Police Citizen Review Subcommittee

City of Portland Police Citizen Review Subcommittee AGENDA February 12, 2025 6:00 PM 1. Zoom information a. On Wednesday, February 12, 2025at 6:00 p.m., the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee will conduct a virtual meeting. This meeting will take place remotely using Zoom. This meeting will be held remotely pursuant to the Remote Meeting Policy adopted by the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee and as authorized under 1 M.R.S. 403-B . Allow your computer to install the free Zoom app to get the best meeting experience. If you are not able to attend live, a recording will be available following the meeting. For public comment, you will need to use the "raise your hand" feature. To raise your hand via the telephone, please hit *9. You will be unmuted by the host when it is time for public comment. You are invited to a Zoom webinar! When: Feb 12, 2025 06:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Every month on the Second Wed, until Feb 12, 2025, 1 occurrence(s) Feb 12, 2025 06:00 PM Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system. Monthly: https://portlandmaine- gov.zoom.us/webinar/tZcpfu2sqTssGNV6CZYBteABamEsRuTi0hJm/ics?icsToken=DBUU- dNaoS42OTuG6wAALAAAALe2tOFxwpZywgetCUHoTDh2- R7sFdToNQS9vZyZfztDCVaWYEazsqVKSWcl1Ffnlcaw9V4eiG6_tGWRyjAwMDAwMQ Topic: Police Citizen Review Subcommittee Join from PC, Mac, iPad, or Android: https://portlandmaine- gov.zoom.us/j/83494470621?pwd=PqEvbCqi4naT2Pa1QNco1u4TPI1U3Q.1 Passcode:928732 Phone one-tap: +13126266799,,83494470621# US (Chicago) +16469313860,,83494470621# US 2. Call to Order 3. Executive session pursuant to 1 M.R.S. Sec. 405(6)(F) to discuss IA 2025-001 Page 1 4. Approval of amended December 11, 2024 minutes a. Attachment - minutes b. Attachment - redlined minutes c. Attachment - SOP 1A d. Attachment - SOP 90B 5. Approval of January 8, 2025 minutes a. Attachment - draft minutes 6. Update on the new Civil Police Review Board ordinance 7. Review draft PCRS introduction letter to complainants a. Attachment - draft 8. Training opportunities 9. 2024 Annual Report development 10. Public comment on agenda items 11. Topics for next month’s meeting 12. Adjourn Page 2  MINUTES POLICE CITIZEN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE December 11, 2024 Meeting Held Remotely Via Zoom Members present: Anne Hardcastle, Chair (left at 6:52); Xavier Botana; Gino Desruisseaux; Joey Brunelle; Kaylin Kerina Members absent: Reverend Lewis, Vice-Chair Staff present: Associate Corporation Counsel Rachel Millette; Chief Mark Dubois; Major Dan Hondo; Lt. Jacob Titcomb; Associate Corporation Counsel Nicole Albert; Tracy Boyd 6:02 Call to order. Anne announced that she needed to leave the meeting early, thus the agenda was flipped so that she could present the case that was carried forward from November. Motion was made by Xavier and seconded by Gino to adopt the October 9, 2024 meeting minutes. Passage 5-0. 6:05 Motion was made to enter into Executive Session pursuant to 1 M.R.S. Sec. 405(6)(F) to discuss IA2024-017 by Gino and seconded by Xavier. Passage 5-0. 6:44 Out of Executive Session. Motion was made by Kay to find that IA2024-017 was fair; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-017 was found to be fair. Motion was made by Joey to find that IA2024-017 was objective; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-017 was found to be objective. Motion was made by Kay to find that IA2024-017 was timely; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-017 was found to be timely. Motion was made by Xavier to find that IA2024-017 was thorough; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-017 was found to be thorough. No public comment was offered. Standing of the new ordinance: Rachel reported that there’s been an update to the City Council’s workshop schedule, the new Civilian Police Review Board (“CPRB”) will be discussed on February 10, 2025. The meeting will start in an executive session because the discussion will entail bargaining related obligations and collective bargaining processes. After the executive session the City Council may open up the workshop to the public depending on the outcome of the meeting, or, they may announce that they are still bargaining. Joey asked when the public might see the updated version of the ordinance. Rachel responded that once the City Council has settled on the new version, the Page 3 public will have a minimum of two and a half weeks to view the new ordinance before the City Council votes on it. The item will be a two read item posted ahead of the first read then public comment will be allowed during the second read. 6:52 Anne designated Xavier to lead the remainder of the meeting and left the meeting. Use of Force Incident Review Presentation: Associate Corporation Counsel Nicole Albert gave an overview of the Use of Force Incident Review process. Questions arose around the Police Department’s separate Use of Force committee members; who they are; how are they chosen; are there any disqualifiers for serving on the committee? Nicole explained that her task was to inform the committee of the incident review process and explained that she did not have information to answer the subcommittee members’ questions regarding the separate Use of Force committee. Workshop – role/responsibilities of the PCRS Board and IA process overview: Rachel gave a PowerPoint presentation around the roles and responsibilities of the subcommittee members. No public comment was offered. Topics for next month’s meeting: Potential update on the new Civil Police Review Board ordinance Notice to complainant regarding PCRS review of their IA complaint Previous trainings offered by PPD and NACOLE 2024 Report development 8:06 Motion was made by Joey and seconded by Kay to adjourn. Passage 4-0. Page 4  Page 2 MINUTES POLICE CITIZEN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE December 11, 2024 Meeting Held Remotely Via Zoom Members present: Anne Hardcastle, Chair (left at 6:52); Xavier Botana; Gino Desruisseaux; Joey Brunelle; Kaylin Kerina Members absent: Reverend Lewis, Vice-Chair Staff present: Associate Corporation Counsel Rachel Millette; Chief Mark Dubois; Major Dan Hondo; Lt. Jacob Titcomb; Associate Corporation Counsel Nicole Albert; Tracy Boyd 6:02 Call to order. Anne announced that she needed to leave the meeting early, thus the agenda was flipped so that she could present the case that was carried forward from November. Motion was made by Xavier and seconded by Gino to adopt the October 9, 2024 meeting minutes. Passage 5-0. 6:05 Motion was made to enter into Executive Session pursuant to 1 M.R.S. Sec. 405(6)(F) to discuss IA2024-017 by Gino and seconded by Xavier. Passage 5-0. 6:44 Out of Executive Session. Motion was made by Kay to find that IA2024-017 was fair; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-017 was found to be fair. Motion was made by Joey to find that IA2024-017 was objective; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-017 was found to be objective. Motion was made by Kay to find that IA2024-017 was timely; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-017 was found to be timely. Motion was made by Xavier to find that IA2024-017 was thorough; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-017 was found to be thorough. No public comment was offered. Standing of the new ordinance: Rachel reported that there’s been an update to the City Council’s workshop schedule, the new Civilian Police Review Board (“CPRB”) will be discussed on February 10, 2025. The meeting will start in an executive session because the discussion will entail bargaining related obligations and collective bargaining processes. After the executive session the City Council may open up the workshop to the public depending on the outcome of the Page 5 meeting, or, they may announce that they are still bargaining. Joey asked when the public might see the updated version of the ordinance. Rachel responded that once the City Council has settled on the new version, the public will have a minimum of two and a half weeks to view the new ordinance before the City Council votes on it. The item will be a two read item posted ahead of the first read then public comment will be allowed during the second read. 6:52 Anne designated Xavier to lead the remainder of the meeting and left the meeting. Use of Force Incident Review Presentation: Associate Corporation Counsel Nicole Albert, legal counsel to the police department, gave an overview of the Use of Force Incident Review process. Questions arose around the Police Department’s separate Use of Force committee members; who they are; how are they chosen; are there any disqualifiers for serving on the committee? Nicole explained that her task was to inform the committee of the incident review process and explained that she did not have information to answer the subcommittee members’ questions regarding the separate Use of Force committee. >> Acting Chair Xavier requested that staff provide answers to these question at the next meeting. Members discuss the possibility of making information about the Use of Force/Incident Review information available to the public. >> Rachel, Tracy and Nicole say they can put this information in the meeting’s minutes/supporting documents, along with the Police Department’s relevant SOP. Workshop – role/responsibilities of the PCRS Board and IA process overview: Rachel gave a PowerPoint presentation around the roles and responsibilities of the subcommittee members. Rachel clarifies something from the previous meeting and says that PCRS members *can* discuss their votes in a public session provided that the discussion does not in any way violate the privacy rights of the employees or the individual making the complaint. Broad generalizations are allowed, and questions can be asked during executive session regarding what is allowable to say in the public meeting. The Committee discussed the possibility of sending a letter to complainants *before* the PCRS process, in addition to afterward (as currently happens), to better explain our purpose, limitations and value, which happened in the early years of the committee. The Committee also expressed interest in including vote totals in the letter sent to complainants. >> It is suggested to put these on a future agenda. Page 6 Joey raised the concern that the PCRS annual reports from 2008-2013 are missing from the City’s website. >> Rachel says she will take a look into that. The Committee discussed past and possible future training, including