Case Law & Resources: Washington

Provides for de-escalation protocols for Seattle police officers to avoid use of force.

De-escalation may take the form of scene management, team tactics, and/or individual engagement. Even when individual engagement is not feasible, de-escalation techniques including scene management and team tactics such as time, distance, and shielding, should still be used unless doing so would create undue risk of harm to any person due to the exigency/threat of a situation.

​

De-escalation tactics and techniques are actions used by officers, when safe and feasible without compromising law enforcement priorities, that seek to minimize the likelihood of the need to use force during an incident and increase the likelihood of voluntary compliance. See definition of de-escalation in 8.050.

​

When safe and feasible under the totality of the circumstances, officers shall attempt to slow down or stabilize the situation so that more time, options and resources are available for incident resolution.

​

The overall goal of this policy is to promote thoughtful resolutions to situations and to reduce the likelihood of harm to all persons involved. De-escalation is reviewed and evaluated under the totality of the circumstances present at the time of the incident.

​

1. When Safe, Feasible, and Without Compromising Law Enforcement Priorities, Officers Shall Use De-Escalation Tactics in Order to Reduce the Need for Force.

(a). Officers shall conduct a threat assessment so as not to precipitate an unnecessary, unreasonable, or disproportionate use of force by placing themselves or others in undue jeopardy.

(b). Team approaches to de-escalation are encouraged and should consider officer training and skill level, number of officers, and whether any officer has successfully established rapport with the subject. Where officers use a team approach to de-escalation, each individual officer’s obligation to de-escalate will be satisfied as long as the officer’s actions complement the overall approach.

(c). Selection of de-escalation options should be guided by the totality of the circumstances with the goal of attaining voluntary compliance; considerations include:

• Communication. Using communication intended to gain voluntary compliance, such as:

• Verbal persuasion

• Advisements and warnings (includingTASER spark display to explain/warn prior to TASER application), given in a calm and explanatory manner. Exception: Warnings given as a threat of force are not considered part of de-escalation.

• Clear instructions

• Using verbal techniques, such as Listen and Explain with Equity and Dignity (LEED) to calm an agitated subject and promote rational decision making

• Avoiding language, such as taunting or insults, that could escalate the incident

Considering whether any lack of compliance is a deliberate attempt to resist rather than an inability to comply based on factors including, but not limited to:

• Medical conditions

• Mental impairment

• Developmental disability

• Physical limitation

• Language barrier

• Drug interaction

• Behavioral crisis

• Fear or anxiety

• Time

Attempt to slow down or stabilize the situation so that more time, options and resources are available for incident resolution.

• Scene stabilization assists in transitioning incidents from dynamic to static by limiting access to unsecured areas, limiting mobility and preventing the introduction of non- involved community members

• Avoiding or minimizing physical confrontation, unless necessary (for example, to protect someone, or stop dangerous behavior)

• Calling extra resources or officers to assist, such as CIT or Less-Lethal Certified officers

• Distance

Maximizing tactical advantage by increasing distance to allow for greater reaction time.

• Shielding - Utilizing cover and concealment for tactical advantage, such as:

• Placing barriers between an uncooperative subject and officers

• Using natural barriers in the immediate environment

Title 8.200 [Seattle Police Department Manual]

Effective Jun. 19, 2020

Seattle Police Department Manual provides for more robust guidelines on when use of force is appropriate than the state laws provided for in RCW 9A.16.020.

1. Use of Force: When Authorized

An officer shall use only the force objectively reasonable, necessary, and proportional to effectively bring an incident or person under control, while protecting the life and safety of all persons.
In other words, officers shall only use objectively reasonable force, proportional to the threat or urgency of the situation, when necessary, to achieve a law-enforcement objective. The force used must comply with federal and state law and Seattle Police Department policies, and rules for specific weapons and tools. See 8.300 - Use of Force Tools. Once it is safe to do so and the threat has ended, the force must stop.

