In 2009, I did a survey of violence against police officers. Take the following 10-quesiton quiz and see if you know what they said.
1. What percentage of officers were hit, pushed, punched, shoved, kicked, or otherwise physically assaulted in a way that caused discomfort or pain within the previous 12 months but did not seek medical attention.
a) 9 % b) 27% c) 63%
2. What percentage of officers did seek medical attention within the past 12 months for an injury resulting from assault or resistance from a suspect?
a) 5% b) 10% c) 21%
3. What percentage of officers were put at risk for disease from exposure to bodily fluids from an assault within the last 12 months?
a) 4% b) 25% c) 39%
4. What percentage of officers had damage or vandalism to their personal property because of their police affiliation within the last 12 months?
a) 2% b) 8% c) 13%
5. What percentage of officers have, within the last 12 months, been threatened with a lawsuit by an offender?
a) 25% b) 51% c) 88%
6. What percentage of officers have, within the last 12 months, been threatened by an offender that if they caught the officer out of uniform the offender would assault the officer?
a) 25% b) 50% c) 80 %
7. What percentage of officers report that they have been threatened with a deadly weapon (including a vehicle) within the last 12 months?
a) 4% b) 12% c) 23%
8. What percentage of officers felt that assaults on officers were dropped when there were multiple charges on a suspect?
a) 13% b) 45% c) 61%
9. What percentage of officers report that they usually don’t ask for charges when they are assaulted because they won’t be prosecuted?
a) 2% b) 5% c) 10%
10. What percentage of officers — when assaulted — were the only officer investigating the assault?
a) 5% b) 10% c) 25%
What the Results Mean for Police Leaders
All of the correct survey answers are “C.” Surprised by any of them?
Other results of the survey show that almost 15 percent of officers have thought about quitting law enforcement due to inaction by supervisors and courts when they have been assaulted. Very few officers are afforded their rights as crime victims as required by nearly every state law.
The only national statistic on assaults on officers is the most recent FBI report that says 52,910 officers were assaulted in 2012. This represents 10 out of 100 officers whose agencies contributed data, according to the Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted summary.
This is a vast under-reporting on assaults against our officers, and it is not the fault of the FBI — it is the fault of police leadership. The link to the Ferguson debate is that it was not possible to validate our reasonable claims as to the dangerousness of police work. During weeks of interviews after the Michael Brown shooting, I had to cobble together the rationale for police use of force from indirect indicators.
What my research reveals is the more likely extent of officers being injured and disregarded by the justice system they serve. The results most certainly do not square with the FBI numbers of officers assaulted.
What Police Leaders Can Do About It
Until we develop a robust system of reporting violence against law enforcement, you can create that body of knowledge within your own agency. At the same, time you’ll be doing your officers and the citizens they serve a tremendous service. Review your department policy for the following five key attributes.
1. Make a separate offense report. Do this any time a police action results in an assault on — or resisting of — an officer. Because of hierarchy rules, an assault against an officer might be lost as a statistic. Also, prosecutors have a habit of accepting violence against the police and may drop the assault charges if the primary case is dropped. If a meth lab is found during a domestic call, the drug charges would be a separate investigation and certainly not dropped even if the domestic violence charges are dropped. Why then, if an officer is assaulted during a domestic, does the assault charge get buried in the domestic report and dropped if the domestic charges are dropped? It shouldn’t!
2. Get another officer to investigate when an officer is assaulted. Do you know of any other crime victim that is asked to investigate the crime against them? Police officers who are victims of violent crime should not do their own investigation, especially when about a quarter of those incidents will result in the officer being accused of using excessive force.
3. Mandate medical clearance and victim rights. Officers who have delayed consequences of individual or cumulative injuries will have no documentation if they just “walk it off” and tough it out. That could mean financial disaster and loss of deserved benefits or compensation down the road. We shake our head when a civilian assault victim declines medical attention, but we question the toughness of an officer who seeks it. We need to change that culture and take better care of ourselves and our officers.
If an officer is the victim of a crime that is covered under your jurisdiction’s victim rights laws, that officer should accept all of those benefits. I believe that officers who get counseling, get notified of case dispositions, and have the opportunity to make a victim impact statement will have more empathy for other crime victims, fewer mental health issues, and are less likely to feel that the only justice they’ll ever get is taking it out on the streets.
4. Make compliance a statistic. My personal preference is to do away with special use of force report forms. The dynamics of every encounter from field interview cards, to traffic warnings and summons forms, to dispatch records, to offense reports should include some data on compliance or non-compliance. It is very powerful to say what percentage of your contacts are peaceful and what percentage are successfully managed even with verbal or physical resistance.
5. Don’t ‘cam up’ until you’re ready. I’m a big fan of body cameras. But if your officers aren’t trained on report writing where a video or audio record exists, the camera will bite. Orientation to being on camera is also necessary. The liberties, language, and leverage that officers may have used discretely on contacts may not be viewed favorably by jurors. Some officers will need to change the attitude they portray to citizens. Face it, you already know their names. An ethics review is in order.