from the police department and from NACOLE, and multiple members expressed interest in additional training. No public comment was offered. Topics for next month’s meeting: Kay suggests that we have a forward-looking discussion of trainings offered by PPD and NACOLE, or reaching out to USM (or other schools, e.g. Husson) to see if someone can give a presentation on other models of citizen police review. Xavier suggests starting with a review of past trainings. Joey asks what the process is to develop the annual report. Gino says that it starts in spring and sometimes drags into fall. It doesn’t take much, once we get the data. >> Acting Chair Xavier suggests putting this topic on the January meeting agenda. ●​ Potential update on the new Civil Police Review Board ordinance ●​ Notice to complainant regarding PCRS review of their IA complaint ●​ An Outline of the Incident Review Process that could go along with the meeting minutes and the SOP around incident review on the city’s website ●​ Previous trainings offered by PPD and NACOLE ●​ 2024 Report development 8:06 Motion was made by Joey and seconded by Kay to adjourn. Passage 4-0. Page 7  PORTLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE Subject: RESPONSE TO RESISTANCE/AID/REPORTING Policy #: 1A Distribu on: Internal/External Effec ve: 10/22/2017 By Order of: Chief of Police Revised: 12/18/2022 I. PURPOSE To establish guidelines governing response to resistance by Portland Police Officers and to describe requirements for medical aid and repor ng. II. POLICY The Portland Police Department seeks to treat all people with dignity and respect and recognizes the value and sanc ty of every human life. Inves ng officers with the trust and lawful authority to respond to use force in response to resistance and to protect the public welfare, a careful balancing of all human interests is required. Since there are too many variables that go into an officer's split-second decision to use force in what are o en mes tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving situa ons, this procedure, although intended to provide clear direc on, is unable to be all inclusive and does not a empt to describe in absolute terms and in every circumstance when an officer should or should not use a par cular response op on. It is the policy of this agency for officers to consider safety priori es and a empt to control an incident by the use of de-escala on whenever safe and reasonable to do so, and to use only the degree of force that the officer reasonably and actually believes is necessary to effec vely bring an incident under control while protec ng the officer or another. When necessary to respond to resistance, the degree of force employed must be propor onal and in direct rela onship to the amount of resistance exerted, or the immediate threat to the officers or others. Officers must respond in a way that does not violate the Cons tu on or applicable law. Officers shall report their use of physical force, and shall take reasonable steps to obtain appropriate medical a en on. Supervisors and command staff shall review all uses of force and control to ensure compliance with legal requirements and this policy. Given this is a statutorily mandated policy, officers must abide by this SOP as it applies to all standards of the MCJA Board of Trustees. III. DEFINITIONS A. Actual Belief: A subjec ve state of mind in which the officer holds a genuine or honest convic on. B. Bodily Injury: Physical pain, physical illness or any impairment of physical condi on. C. Canine (K-9): A department authorized dog, the training and cer fica on of which has included handler protec on and suspect apprehension. This is considered the use of non-deadly force. D. Chemical Agents: A response op on intended to disable a person with the use of chemicals, inflammatory agents, or similar substances (e.g., OC or CS) that has an irrita ng or disabling effect upon human beings. Incapacita ng agents are designed to produce temporary physiological or mental effects, or both, which will render individuals incapable of concerted effort. This is considered the use of non-deadly force. E. Command / Officer Presence: The presence of a law enforcement officer who is willing and able to handle a situa on, and the ability to speak clearly authorita vely, issuing concise commands using a tone that reflects control and professionalism. 1A-1 Page 8 F. Compliance Techniques: Methods of arrest, restraint and control that include the manipula on of joints, pressure point applica ons, and take down techniques to control a resistant or aggressive offender. G. Conducted Electrical Weapon (CEW): An incapacita ng weapon that uses electricity against a person, causing involuntary muscle contrac on, and overriding the person’s voluntary motor responses. This is considered an intermediate level use of non-deadly force. H. Deadly Force: Physical force which a person uses with the intent of causing, or which the person knows to create a substan al risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury, including, but not limited to the inten onal, knowing or reckless discharge of a firearm in the direc on of another person or at a moving vehicle. I. De-escala on: Coupled with the considera on of safety priori es, the use of verbal or non-verbal ac ons and tac cs, whenever feasible and possible, preceding a poten al force encounter. This may include, but is not limited to the use of distance, cover, tac cal re-posi oning, and communica on in order to stabilize the situa on, reduce the immediacy of the threat, and allow for more me and op ons for resolu on. The goal of these tac cs is to slow down the situa on, allowing access to addi onal resources (e.g., personnel, supervisors, specialized officers or teams) that may mi gate the intensity of the encounter, help gain voluntary compliance, or otherwise allow for control of the situa on and the safety of the officer, subject and others without the need to use force, or with the use of a lower level of force. J. Excessive Force: Physical force that is unreasonable, unnecessary or inappropriate given the facts and circumstances known to the officer at the me the force was used. K. Firearm: Any weapon whether loaded or unloaded, which is designed to expel a projec le by the ac on of an explosive and includes a pistol, rifle, revolver, gun, machine gun or shotgun, but not including the PepperBall system or a CEW device. Any weapon that can be made into a firearm by the inser on of a firing pin, or other similar thing, or by repair, is a firearm. L. Imminent: Impending, immediate or appearing as if about to happen or occur. M. Impact Projec les (Less Lethal Muni ons): Specialty, low-kine c energy projec les, approved by the MCJA Board of Trustees, designed to be discharged from a firearm and have a disabling effect upon human beings. Law enforcement use of such muni ons is considered the use of non-deadly force. N. Impact Tool / Weapon: A tool or device designed for use by an officer in close quarter physical defense of the officer or another and / or control of an aggressive offender. The issued baton is a department-approved impact tool. O. Individual Ac ons: As a part of the Situa onal Use of Force assessment process, the categories below can be used to describe an individual subject’s behavior: ● Coopera ve: Compliant and willing to obey, posing minimal threat to the officer(s) or others. ● Resis ve (Passive): Non-compliance, defiance or failure to cooperate with lawful verbal direc on, but offering no resis ve or evasive bodily movement to prevent the officer’s a empt at physical 1A-2 Page 9  control (e.g., a passive demonstrator, a person going limp, prone or refusing to stand up, lie down, enter / exit vehicle, leave the scene, etc.). ● Resis ve (Ac ve): Physically resis ve or evasive bodily movement, including but not limited to muscle tension, bracing, pushing, pulling, flailing or flight, to avoid or defeat an officer’s a empt at physical control, or to prevent being taken into or retained in custody. Verbal statements, defiance and belligerence alone do not cons tute ac ve resistance. ● Ac ve Aggression: A threat of an assault, coupled with any pre-a ack indicators (e.g., clenched fists, flanking, figh ng stance, etc.) and the present ability to carry out the threat or assault, reasonably indica ng that an assault or injury to the officer or another person is imminent. ● Assaul ve (High Risk): An overt act of an assault, or highly agitated or comba ve ac ons or behavior posing an imminent threat of injury to the officer or another. Such ac ons may include, but are not limited to hos le physical or ac ve resistance, kicking, punching or spi ng, whether an assault occurs or not. ● Life Threatening: Ac ons or behavior that could cause death or serious bodily injury, poten ally jus fying the use of deadly force. P. Less Lethal Force: Response op ons that are not designed or used with the inten on of causing (and have less poten al for causing) death or serious bodily injury, including but not limited to chemical agents, PepperBall, impact projec les or muni ons, or a CEW. Q. Less than Lethal Muni ons: A low-kine c energy projec le designed to be discharged from a 40 mm launcher that is approved by the Board of Trustees of the Maine Criminal Jus ce Academy that has been designed to have a disabling effect upon human beings. The use of a less-than-lethal muni ons weapon is considered to be the use of non-deadly force. R. Neck (“choke”) hold: One of the following types of holds: (1) arm-bar control hold, a hold that inhibits breathing by compression of the airway in the neck; (2) caro d restraint hold, a hold that inhibits blood flow by compression of the blood vessels in the neck; (3) lateral vascular neck constraint; or (4) a hold with a knee or other object to the back of a prone subject's neck, all of which are considered lethal force. S. Non-Deadly Force: Any physical force that is not deadly force. T. Officer Response Op ons: Choices available to an officer concerning the type of force to be used in response to resistance in a given situa on, including but not limited to officer / command presence, voice commands, de-escala on, compliance techniques, CEWs, chemical agents, impact weapons, canines, and deadly force. U. PepperBall Projec les: Plas c spheres that are filled with pelargonic acid vanillylamide (PAVA) and are delivered by a special launching device. With the excep on of specialized (e.g glass-breaking rounds) use of PepperBall projec les is considered the use of non-deadly