointed to something more sinister than a SD situation. I think our local PD would have a little more tact than that and realize we are one the same side and I'm just trying to make the best legal decision possible.

Or you can take a different route. You can say that you encountered the bad actor and felt that the use of force was necessary and then stop talking. You can then say that although you're certain that the officers on seen are going to act in accordance to all laws, someone should be there to make sure that all of your rights are respected. Therefore, you request questioning to continue when your union rep or lawyer gets here.

Don't be afraid to exercise ALL your rights.

 

[Dennis M]

I think, most importantly be honest. Make sure when calling 911 that you leave the phone on so everything is witnessed or recorded. Second, identify and describe yourself as the victim and disarm immediately when they arrive. Thirdly, delay giving any testimony immediately. There will be an immediate knee-jerk suspicion by LEO. A trip to the hospital is a good idea. It will confirm your mental stability and record any injuries you may have received. Then give testimony, lawyer in tow, before details get fuzzy or forgotten. IMHO

 

[farsidefan1]

I saw a presentation by 2 men, an atty and a cop who was about to retire and go into law practice. It was a long show but they both absolutely agreed that you should not say ANYTHING to the cops without your atty being present. Nothing good comes from talking. They go through several scenarios and nothing was to be gained by immediately cooperating and tons of bad things could result - even when you are totally innocent of any wrong doing. A simple error of filling in the blank of something you don't quite remember which is natural for humans, could end up just killing your credibility later. If I find the link I'll post it but I'm really crappy at this tech stuff. The cop had conducted literally thousands of interviews and he talked about how often guys who opened up got hammered, time and time again. He laughed about how easy it was to get guys talking and once started you couldn't shut them up. A huge point was that even the slightest mistatement could be used by an opposing atty and would ruin you credibility, even if it was a harmless comment.
I'd say be extremely cautious. In fact I would not say a word till after seeing an atty - period. I was that convinced after spending about an hour listening to the 2 of them.

OK, it is on you tube. "Don't talk to cops" part 1 by Mr. James Duane, a prof at regent law school. "Don't talk to cops" part 2 is by M.P. Anon. Please take the time to listen to both parts. It is the best explanation I have ever heard.

 

[leadsender]

Many years ago when I first started purchasing firearms; I read books about firearms and what to do after you have been involved in a shooting. One of those books was by Mr. Masaad Ayoob. I remember to this day that he stated that you should expect to be arrested after a shoot. When I took my CPL/CCW class we were taught to be respectful and say to the officer that at this time I have nothing to say involving this matter until I have spoken to my attorney. LEO's themselves are prepped not to say anything after an officer involved shoot and to request to turn there weapon over to a supervisor and to get there union rep. Everybody knows that your BP is going to be elevated and that you are going to be hyped. I really don't care what it looks like. Unless I am having a heart attack or about to fall out I am not going to pretend. If you pull your weapon and shoot then it sure as HELL better be justified.

 

[Treo]

Unless I am having a heart attack or about to fall out I am not going to pretend.

One of the key symptoms of shock is not knowing you're in it getting checked out wouldn't hurt

 

[jcreek]

Two, since you have made it clear you are not in the proper mental capacity to give a statement, anything you say until cleared by a physician is inadmissible in court.

Can you site an actual statute or case law that supports this?

Most of what you’ve posted here is a rehash of what Masaad Ayoob has said on this topic previously.
His take is that you point out witnesses and evidence to the police (officer those people were witnesses / Officer there is the bad guy’s gun) and then tell them that you are in no condition to make a statement at this time and you’d like to receive medical care and speak to your attorney but that you will be happy to make a statement and they’ll have your complete cooperation in 24 hours.


What is your company policy? What has your company done in the past?

No, I can't, and I can't verify whether this is fully correct or not. Sorry if I didn't make it clear but I wasn't trying to state that as fact, it's just what the instructor had stated as fact, but I've had instructors misinterpret or be otherwise incorrect about laws before. Regardless, I don't think getting checked out would hurt, but I'm not sure it's definitely the route I would take every single time, if god forbid I was involved in more than one shooting.