Use of Force Core Principles":

• Objectively Reasonable defined

• Necessary defined

• Proportional defined

2. Use of Force: When Prohibited

• Officers are prohibited from using neck and carotid restraints in all circumstances

• An officer will not use force to punish or retaliate

• An officer will not use force against individuals who only verbally confront them unless the vocalization impedes a legitimate law enforcement function (See 5.160 – Observation of Officers).

• An officer will not use force to stop a subject from swallowing a substance that is already in their mouth; however:

• Officers may use reasonable force, not including hands to the neck or insertion of any objects or hands into a subject’s mouth, to prevent a suspect from putting a substance in their mouth

• In the event that an officer reasonably believes that a suspect has ingested a harmful substance, officers shall summon medical assistance as soon as feasible.

• An officer may not use force to extract a substance or item from inside the body of a suspect. Exception: This prohibition does not apply when force is necessary to facilitate a forensic blood draw. In that situation, officers will document any use of reportable force.

3. Officers Should Assess and Modulate the Use-Of-Force as Resistance Changes
For example, as resistance decreases, the use of force may decrease.

4. Use of Deadly Force
Deadly force may only be used in circumstances where a threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others is imminent. A danger is imminent when an objectively reasonable officer would believe that:

• A suspect is acting or threatening to cause death or serious physical injury to the officer or others; and

• The suspect has the means or instrumentalities to do so; and

• The suspect has the opportunity and ability to use the means or instrumentalities to cause death or serious physical injury.

• See also 8.050 – Deadly Force

5. Deadly Force May Be Used to Prevent the Escape of a Fleeing Suspect Only When an Objectively Reasonable Officer Would Believe That it Is Necessary and That There is Probable Cause That:

• The suspect has committed or is in the process of committing a felony involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical injury or death; and

• The escape of the suspect would pose an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person unless the suspect is apprehended without delay; and

• The officer has given a verbal warning to the suspect, if time, safety, and circumstances permit.

6. Officers May Only Use Force on Restrained Subjects When Objectively Reasonable, Necessary, and Proportional
Officers may only use objectively reasonable, necessary and proportional force on restrained subjects (e.g. including handcuffed or contained in a law enforcement vehicle).
Officers may use objectively reasonable, necessary and proportional force to get subjects into or out of a law enforcement vehicle only after reasonable attempts to gain voluntary compliance have failed. When feasible, officers shall obtain supervisor approval prior to using force to remove a subject from a Department vehicle.
Officers may only use force on restrained subjects that would foreseeably result in a Type II or Type III investigation under exceptional circumstances when the subject’s actions must be immediately stopped to prevent injury, escape, or destruction of property. All such force shall be closely and critically reviewed.
The investigating supervisor will consult with FIT regarding the classification of force used on restrained subjects when such force is not easily identifiable as de minimis or Type I.

7. Recognizing the Urgency of Providing Medical Aid and the Importance of Preserving Human Life, Following a Use-of-Force, Officers Will Evaluate the Subject for Injuries, Request Medical Aid if Needed or if Requested By Anyone, and Render Appropriate Medical Aid Within Their Training as Soon as Reasonably Possible
When safe and feasible, officers will request a medical aid response for any apparent injury, complaint of injury, or sign of medical distress for subjects and others even if the aid is declined. Officers will closely monitor subjects taken into custody.
After requesting a medical aid response, officers will render aid within the scope of their training unless aid is declined. Certified EMT officers should be given priority to render care, when feasible. Consent should be assumed for unconscious subjects or subjects incapable of providing consent. Exception: A call for medical aid is not required for apparent injuries that can be treated by basic first aid (e.g. minor cuts and abrasions).
Absent exigent circumstances, prone subjects will be placed on their side in the recovery position or assisted to an upright position as soon as safe and feasible. Officers shall not restrain subjects who are in custody and under control in a manner that restricts the subject’s ability to breathe.

8. Officers Shall Automatically Request Medical Aid in Certain Situations:

• Every Type III use-of-force.

• The following less-lethal incidents: TASER applications, 40 mm LL Launcher applications

• After any use-of-force greater than Type I force on subjects who are reasonably believed or known to be: Pregnant, Pre-adolescent children, Elderly, Physically frail or disabled.