force. V. Physical Force: Any physical power or kine c energy exerted by an officer to coerce, overcome, control or restrain another individual to comply or submit. The actual exercise of some form of Kine c energy (one person to another) of such a nature as to create an imminent and substan al risk of causing bodily harm. 1A-3 Page 10  W. Reasonable Belief: When facts or circumstances provided to or known to the officer are such as to cause an ordinary and prudent officer to act or think in a similar way under similar circumstances. X. Safety Priori es: A decision-making process which provides the framework for making tac cally sound decisions, u lizing objec ve criteria based on an individual’s current or likely risk of suffering serious bodily injury or death and their ability to remove themselves from that danger. Those exposed to the greatest poten al of injury with the least ability to escape the situa on are placed at the top of the priori es (e.g., a hostage held against their will who has li le ability to control the situa on). On the other end of the con nuum is the suspect or subject who has li le threat of injury by others and is in control over the situa on. The safety priori es value all life and its intent is to assist law enforcement in making tac cal decisions to assist in saving lives. Y. Serious Bodily Injury: Bodily injury which creates a substan al risk of death, or which causes serious, permanent disfigurement or loss or substan al impairment of the func on of any bodily member or organ, or extended convalescence for recovery of physical health. Z. Situa onal Use of Force Op ons: A dynamic process by which an officer assesses, plans and responds to situa ons that threaten public and officer safety and require the use of force and control. The process includes an assessment of the situa on and circumstances immediately confron ng the officer, including but not limited to the severity of the crime or suspected offense, the level and imminence of any threat to the officers or public, the level of resistance, the risk or apparent a empt to flee or escape; the suspect’s behavior and individual ac ons (coopera ve, resis ve (passively or ac vely), assaul ve / high risk, or posing a threat of death or serious bodily injury); and to the officer’s percep ons and tac cal considera ons. Based on this assessment, the officer selects from the available officer response op ons while con nuing to evaluate the evolving situa on, adap ng a plan and ac ons that are appropriate and effec ve in bringing the situa on under control. AA. Op on of Availability: Flashlights, vehicles, tools, implements, objects or other devices or techniques that are not necessarily issued, intended or normally authorized as response op ons, but that may be used in extraordinary circumstances when their use would be jus fiable and no other adequate or suitable defensive op on is immediately available. IV. TRAINING / PROFICIENCY / DUTY TO ACT A. Only sworn and cer fied personnel, who have been trained on this SOP and demonstrate proficiency in the use of the department’s authorized firearms and less lethal force op ons, as may be established by the department or the Maine Criminal Jus ce Academy, will be permi ed to carry or use them on or off-duty. B. Ini al weapons proficiency will be achieved through training and qualifica on during the Field Training program. Training will include instruc on on safe handling, storage and maintenance procedures. Con nued proficiency with all authorized firearms (both lethal and impact projec les) and the CEW will be demonstrated by successful comple on of annual training and qualifica on. Annual training should include relevant review of this SOP. All firearms and less lethal force response op ons training and qualifica ons will be documented and supervised by trained and / or cer fied instructors. 1A-4 Page 11  C. Training in other less lethal response op ons (O.C., PepperBall, impact baton and defensive tac cs) must be conducted at least biennially. D. If an officer fails to qualify with a firearm as outlined in SOP 1B, or demonstrate proficiency with another less lethal response, the instructor shall no fy the Chief of Police, in wri ng, on the same date, and will develop a remedial training (lesson) plan, subject to approval by the Chief of Police or designee, to include the type of remedial training and the metable to address the deficiencies. The officer will be placed on an altered or administra ve assignment pending successful comple on of the training / qualifica on, and must not carry or use the firearm or less lethal response op on un l having demonstrated proficiency. E. Failure to qualify following remedial training will result in further review or evalua on of fitness for duty, which may result in ac on up to and including termina on. F. An officer has a duty to intervene, at the earliest, safe opportunity, to prevent or stop the known or apparent use of excessive force by another officer when it is objec vely reasonable to do so. The incident must be immediately reported, verbally and in wri ng, to a supervisor. V. RESPONSE TO RESISTANCE JUSTIFICATIONS Officers are authorized to use force to overcome a suspect’s resistance or to accomplish some other lawful law enforcement objec ve for which force is lawful, necessary and appropriate. Officers derive their authority to use force from applicable Maine State laws and guidelines. As such, officers should be familiar with the laws and guidelines contained in 17-A M.R.S.A. § 104, 105, 106(6), 107, 108 and 110, as well as the ARREST Chapter of the Maine Law Enforcement Officer’s Manual. Officers shall only carry department-authorized weapons, and with the excep on of an authorized use of a op on of availability, should only use weapons a er being trained in their use. A. USE OF NON-DEADLY FORCE: An officer is jus fied in responding to resistance using a reasonable degree of non-deadly force upon another person: 1. when and to the extent the officer reasonably believes it is necessary to effect an arrest or prevent the escape from custody of an arrested person, unless the officer knows the arrest or deten on is illegal; OR in self-defense or to defend a third person from what the officer reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful, non-deadly force encountered while a emp ng to effect such an arrest or while seeking to prevent such an escape; OR 2. in self-defense or to defend a third person from what the officer actually and reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful, non-deadly force, and the officer actually and reasonably believes that the officer’s use of non-deadly force is necessary; OR 3. to prevent or thwart the commission of a person’s suicide, or a person’s self-inflic on of serious bodily injury; and / or to exercise protec ve custody of a person, consistent with 34-B M.R.S.A. § 3862. B. USE OF DEADLY FORCE: An officer is jus fied in responding to resistance using deadly force only when the officer reasonably believes such force is necessary: 1A-5 Page 12  1. for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the officer reasonably believes is the imminent use of unlawful deadly force; OR 2. to effect an arrest or prevent the escape of a person when the officer reasonably believes the person has commi ed a crime involving the use or threatened use of deadly force, is using a dangerous weapon in a emp ng to escape, or otherwise indicates that the person is likely to seriously endanger human life or inflict serious bodily injury, unless apprehended without delay, AND the officer has made reasonable efforts to advise the person that the officer is a law enforcement officer a emp ng to effect an arrest or prevent the escape from arrest and the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the person is aware of the advice, or the officer reasonably believes that the person otherwise knows that the officer is a law enforcement officer a emp ng to effect an arrest or prevent an escape. The mere fact that a person is a “fleeing felon” does NOT, in and of itself, jus fy the use of deadly force (Tennessee v. Garner). Deadly force may not be used against an unarmed, non-violent, property crime offender; OR 3. to destroy any animal that is obviously vicious or aggressive and presents a direct or poten al threat of killing or seriously injuring any person. Supervisory approval should be obtained, whenever possible. Dispatching or euthanizing an animal is not considered a use of force. Where reasonably prac cal and permi ed by the circumstances, officers should iden fy as a law enforcement officer and warn of their intent to use deadly force. VI RESPONSE OPTION GUIDELINES A. Consistent with Maine state standards, the department has adopted the Situa onal Use of Force response model, the underlying principle of which is threat assessment. During any incident in which force is jus fied to respond to resistance, officers are expected to use good judgment in assessing a situa on and determining which response op on would best defuse a situa on and bring it under control. The key to using the proper type of force is recognizing a threat. B. Consistent with the Graham v. Connor decision, officers must, on an ongoing basis, assess the totality of the circumstances, including but not limited to: 1. The severity or seriousness of the crime or suspected offense; 2. The level of threat or resistance presented by the subject; 3. The risk or apparent a empt by the subject to flee or escape; and 4. Whether the subject was posing an imminent threat to the officer(s) or others. C. An officer may assess or perceive a situa on based, in part, on the suspect’s individual ac ons and behaviors (i.e., coopera ve, resistant (passively or ac vely), assaul ve or posing a threat of death or serious bodily injury); the officer’s objec ve percep ons and tac cal considera ons; the environment; the number of individuals; the perceived abili es and knowledge of the individuals; the number of officers (or availability of backup); each officer’s unique skill levels and competencies; me and distance; and any objec ve indicators signaling an a ack. D. Use of physical force should terminate when resistance ceases or when it is objec vely reasonable that a subject is fully in the control of law enforcement. 