Honestly, I don't know if my company has a policy regarding talking to police. Basically, in the state curriculum for the course it says, if you decide to use deadly force even while on duty, the decision is completely on you and the company has no criminal (but possible civil) liability. The one strict policy they do have is, if you talk to the press without approval, you're basically fired on the spot. And that goes for any event where media is present. We have accounts with all the public schools in the county and a few months ago there was a 5-alarm fire at one of the elementary schools. Myself and several other officers were stationed out front to keep the public back while the FD was fighting it. One of the officers was talking to a pedestrian and passed on a bunch of hearsay about the fire as fact. Long story short, the guy happened to be some independent media blogger who quoted a bunch of misinformation from our officer in his article. The officer was gone the next day when the company found out.

As far as precedents go, I don't think any of our officers has had to discharge a weapon on duty, which I think is pretty astounding cause the company's been around for 40 years.

 

[Treo]

No, I can't, and I can't verify whether this is fully correct or not. Sorry if I didn't make it clear but I wasn't trying to state that as fact, it's just what the instructor had stated as fact, but I've had instructors misinterpret or be otherwise incorrect about laws before.

That was kinda my point, if you can't verify it ofr yourself I wouldn't trust it.

I can tell you from my training that most security companies will hang your ass out to dry if you ever have to use your weapon. That's one of the reasons I have no interest in being an armed guard

 

[apvbguy]

Can you cite an actual statute or case law that refutes what Masaad Ayoob has said?

how do you manage to survive in this world?

 

[BC1]

jcreek:
.
Remember these words... "anything you say can be used against you in a court of law." And you can bet it will. Your statements will not be suppressed by a court because a doctor didn't clear you. Having trained a LFI under Mas some years ago, the posts on here quoting him are accurate.
.
In the aftermath of a shooting one may be experiencing physiological and psychological responses to the stress. During the encounter you may have had tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, time dilation and various other responses. Recall of the events may be impaired. For this reason most police agencies will not take a statement from an officer involved in a shooting until after a period of a day or two. The officer gets counseling and talks with his attorney before making his statement. The attorney accompanies him to make the statement. In some areas the PBA will assist the LEO.
.
When speaking with police I recommend saying that a grave danger existed and you had no choice but to exercise deadly force. Then tell the LEO that you would like to discuss this with an attorney, after which you'll answer any questions the may have. Prepare to be arrested if you're a civilian. Most times the LEO won't make the call regarding whether to arrest you. The DA may convene a grand jury.
.
A good summary of what you might encounter after a shooting is found in the book "NRA Personal Protection Outside the Home." Good advice there.

 

[The_Outlaw]

So I was at work today, taking my armed security recertification class and the instructor mentioned something I hadn't heard of or though of before concerning how to handle talking to police after having to use deadly force.

The way he laid it out, he said there were three basic options. The first: spill your guts as soon as police arrive on scene, while adrenaline is still pumping and you're still in shock. This could cause you to possibly misstate incorrectly recall a detail, such as how many shots were fired, possibly causing you to lose credibility in the investigators eyes.

The second was to immediately lawyer up. This would cause police to detain you based on the facts present, and possibly haul you in in handcuffs for questioning. Keep in mind, he's talking about on-duty shootings. In his eyes, if there are bystanders or media present, and they see a guy in a uniform (or anyone for that matter) being hauled away in handcuffs, it immediately gives them the impression that he is the bad guy and could cause a huge trial by media influencing the outcome.

The third option he mentioned was the one I hadn't thought of before. When the police start to question you, immediately tell them you are still feeling the effects of shock (elevated heart rate and blood pressure, possible shortness of breath) and request to be taken to the hospital to be examined and treated. This does two things. One, you leave the scene in an ambulance looking like a victim to the media, rather than in handcuffs looking like a suspect. Two, since you have made it clear you are not in the proper mental capacity to give a statement, anything you say until cleared by a physician is inadmissible in court.

I have mixed feelings about his thoughts and was wondering your opinions.