1A-6 Page 13 E. Based upon that assessment, safety priori es, and the officer’s training, educa on and experience, an officer must decide upon a proper and reasonable response op on, either deadly or non-deadly force, as depicted and further described below: F. Consistent with State and Federal laws, the response op ons available within the situa onal use of force matrix, and notwithstanding the jus fied use of any Op on of Availability, in response to a given situa on, officers jus fied to respond to resistance may consider the reasonableness, appropriateness and necessity to use one or more of the following authorized non-deadly or less lethal force response op ons: 1. Officer Presence (Non-Verbal): The appearance of an officer who is willing and able to handle a situa on. Officers should use tac cal de-escala on techniques, such as distance, cover, and tac cal re- posi oning to gain me, as appropriate, and other alterna ves to higher levels of force, consistent with SOP and training. Remember the tac cal resolu on equa on of Distance + Cover = Time. 2. Professional / Command Presence (Verbal): Whenever such delay will not compromise the safety of the officer or another and will not result in the destruc on of evidence, escape of a suspect, or commission of a crime, officers should make every a empt to achieve control through the use of tac cal de-escala on techniques, coupled with advisements, warnings, persuasion, appeals, and the use of clear, concise and direct advice or commands while using a tone that reflects control and professionalism, without the undue use of profanity or argument. Whenever feasible, an officer will allow the subject an opportunity to comply with the officer’s verbal commands prior to resor ng to a use of force. 1A-7 Page 14 3. Control / Compliance Techniques & Restraints: Includes the use of empty hands, impact tools and / or mechanical restraints (e.g., handcuffs and / or leg cuffs, and may include the applica on of strength, leverage, takedowns, control holds, and / or come-alongs, using hands, feet, fists, knees or baton. The purpose of these op ons is to gain control, forcing the suspect’s compliance while minimizing the risk of injury to the officer, bystanders, or the person being taken into custody. Neck holds are prohibited, unless deadly force is jus fied. 4. Chemical Agents (OC Spray): Although not universal, chemical agents have displayed a high level of effec veness and low poten al for las ng injury and may be used to supplement other means of controlling a subject: a. AUTHORIZED USE: OC spray may be a response op on: 1) When physical force is jus fied to control or subdue a person ac vely resis ng arrest; a person exhibi ng ac ve aggression; or whose individual ac ons are assaul ve (high risk) or life threatening, leading to a reasonable belief that the person poses an immediate threat to the officer or another person and it would be unsafe, ineffec ve or imprac cal for officers to approach within contact range, or a empt to subdue the person by other conven onal tac cs. 2) When physical force is jus fied to control or subdue a person who overtly poses an imminent and substan al threat of harm to themself. 3) To defend oneself or another from a vicious or aggressive animal. b. RESTRICTIONS: Considera on should be given as to whether the use of chemical agents will help or hinder the opera on because of the physical limita ons and / or the need for decontamina on. The use of chemical agents should be avoided where it would affect children or innocent bystanders, unless the exigency of the situa on dictates otherwise. Chemical agents shall not be used on a coopera ve or passively resistant person; on a person solely due to belligerence or verbal defiance; on anyone under effec ve restraint; to punish, in midate or coerce a subject; for purposes of demonstra on, experimenta on or horseplay against any person, even a volunteer, unless as part of department sanc oned training; to rouse an unconscious, impaired, disabled or intoxicated person; or to elicit informa on or to threaten or in midate, without legal jus fica on. c. POST APPLICATION: As soon as prac cal a er a chemical agent applica on, officers should assist with decontamina on by providing fresh air and water. Officers should monitor the exposed person’s health and should counsel and provide informa on about OC effects to an exposed person. 5. Canine (K-9): a. AUTHORIZED USE: A cer fied police canine may be a response op on for instances in which non-deadly force is jus fied to control or subdue a person ac vely resis ng arrest, to include any person suspected of fleeing a er having commi ed a violent or other serious crime; a person displaying ac ve aggression; or a person whose individual ac ons are assaul ve (high risk) or life threatening towards the officer or another person present, leading to a reasonable belief that the person poses an immediate threat to the officer or another 1A-8 Page 15  person and it would be unsafe, ineffec ve or imprac cal for officers to approach within contact range, or a empt to subdue the person by other conven onal tac cs; OR when physical force is jus fied to control or subdue a person who poses an imminent and substan al threat of physical harm to that person, the officer, or another. b. RESTRICTIONS: Unless otherwise jus fied, reasonable and necessary, a police canine shall not be deployed to apprehend a coopera ve or passively resistant person; a person solely due to belligerence or verbal defiance; a person fleeing from a property or other non-violent crime; a person the officer knows or reasonably believes to be pregnant; elderly and / or visibly frail, to include persons known or believed to be over the age of sixty-five (65), a juvenile believed to be under the age of eighteen (18); or a person who is handcuffed and under effec ve restraint. c. DEPLOYMENT: A warning should be given prior to the deployment of a canine, unless it would be tac cally unsafe to do so. The handler shall cause the canine to disengage immediately when it becomes reasonably apparent that the suspect has surrendered, readily complies with the officers’ direc ons, is no longer a threat, and / or when sufficient law enforcement personnel are available to safely take the suspect into custody. 6. Conducted Electrical Weapon (CEW): a. READINESS: Officers are responsible for immediately repor ng any issues (e.g., missing or damaged equipment) to the Shi Commander, who will be responsible for the overall accountability of the department’s CEW units. b. AUTHORIZED USE: A CEW may be a response op on: 1) To control or subdue a person ac vely resis ng arrest, exhibi ng ac ve aggression, or whose individual ac ons are assaul ve (high risk) or life threatening, leading to a reasonable belief that the person poses an immediate threat to the officer or another person and it would be unsafe, ineffec ve or imprac cal for officers to approach within contact range, or a empt to subdue the person by other conven onal tac cs. 2) To control or subdue a person who overtly poses an imminent and substan al threat of harm to themself, and it would be unsafe, ineffec ve or imprac cal for officers to approach within contact range, or a empt to subdue the person by other conven onal tac cs. 3) To defend oneself or another from a vicious or aggressive animal. c. RESTRICTIONS: Unless otherwise jus fied, reasonable, necessary and appropriate, officers SHALL NOT use a CEW: 1) On a coopera ve or passively resistant person, or a person who is solely belligerent or verbally defiant; 2) On a person merely because that person is fleeing or a emp ng to escape; 3) On a person the officer knows or reasonably believes to be pregnant, elderly and / or visibly frail, to include persons known or believed to be over the age of sixty-five (65), or young children, to include persons known or believed to be under the age of fourteen (14); or on a person who is handcuffed and under effec ve restraint; 1A-9 Page 16  4) On a person in a posi on where a fall would likely cause serious bodily injury or death (e.g., edge of a bridge, or body of water, in a body of water, or on top of a staircase, roof, tree, or other elevated structure), unless deadly force is otherwise jus fied; 5) On a person in control of a mode of transporta on (e.g., automobiles, motorcycles, bicycles, etc.) if the CEW use could reasonably result in the uncontrolled movement of the transport vehicle; 6) To punish, in midate or coerce a subject, or to rouse an unconscious, impaired, disabled or intoxicated person; 7) In the presence of poten ally flammable, vola le or explosive materials, including alcohol-based OC Spray, gasoline, natural, and / or propane gas; 8) For purposes of demonstra on, experimenta on or horseplay against any person, even a volunteer. Officers shall not be voluntarily or involuntarily “exposed” to a CEW discharge. d. DEPLOYMENT: 1) Officers responding to or at an incident where a CEW is used - or is an cipated - shall no fy dispatch, the on-duty supervisor and EMS. 2) Officers may consider using the CEW, consistent with this SOP and their training, in any of the following modes: a) Laser Only – with verbal warning (non-contact) b) Spark Check – with verbal warning (non-contact) c) Probe Deployment – temporary incapacita on (primary / preferred) op on. d) Drive (Touch) Stun – less effec ve (secondary / non-preferred) op on. 3) Unless it would be unsafe to do so, prior to deploying the CEW, officers should verbally announce, “Taser-Taser” so that other officers are aware that a CEW is about to be deployed. This will also provide the suspect an addi onal opportunity to cease the conduct that has given rise to the intended CEW deployment. 4) The primary aiming point is a person’s back. Since it is not always possible to get behind a person, secondary targe ng areas may include lower, front center mass / torso or legs. Officers shall not target the face, neck, groin or upper chest areas, where possible. 5) Only one officer should ac vate a CEW on a person at any one me, deploying the CEW for one standard cycle (5 seconds) and then re-assessing. Officers must use the minimum number of cycles necessary to accomplish the legi mate opera onal goal. If a CEW remains ineffec ve a er three (3) cycles, or a er a con nuous cycle of more than 15 seconds, officers should avoid con nued cycling and consider alterna ve response op ons. 6) Verbal commands should be provided throughout the contact. Back-up officers should begin to take control of the subject while temporarily incapacitated. 7) Any accidental CEW deployments, or other unusual occurrences, should be documented in a memo to the Major. That report must be forwarded through the Chain of Command to the Lead CEW Instructor for considera on of future training needs. e. POST-DEPLOYMENT: A er appropriate medical aid and clearance, whenever a person has been exposed to a CEW: 1) If that person is transported to a deten on facility, the transpor ng officer shall advise that facility’s staff of the CEW exposure. 1A-10 Page 17  2) The CEW cartridge, lead wires and probes shall be collected and submi ed as evidence. The probes should be treated as a biohazard. 3) The supervisor shall coordinate access to the CEW’s download discharge data that will be forwarded as part of the report for the administra ve review. 7. Pepperball Projec les: In addi on to the above Chemical Agent guidelines: a. The department has authorized PepperBall launchers as a less lethal force system, combining chemical irritants (PAVA) and kine c energy (impact force), which may be a response op on: 1) To control or subdue any person being taken into custody who is exhibi ng ac ve aggression, or whose individual ac ons are assaul ve (high risk) and / or life threatening, leading to a reasonable belief that the person poses an imminent threat to the officer or another person and it would be unsafe, ineffec ve or imprac cal for officers to approach within contact range, or a empt to subdue the person by other conven onal tac cs. 2) To control or subdue a person who overtly poses an imminent and substan al threat of harm to themself, and it would be unsafe, ineffec ve or imprac cal for officers to approach within contact range, or a empt to subdue the person by other conven onal tac cs. 3) To defend oneself or another from a vicious or aggressive animal. b. Pepperball projec les are considered target accurate at up to 60 feet and can create a cloud of O.C. powder at up to 150 feet. There is no minimum deployment stand-off distance. Officers should target center mass and the extremi es and shall not target the face, neck, groin or spine. c. The PepperBall launcher may also be used to deploy specialty rounds, as authorized. Such rounds shall not be deployed at a human being, unless deadly force is otherwise jus fied. d. PepperBall deployment should be part of a coordinated response. Officers should advise other officers prior to deployment in order to prevent sympathe c reac onary fire. 8. Impact Force: Impact force, including the use of hands, feet, fists, knees and the department approved baton, provides officers with defensive op ons to defend themselves or others from injury: a. AUTHORIZED USE: Ac ve resistance, ac ve aggression, assaul ve (high risk) and / or life threatening circumstances may warrant impact-type force. b. APPLICATION: Baton strikes may be delivered to the person’s Weapon Delivery System, which is the center mass of the arm, leg or body of the presented threat. The arms and the legs are vehicles which transport force against the officer and are the preferred targets at a downward 45-degree angle. A center mass straight strike can also be used to create distance, or the baton can be held at both ends and used with the length of the baton. c. RESTRICTIONS: The baton shall not be used to strike any coopera ve or passively resistant person; on a person solely due to belligerence or verbal defiance or any person who is under effec ve restraint; nor to rouse an unconscious, impaired, disabled or intoxicated person, or to punish, in midate or coerce a subject, elicit informa on or to threaten or in midate, without legal jus fica on. Blows to the head, neck, spine, groin, solar plexus or rib cage may 1A-11 Page 18  cause death or serious injury and should not be used, unless deadly force is otherwise jus fied. 9. Impact Projec les: To the extent that the law enforcement use of impact projec les deployed from a firearm is considered non-deadly force under Maine law (17-A MRSA, § 101(5)), it will also be considered non-deadly force under this SOP: a. READINESS: 1) Authorized and dedicated firearms must be maintained for deployment. 2) Deploying officers are responsible for verifying the weapon is loaded only with less lethal impact projec les. Any officer who discovers lethal rounds in a designated less lethal firearm shall immediately take correc ve ac on and report the discrepancy to a supervisor. B. AUTHORIZED USE: Impact projec les are intended to provide officers with another less lethal response op on. Impact projec les may be appropriate: 1) To defend against what the officer actually and reasonably believes is the imminent use of deadly force; and / or a person who is armed or appears / alleges to be armed and / or is a emp ng to arm themselves with a poten ally deadly weapon, and refuses to comply with or submit to the officer's lawful authority. 2) On a person who overtly poses an imminent and substan al threat of harm to themself, and it would be unsafe, ineffec ve or imprac cal for officers to approach within contact range, or a empt to subdue the person by other conven onal tac cs. 3) As a "door knocker” or window opener during high-risk tac cal incidents. c. RESTRICTIONS: Impact projec les should generally be used a er other conven onal tac cs have been, or likely will be, ineffec ve or imprac cal under the circumstances. Without legal authority, jus fica on and / or exigent circumstances, officers SHALL NOT use impact projec les: 1) On a coopera ve or resistant person; a person solely due to belligerence or verbal defiance; or on any person whose ac ons are not life threatening to that person or another person; or on any person the officer knows or reasonably believes to be pregnant, elderly and / or visibly frail, to include persons known or believed to be over the age of sixty-five (65), or persons known or believed to be juveniles under the age of eighteen (18). 2) In a crowd or crowd control situa on, including against subjects who are physically engaged with other officers or not isolated from bystanders. 3) On a person in a posi on where a fall would likely cause serious bodily injury or death (e.g., edge of a bridge or body of water or top of a staircase, roof, tree, or elevated structure), unless deadly force is otherwise jus fied. 4) On a person in control of a mode of transporta on (e.g., automobiles, motorcycles, bicycles, etc.), if the deployment could reasonably result in the uncontrolled movement of the vehicle. 5) To punish, in midate or coerce a subject. 6) Against any person, even a volunteer, for purposes of training, demonstra on or horseplay. d. DEPLOYMENT: With supervisory approval, impact projec les may be used as part of a coordinated and planned effort and response to a cri cal incident: 1A-12 Page 19  1) The intended deployment of impact projec les should be communicated to other officers within the area of the incident in order to avoid sympathe c reac onary fire. 2) Unless deadly force is jus fied, impact projec les should be deployed within their op mal range, generally between 15 feet and 75 feet. 3) When deploying impact projec les, officers should target the extremi es, specifically including the thigh, lower leg, bu ock or lower arm. If impacts to these areas are ineffec ve, inappropriate or too dangerous, and the circumstances jus fy a poten ally higher risk of injury, officers may target the lower abdomen. Officers shall not target the head, neck, center mass, spine or groin. 4) In order to reduce the likelihood of injury, only one officer should deploy impact projec les on a person at any one me. Deploying officers should a empt verbal dialogue, sight a proper target loca on, fire a single round and then assess the results. This sequence should be repeated, as deemed reasonably necessary and appropriate under the circumstances, with considera on being given to alterna ve tac cs when it appears that the technique is not working, and the injury risk of mul volleys outweighs the value of con nuing the deployment. 10. Deadly Force: Consistent with State and Federal laws and the situa onal use of force concept depicted above, and notwithstanding the jus fied use of any incapacita ng force method, to include any op on of availability, officers’ response to resistance may require the need to resort to the use of deadly force. Officers may use departmental firearms, as trained, and consistent with state and federal laws, this SOP, and SOP #1-1B. In recogni on of the sanc ty of human life, although officers should make every a empt to exhaust all other means prior to the applica on of deadly force, any officer otherwise jus fied in using deadly force should but is not required to a empt the use of any alterna ve, less lethal or non-deadly force response op ons prior to the appropriate and reasonable applica on of deadly force. VII. EMS RESPONSE / MEDICAL AID: A. Whenever an officer uses force, either deadly or non-deadly, that results in injury, or otherwise requires an EMS response or hospital transport, as outlined below, the officer shall ensure that appropriate medical aid is rendered as soon as prac cal. Appropriate medical aid may include increased observa on, decontamina on of chemical agents, applying first aid, EMS evalua on or transport and / or, for more serious or life-threatening incidents, immediate aid by emergency room medical staff. B. Officers shall request that EMS respond and evaluate any subject a er the following uses of force: 1. Any applica on of deadly force, or deployment of a firearm or impact projec le; 2. Any police K-9 bite; 3. Any baton strike resul ng in injury or complaint of injury, or as otherwise deemed appropriate by the officer or supervisor. 