I've been in several high adrenaline situations. I also know my memory, and I trust my ability to calm down quickly from a high intensity situation and give clear, concise facts, much more than I trust my ability to recall the same facts a day or two later when I finally give a statement.

Also, our company works very closely with police. I don't know how accurate his assumption is that if a security officer chose to seek legal counsel after a shooting, that they would be handcuffed and hauled away unless the facts at the scene clearly pointed to something more sinister than a SD situation. I think our local PD would have a little more tact than that and realize we are one the same side and I'm just trying to make the best legal decision possible.

I prefer option #3.....George Zimmerman went with option #1 and look at how badly that worked out for him.

 

[JimTh]

Many years ago when I first started purchasing firearms; I read books about firearms and what to do after you have been involved in a shooting. One of those books was by Mr. Masaad Ayoob. I remember to this day that he stated that you should expect to be arrested after a shoot. When I took my CPL/CCW class we were taught to be respectful and say to the officer that at this time I have nothing to say involving this matter until I have spoken to my attorney. LEO's themselves are prepped not to say anything after an officer involved shoot and to request to turn there weapon over to a supervisor and to get there union rep. Everybody knows that your BP is going to be elevated and that you are going to be hyped. I really don't care what it looks like. Unless I am having a heart attack or about to fall out I am not going to pretend. If you pull your weapon and shoot then it sure as HELL better be justified.

Based on the last line of your response I should remind you that LEO's can't even guarantee that. LEO bad shoot percentages far out number private citizen bad shoots. I think the difference is that a citizen has no desire to kill someone where as LEO's are taught that it is sometimes there duty to kill. Kill em' all and ask questions later!

 

[NCIC105]

I'm retired LEO, and you can bet the bank if I'm ever involved in a shoot...No interview until my attorney, and I have talked and covered what I will and "WILL NOT," say...What you don't say is often more important than what you say!


You can talk yourself into more trouble in 5 minutes that you can get out of in years....Hand over your weapon, Sit down and shut up.


It is often advisable not to give any answer, Don't say NO, Don't say YES. Say NOTHING


Remember "Stupid people speak loudest"

 

[JimTh]

I'm retired LEO, and you can bet the bank if I'm ever involved in a shoot...No interview until my attorney, and I have talked and covered what I will and "WILL NOT," say...What you don't say is often more important than what you say!


You can talk yourself into more trouble in 5 minutes that you can get out of in years....Hand over your weapon, Sit down and shut up.


It is often advisable not to give any answer, Don't say NO, Don't say YES. Say NOTHING


Remember "Stupid people speak loudest"

What you say is what most of us have always believed...the cops and the courts are not interested in what happened but are interested in who they can hang. If they were interested in the truth of a given situation then what is there to worry about. I have always thought that justice is not blind...it is dead. If justice were what the system pursues then most folks would not have to worry about spending thousands of dollars trying to defend themselves. But justice is not what happens in the halls of the LEO district stations or the court houses. To believe otherwise just shows naivety. I know, I have the experience to back up my words. Truth is not relative, it is absolute. The justice system in this country has learned how to dilute and bastardize the truth. It has not only become a game within the legal and LEO system, it has become an art form.

 

[NCIC105]

What you say is what most of us have always believed...the cops and the courts are not interested in what happened but are interested in who they can hang. If they were interested in the truth of a given situation then what is there to worry about. I have always thought that justice is not blind...it is dead. If justice were what the system pursues then most folks would not have to worry about spending thousands of dollars trying to defend themselves. But justice is not what happens in the halls of the LEO district stations or the court houses. To believe otherwise just shows naivety. I know, I have the experience to back up my words. Truth is not relative, it is absolute. The justice system in this country has learned how to dilute and bastardize the truth. It has not only become a game within the legal and LEO system, it has become an art form.

Wow you make a lot of assumptions about someone you have never met....as well as thousand of others...


I would like to know where in my post do you find confirmation of your harangue


Please don't character my post to spew your malevolence


Hope you enjoy your life on "Your planet"