4. Any chemical agent applica on, including O.C. and Pepperball, as the supervisor deems appropriate for decontamina on and / or medical assessment; 5. Any CEW deployment or contact: a. In general, the on-scene supervisor, another officer not involved in the use of force, or MedCU staff is authorized to remove CEW probes from a person’s body. If the person was struck in the eyes, head, genitals, female breasts, or another sensi ve area, the person should be 1A-13 Page 20  transported to the hospital, as only medical personnel will be authorized to remove such probes. b. The Shi Commander or on-scene supervisor shall ensure that any person who falls into one of the restricted / vulnerable classes (e.g., pregnant woman, elderly or visibly frail person, or young child), OR who is believed to have been exposed to a consecu ve or cumula ve CEW applica on of fi een (15) seconds or more, OR who is believed to have been exposed to simultaneous applica ons by more than one CEW, is transported to the hospital for a medical evalua on. 6. Any other me an officer or supervisor deems it to be appropriate and / or prudent under the circumstances, to include if requested by the subject, if the subject is exhibi ng signs of excited delirium, or if the subject does not appear to fully recover – or maintains symptoms of physical distress – shortly a er any use of force / control applica on. C. Whenever an officer arrests or detains an individual and that person, loses consciousness, is injured or claims to be injured during the course of the arrest or deten on in a manner that is unrelated to a use of force, the officer shall immediately render aid, call for Medcu, and no fy a supervisor, who shall immediately respond to the scene. If an incident or force report is not required to be completed, the officer shall complete a casualty report, documen ng the injury. The supervisor shall complete a supplement documen ng their ac ons and review. Any incident involving a death while in police custody shall be handled in accordance with SOP 90A. D. In situa ons that require a casualty report, the subject must be photographed in order to document the injury. Any and all visible injuries to a subject and the scene must be photographed. An officer or supervisor other than the officer who placed the subject in custody will be assigned to take the photographs and should document any relevant statements made by the subject while being photographed. The photos should be noted in the casualty report. If a person alleges an injury, but it is not visible to the officer, photograph the area that the person claims is injured and document the allega on and the fact of no visible injury. E. All serious in-custody injuries require command staff no fica on; as outlined in SOP 48. VIII. REPORTING: A. Whenever an officer ac ng in an official capacity response op ons that include deadly, less-lethal or non- deadly force against another person, including physical force greater than un-resisted handcuffing, the officer shall immediately call a superior officer to the scene or, if that is not prac cal, contact a superior officer as soon as possible following the incident. If a superior officer is unable to respond to the scene, that fact shall be noted in the Use of Force report. B. All reportable uses of force must be documented in a Use of Force report. The following are reportable uses of force: 1. applica on of deadly force; 2. physical force that involves physical force techniques to overcome resistance; 3. the applica on of force by a firearm, Taser, baton, O.C. Spray, impact projec le, canine, pepperball, striking an individual with hands, feet, knees or elbow or any other weapon or implement; 4. any me the Shi Commander, a er consulta on with the supervisor and officer using force, deems it reportable. 1A-14 Page 21  C. In all situa ons that require a Use of Force report, the subject must be photographed in order to document injury or lack of injury. Any and all visible injuries to a suspect or an officer, whether or not the injuries are caused by the use of force, must be photographed. An officer or supervisor, other than the officer who applied the force, shall be assigned to take photographs and document any relevant statements made by the subject during the photographing. If a person alleges an injury, but it is not visible to the officer, photograph the area that the person claims is injured, documen ng the allega on and the fact that no injury was visible. D. All blank spaces on the Use of Force report shall be completed by the officer who has used force. The officer shall make a diligent a empt to obtain all informa on necessary to complete the report. If informa on remains unknown a er a diligent a empt, the officer shall mark such space “unknown.” An officer who is a witness to a use of force may be required to complete a supplement and a ach it to the Use of Force report. Upon comple on of the report, it shall be forwarded to the immediate supervisor of the officer wri ng the report. The Use of Force report must be completed and forwarded to the officer's immediate superior officer by the end of the shi in which the force is used. E. In the case of an SRT or other specialty type call-out, the Major, SRT Commander, or their designee shall file an a er-ac on report on behalf of the en re team documen ng the ac vi es of the team in detail and addressing any areas of concern related to department policy, training, equipment or tac cs. Any team member that engaged in a reportable use of force during the call-out shall complete a Use of Force report or supplement at the direc on of the Major or supervisor. The a er ac on report shall be reviewed by the command staff and use of force commi ee, as applicable. IX. REVIEW: A. The immediate supervisor of the involved officer(s) will interview the officer(s), any other officer(s) present at the use of force, the subject upon whom force was used, and any witnesses. B. The interviews will be recorded and geared towards determining the facts and the subject’s understanding of the situa on. The interviews must be recorded and then summarized by the supervisor in the review por on of the Use of Force report or related supplement. C. The responding supervisor should addi onally ensure that any injured individuals receive immediate medical a en on. If treatment at a medical facility is necessary, the supervisor should ensure that the involved officer does not transport or maintain custody of the injured individual during the medical treatment process. D. If the use of force results in serious bodily injury, the Shi Commander will ini ate a command no fica on. The Assistant Chief will no fy the Internal Affairs Lieutenant who will assign an inves gator to begin an immediate inves ga on. All uses of deadly force shall be inves gated as outlined in SOP 52A. E. The use of a firearm, the delivery of a hit or strike to a subject’s head with a baton or other Heavy object or the use of a neck hold will be reviewed by the department as the use of deadly force. In cases involving these types of force that do not result in serious bodily injury, the on-duty Shi Commander will arrange for command staff no fica on; as outlined in SOP 48. 1A-15 Page 22 F. A er the inves ga on is completed; the Shi Commander shall review the completed Use of Force report and any supplemental reports to ensure that the Use of Force report and inves ga on is thorough and complete. If in the Shi Commander’s judgment, the officer or supervisor has not provided sufficient details regarding the incident, they shall return the report for further clarifica on. Once the Use of Force report is complete, it shall be forwarded through the command review process. The Use of Force report shall not accompany nor be filed with any arrest or incident report. A er a report is reviewed administra vely, if it is determined that a viola on may have occurred warran ng inves ga on, the ma er will be referred to Internal Affairs. If it is believed that the officer engaged in criminal conduct, the Police Chief is mandated to forward the report to the Office of the District A orney or the Office of the A orney General and the Director of the Maine Criminal Jus ce Academy. Any such ma ers will be handled through the Internal Affairs in lieu of the below described commi ee process. G. The Professional Standards lieutenant will maintain all Use of Force reports. This will allow for the tracking and analyzing of all such incidents. H. The Use of Force Review Commi ee, chaired by the Professional Standards lieutenant, will meet monthly to review use of force incidents in detail. In addi on, the commi ee will consist of the Command staff, the Internal Affairs Sergeant(s), a PBA representa ve, a SOA representa ve, the Police A orney, any subject ma er experts as deemed appropriate by the Chair or Command staff, and a neutral member of the public, who is a resident of the City of Portland, appointed by the City Manager in consulta on with the Police Chief. The appointee may be removed by the City Manager for any reason that is not arbitrary, to include non- par cipa on in mee ngs or requisite training and viola ng confiden ality. Prior to par cipa ng in the commi ee, the civilian member will be required to a end training, provided by the city and the department, related to confiden ality requirements, legal principles in use of force review, as well as this and other relevant police department policies, training and procedures. The civilian must also par cipate in at least one “ride-along” within the first six months of appointment, and will annually par cipate in at least one ride- along and observe and par cipate in police department use of force and response to resistance training. The civilian member is expected to par cipate equally in the commi ee discussions, providing an addi onal perspec ve. I. The Chair shall schedule the commi ee mee ngs and provide the commi ee with all per nent informa on covering the incident and officer(s) in ques on. J. The Command staff and the Use of Force Review Commi ee shall use the following criteria in reviewing use of force incidents: 1. Did the officer u lize an appropriate level of force for the situa on; 2. Were the officer's ac ons reasonable; 3. Did the officer use department-authorized weapon systems and tools in an appropriate manner; 4. Was the force promptly reported and correctly documented; 5. Was the use of force consistent with the officer's training and experience; 6. Did the officer a empt to de-escalate the situa on prior to the use of force (if feasible); 7. Did the officer place other members of the public at risk by the their ac ons; 8. Did the officer's ac ons contribute to the necessity to use force; 9. Did the use of force policy effec vely address the situa on; 10. Was department training adequate; 1A-16 Page 23  11. Were the use of force op ons available to the officer adequate to control the situa on; 12. Is there a pa ern of misuse of this type of force, either by a par cular officer or department-wide; 13. Was the use of force within Department policy? K. A er reviewing each incident, the commi ee will seek to iden fy ac ons that may indicate a policy or procedure viola on, a training need, a policy or procedure modifica on or an equipment deficiency. L. If the Commi ee does iden fy a problema c event, it shall recommend such steps to be taken as are necessary to correct the problem. This shall include, but not be limited to: ordering a wri en clarifica on of the incident; the filing of an internal complaint; ordering remedial training or counseling; recommending a change in standard opera ng procedure or recommending modifica ons to issued equipment. The Police Chief and Command staff retain full authority for all opera onal decisions, including training and discipline. M. By April 1 of the following year, the Professional Standards lieutenant, shall review and compile sta s cs and complete an annual analysis and report to the command staff of all response to resistance repor ng incidents and complaints for the preceding year. The purpose of the annual review is to iden fy long-term pa erns or trends, which may be of concern to the Department. N. All use of force incidents for the past calendar year will be analyzed by the Professional Standards Lieutenant. A trending analysis of force incidents for the whole organiza on and units within the organiza on will also be completed. O. Consistent with Maine State law and with the unions’ approval, all Use of Force reports may be maintained electronically. Reports will be maintained for seven years. 1A-17 Page 24  PORTLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE Effective Date 06/29/2014 Number 90B Subject Deadly Force Investigations Amendment Date I. Purpose The purpose of this policy is to establish uniform procedures for the investigation of all incidents involving the use of deadly force by police officers. These procedures will govern only the investigative aspects of those incidents. Post incident procedures are addressed in SOP 90A. II. Policy It is the policy of the department to thoroughly, quickly and impartially investigate the use of deadly force by an officer. This may involve several separate investigations. The investigations will include: a) a criminal investigation of the suspect’s actions by the department’s Criminal Investigations Division. If the incident occurred in a different jurisdiction, the Chief of Police may request a joint investigation with that jurisdiction’s police department. b) a criminal investigation of the involved officer(s) conducted by the Office of the Attorney General. c) an administrative investigation conducted by the Internal Affairs Unit (IAU) and other assigned personnel, to determine if there were any violations of department policy. The procedures outlined in this policy are intended to elicit the information necessary to fully review the officer’s use of force. These procedures are intended to facilitate the investigative process by allowing all the investigative components to work in a cooperative and collaborative fashion; while still respecting the rights of all of the involved parties. III. Confidentiality of Investigations Administrative investigations of the use of deadly force are conducted for the internal use of the Portland Police Department and are to be kept confidential in accordance with state law. The department reserves the right; however, to provide information regarding an investigation to the department's legal counsel. An officer whose conduct is the subject of an investigation is entitled to review the investigation upon its completion. IV. Definitions Administrative Investigation Team [AIT]: An investigative unit supervised by the Assistant Chief and comprised of personnel from the Internal Affairs Unit, the assigned evidence technician(s) and any other investigative resources deemed necessary by the Chief of Police. This unit is solely responsible for the internal, administrative investigation of the use of force by the officer. Deadly force Incident: Any incident involving the use of deadly force by an officer; the use of any level of force which results in death; any departmental in-custody death or a use of force incident that results in serious bodily injury. Garrity warning: A warning given to a police officer who is interviewed by his/her employer in a potentially disciplinary setting to advise the officer that he/she is part of an investigation, that the officer is obligated to give statements for internal purposes, and these answers may not be used 9-90B-1 Page 25  against the officer in the prosecution’s case in a criminal proceeding. Garrity statements may be used in rebuttal. V. Command Responsibilities A. The Commander of the Uniformed Operations Group shall assume responsibility for the oversight and management of the personnel assigned to the police headquarters after the incident, including, but not limited to, involved officers, dispatch personnel, peer support employees and union representatives. B. The Assistant Chief shall assume responsibility for the oversight and management of investigative personnel including, but not limited to, investigators, evidence technicians and patrol officers and shall act as the liaison with personnel from the Attorney General’s office. VI. Investigative Responsibilities A. The internal, administrative investigation of a deadly force incident shall be the responsibility of the Administrative Investigations Team. If a member of the Administrative Investigation Team is involved in the incident being investigated, a supervisor of equal rank will replace that member. The Administrative Investigation Team will work in coordination with the Criminal Investigation Division as they each conduct parallel investigations. The AIT will share any investigative knowledge that is not a product of compelled statements of involved officers. Investigative knowledge obtained by CID is provided to the AIT. Examples include results of witness interviews, canvasses and physical evidence collected. B. The CID Lieutenant shall retain responsibility for the criminal investigation of the suspect’s actions and assign CID personnel, as he/she deems necessary. C. The Investigation Division of the Office of the Attorney General is designated as the official representative of the Attorney General in the investigation of police-involved deaths. The Attorney General’s Office is required by law to investigate any use of deadly force by a law enforcement officer while acting in the performance of the officer's duties. The sole purpose of the Attorney General’s investigation is to determine whether the force used by the officer was legally justified by self-defense or the defense of others; and to rule out criminal prosecution of the officer. Notification to the Attorney General and Office of the Chief Medical Examiner shall be the responsibility of the Assistant Chief, acting in his/her role as the supervisor of the Administrative Investigations Team. VII. Investigative Duties A. Upon notification, Administrative Investigations Team members shall respond to the scene, the police department or other location as specified by the Assistant Chief. B. The assigned evidence technician(s) shall respond to the scene to begin preliminary processing of the scene and to ensure the preservation of evidence. The collection of evidence from the involved officer shall be a priority and shall be accomplished as quickly as possible. Processing may be done at the scene or at the police department. C. The AIT shall receive a general briefing and walk-through by the scene supervisor regarding the circumstances surrounding the shooting. The involved officer(s) may also be asked at some point to participate in the scene walk-through, if they are able. 9-90B-2 Page 26  D. In dealing with involved personnel, AIT members should be cognizant of the symptoms of post traumatic stress including time and space distortions, confusion, hearing and visual distortion and shock. E. The involved officer(s) shall be relieved of the task of writing a Use of Force report. A Blue Team entry shall be made by the AIT for statistical purposes. F. An AIT member will be responsible for reviewing and collecting all of the video/audio information connected with the incident; including cruiser video, interview video, car to car messaging, email and dispatch audio recordings. The original material shall either remain in the custody and control of the team for investigative purposes or be logged into the evidence system. Copies will be made and/or released to CID and the Attorney General’s office as needed, with the approval of the Assistant Chief. G. An AIT member will review all of the information collected by the AIT during the course of the investigation and be periodically briefed by the CID Lieutenant regarding the status of the criminal investigation. Information gathered by the AIT, pursuant to the Garrity warning, shall not be shared with CID investigators. The Assistant Chief will periodically brief the Chief of Police. H. If an autopsy occurs as a result of the incident, an AIT member will be assigned to attend. I. Blood/Urine testing: It is the police department's policy not to request blood or urine samples from the involved officer(s) unless the officer(s) requests the sample, the involved officer(s) shows objective symptoms of alcohol or drug use or it is obtained pursuant to the Fourth Amendment as part of the criminal investigation. VIII. Officer Interviews A. An AIT member or the Chief’s designee, will be responsible for conducting the formal interview (if necessary) of the officer(s) involved in the incident as well as the witness officers. The interviews shall be audio recorded. No more than two members of the Administrative Investigations Team may be present at the interview but only one person should question the officer. B. Prior to the interview, the involved officer(s) and department witnesses shall be read and provided with a copy of the Garrity warning. Garrity statements will not be released to CID or the Attorney General’s office. C. The interview will be limited to questions which are specifically, directly and narrowly related to the incident. An officer may be questioned about off-duty conduct if it relates to the incident. D. The officer shall be advised that he/she has the right to have an attorney or union representative present during the interview. An officer's request to have an attorney or union representative present shall not unreasonably delay the interview. E. An officer can be disciplined for refusing to participate in an internal interview. F. If an officer chooses to participate in an interview with members of the Attorney General’s office as part of their investigation of the incident, the AIT may request that the officer or his/her attorney arrange for the interview to be recorded and voluntarily provided to the AIT. An officer may refuse the request and will NOT face any discipline for refusing. If an officer provides an audio recording of the interview to the AIT, it may serve to 9-90B-3 Page 27  eliminate any additional interviews by the AIT. An officer or his/her attorney, who agrees to provide this information, acknowledges that the interview is NOT being compelled by the Garrity ruling. IX. Administrative Findings A. The Assistant Chief or his/her designee shall prepare a written report, which includes the team's investigative conclusions about the incident and recommendations to the Chief regarding discipline, policy revisions and training alternatives. The final investigative report will be assigned an Internal Affairs case number and filed in the Internal Affairs Unit. B. The report shall be subject to command review to determine whether: 1. the use of force was justified, 2. the actions of the officer(s) were in accordance with department policy, 3. any training or policy modifications are necessary and 4. the Chief of Police should consider disciplinary action. C. The Chief of Police shall have final approval of the disposition of the case in accordance with the procedures established by SOP. The Chief may take action based on the command staff recommendations at any time before or after the findings of the Incident Review Team are completed. D. The involved officer shall receive a copy of the written report, the command staff recommendations and the Chief’s final disposition. X. Incident Review Team A. Pursuant to Maine law, within thirty (30) days of the completion of the Attorney General’s investigation and the department's administrative investigation, the Chief of Police will convene an Incident Review Team consisting of members appointed by the Chief. B. The members appointed will include: 1. the Assistant Chief, Commander and Captain; 2. one member who is a commissioned officer of the Maine State Police; 3. one member of the public who is not and has not previously served as a sworn law enforcement officer; 4. the police attorney; 5. the Use of Force Committee representatives from the PBA and the SOA; 6. a Chief of Police from an outside agency; and 7. any other individuals the Chief deems appropriate. C. The investigator(s) assigned to the incident will make a presentation to the Incident Review Team and answer any questions that may arise concerning the incident. 9-90B-4 Page 28  D. The purpose of the Incident Review Team is to review both a factual reconstruction of the event and the use of deadly force to advise the Chief of Police on the following issues: 1. Whether relevant policy was understandable and effective during the incident. 2. Whether changes in policies or procedures are necessary to increase public safety or officer safety. 3. Whether training methods or protocols should be reviewed or revised. 4. Whether department equipment or other resources should be replaced, supplemented or modified. E. The police attorney will draft a report that reflects the findings of the Incident Review Team on the above issues for delivery to the Chief of Police. The Incident Review Team does not have the authority to determine whether an officer engaged in misconduct, violated department policy or procedures or should be subject to discipline for his/her actions. F. The Chief of Police will determine whether training, equipment and/or policy revision is needed. G. At the conclusion of the review process, a copy of all relevant reports and information will be filed with the Internal Affairs Unit. H. The involved officer will be given a copy of the Incident Review Team’s report and may meet with the Chief to discuss the team’s findings. I. The report of the Incident Review Team is a public record as provided by law. The following individuals will be provided with copies of the report: the City Manager, the Mayor, Corporation Counsel, members of the Portland City Council and the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee, members of the police department’s Training and Use of Force Committees, the involved officer(s) and the Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Maine Criminal Justice Academy. J. After the Incident Review Team has made its findings, the Training Sergeant will convene the Training Committee, if necessary. At that meeting, a Command Staff member will review the Incident Review Team report with the committee and discuss any training concerns raised in the report. Disclaimer: Any policy, procedure and/or rule shall not be construed as creating a higher legal standard of care or safety in an evidentiary sense with respect to third party claims. Nothing in this policy is intended to increase, modify or in any way affect current legal standards nor shall any deviation from these guidelines be considered a breach of any legal standard. The procedures articulated in this policy are for Department use only and do not apply in any criminal or civil proceeding. When a conflict occurs with Federal laws or Maine statutes, the law or statute will supersede the directive in conflict. 9-90B-5 Page 29  MINUTES POLICE CITIZEN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE January 8, 2025 Meeting Held Remotely Via Zoom Members present: Anne Hardcastle, Chair; Kaylin Kerina; Xavier Botana; Gino Desruisseaux; and Joey Brunelle Staff present: Associate Corporation Counsel Rachel Millette; Chief Mark Dubois; Major Dan Hondo; Lt. Jacob Titcomb; Tracy Boyd 6:03 Call to order. Motion was made by Joey and seconded by Xavier to approve the December 11, 2024 meeting minutes and open for discussion. Joey and Xavier indicated that there are discrepancies between the draft minutes and what was discussed at the December 11, 2024 meeting. Joey emailed an amended draft of the minutes to the subcommittee members and shared his screen with the minutes in public view. Following additional discussion, Joey moved to postpone voting on the minutes until the next meeting, Xavier seconded the motion. Passage 5-0. Update re: new ordinance. Rachel reminded the subcommittee of the upcoming February 10, 2025 City Council workshop. Rachel will provide a projected timeline at the next PCRS meeting and share any additional information that can be made public following the outcome of the City Council’s workshop. PPD & NACOLE trainings. Anne indicated that a former subcommittee member, Tim Smith, had been in charge of culling training opportunities available to the subcommittee. Joey volunteered to reach out to the Interim JDEI Director to see if they can provide information on specific training on police oversight committees or anything related. 2024 Annual Report. Anne asked subcommittee members to email her if they are interested in volunteering to work on the annual report which will be discussed during the next meeting. Notice letter to complainant. Anne explained that she receives a copy of the letter which is sent after PCRS reviews the matter. Joey asked if everyone could receive a copy of the letter. and suggested redacting the complainant information before sharing it. The committee also discussed whether to send a letter to the complainants ahead of PCRS meetings where the complaint will be considered. Anne offered to draft a letter for review at the next meeting. 7:16 Motion was made to enter into Executive Session pursuant to 1 M.R.S. Sec. 405(6)(F) to discuss IA2024-015 and IA2024-016 by Gino and seconded by Kay. Passage 5-0. 8:01 Out of Executive Session. Page 30  Motion was made by Joey to find that IA2024-015 was fair; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-015 was found to be fair. Motion was made by Kay to find that IA2024-015 was objective; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-015 was found to be objective. Motion was made by Gino to find that IA2024-015 was timely; seconded by Kay. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-015 was found to be timely. Motion was made by Gino to find that IA2024-015 was thorough; seconded by Kay. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-015 was found to be thorough. Motion was made by Xavier to find that IA2024-016 was fair; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-016 was found to be fair. Motion was made by Kay to find that IA2024-016 was objective; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-016 was found to be objective. Motion was made by Joey to find that IA2024-016 was timely; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-016 was found to be timely. Motion was made by Kay to find that IA2024-016 was thorough; seconded by Gino. Passage: 5-0, IA2024-016 was found to be thorough. No public comment was offered. The committee decided that PPD staff will leave executive sessions five minutes before the end of each executive session. The committee proposed the following topics for next month’s meeting: Approval of amended December 11, 2024 minutes Review draft PCRS introduction letter to complainants Update on the new Civil Police Review Board ordinance Tentative update about available trainings 2024 Annual Report development The committee discussed that the SOPs outlining the use of force committee and incident review process would be included in agenda backup materials. 8:17 Motion was made by Joey and seconded by Xavier to adjourn. Passage 5-0. Page 31 Subject: Notification of Case Review by the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee Dear [Complainant's Name], I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to inform you that your case has been referred to the Police Citizen Review Subcommittee (“PCRS”) for review. The PCRS is an independent body comprised of city residents dedicated to promoting accountability, fairness, and transparency in the review of police investigations into citizen complaints. The subcommittee’s primary duties include: • Reviewing the process of police investigations of citizen complaints to ensure they are thorough, objective, fair, and timely. • Reporting to the City Manager on the results of its reviews. • Offering recommendations for improving police investigation processes, policies, and training, and enhancing public confidence in the complaint investigation system. • Holding public hearings to receive community input on the police citizen complaint process. The PCRS will conduct a comprehensive review of your case and follow up with you once their review is complete. Additionally, as part of its commitment to transparency, the subcommittee holds monthly public meetings to discuss relevant matters. You are welcome to attend these meetings. Details about upcoming meetings, including dates, times, and locations, are posted on the City of Portland website at [insert correct link here]. Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention and for trusting the PCRS with this process. Should you have any immediate questions or require assistance, please don’t hesitate to reach out. Sincerely, ______________________ Page 32