Wicked Wordsmith

Stop, or I'll Shoot...And Shoot...And Shoot...By Lee Lofland

Recently, in New York City, a young man was shot to death by a group of plainclothes police officers. The man was enjoying a night out on the town. He was happy - he was having a good time with his friends, and was to be married the next day. He was celebrating his last night as a bachelor when his life abruptly ended.

The bridegroom and his friends were unarmed, yet it took police fifty bullets to stop this group of defenseless men. One officer alone fired 31 rounds - two full magazines holding 15 rounds each and the single bullet in the chamber that was sitting at ready for a quick pull of the trigger. Why did police fire so many rounds at this group of men?

I can speak with a little authority here, because I have been involved In a  pretty nasty shootout with an armed bank robber. During that particular incident, many rounds were exchanged between the robber, me and my fellow officers. A good deal of that gunfire was the result of what we now call contagious shooting, exactly like the type of shooting that occurred in the New York shooting.

One officer in our group fired a total of 46 rounds directly into his own police car, nearly destroying it. He fired nonstop, as fast as he could pull the trigger, one round after another. When he finished shooting, he was totally out of ammunition and the gunfight had just begun. The robber had only fired one round. There were many more to follow.

A contagious shooting begins when more than one police officer is involved in a potentially dangerous confrontation with some bad guys. The confrontation escalates quickly, and one of the officers fires his weapon during what he perceives as a life-threatening situation, usually after the bad guy shoots first or threatens the officer by brandishing a weapon of some sort. In the New York shooting, one officer apparently thought one of the men from the party was reaching for a weapon in the waistband of his pants, an action the officer perceived as a threat, so the officer fired his weapon.

An officer in this position probably has less than a second to react and defend himself. A mere second lost by taking the time to attempt to second-guess a threat could be all the time it takes for that officer to die.

During their police academy training, law enforcement officers are taught to react instinctively to threats such as the one described above. Instructors train rookie cops much like an animal trainer teaches a dog to site, or a trick pony to walk on its hind legs - by repetition. They practice the same action time and time again.

On the firing range, officers go through the motions: draw, point, shoot; draw, point, shoot. They do this over and over again until their reactions are instinctive, and that's why they are able to respond so quickly to deadly threats on the street.

When officers hear the sound of gunfire and see that one of their own is the source or the recipient of that gunfire, they automatically react and do what they're trained to do - stop the threat. So they answer the danger automatically by firing rounds of ammunition directly into what they see as the hazard, usually a criminal suspect.

When returning gunfire, cops are not taught to take the time to aim for any particular spot on the body. They're taught to shoot at the "center mass," meaning the center of whatever target they can see. That target may be the center of a bad guy's chest or - if he's partially hidden - it may only be the center of his head or even just the center of a gun-wielding hand.

After the first shot is fired, an officer's repetitive training takes over. This is part of the explanation for why every officer in the vicinity begins to shoot. In their subconscious minds they're trying to save themselves, their partners and any other people who may be in harm's way.

Contagious shooting is a culmination of many things. Instinct and reaction are only a small part of it. Another major factor in these shootings is the fact that police officers are human beings. They have feelings and emotions like everyone else, and one of those emotions is fear. Yes, police officers do get scared and fear is a great motivator for self preservation. And when cops think their lives are in danger, they shoot.

Police officers also develop tunnel vision during perilous times. Tunnel vision can occur when adrenaline causes the police officer to focus on a particular danger, making him keenly aware of that threat and making him shut out everything else around.

The combination of tunnel vision, a sudden rush of adrenaline, fear, excitement and acute sensory overload, the extremely close bond between police officers, and the repetitive police training can create robotic-like responses from cops. You've all heard the canned way they speak - "I exited my vehicle," "I gave pursuit," "I observed said suspect." Shooting situations are no different. Repetitive training creates almost real life RoboCops.

I know we need to solve the problem of contagious shooting, but I don't believe we should do as some people have suggested and reduce the amount of bullets that an officer carries. The answers to the problem that killed the New York bridegroom are too late in coming, but need to be found soon.

I've never met a police officer who wanted to shoot someone. In fact, most of them would risk their own life to save the life of another person. They're not superheroes and they're not bulletproof. They only have a split second to make a decision - and a lifetime to live with the results.

My thoughts and prayers go out to all those who fight the battle to keep us safe, both at home and abroad. I also hope the family of the man who was killed finds comfort during their time of sorrow and grief.

Until next time, I'm 10-7 out of service.

Lee Lofland is a retired detective and author of  The Book of Police Procedure and Investigation, which comes out in July 2007 from Writer's Digest Books. Visit his site at www.leelofland.com.

CS... I Don't Think So by Lee Lofland

Ah, to live the life of a crime-solving, danger-seeking CSI investigator. After all, the career offers the best in life—fancy clothes, expensive cars, fine dining, high-speed car chases, and high-tech, James-Bondish gadgets. We see all this on television, so it must be true, right?

Actually, the above description couldn’t be further from the truth. The sad reality is that most forensic laboratories don’t have enough funds or manpower to test all the evidence submitted to them by law-enforcement agencies. Many of the laboratories are understaffed, lack modern equipment, and are in sub par facilities.

Understaffed crime labs add to the already huge backlog of cases that many areas of the country are experiencing. A backlog of cases means evidence goes untested; untested evidence means that cases aren’t solved; unsolved cases mean bad guys are still out on the street committing crimes.

Television laboratories examine crime scene evidence immediately, and as a result cases are solved at breakneck speeds. Not so in real life. In August of this year, the Maryland State Police crime lab reported a shortage of twelve forensic scientists, a lack that caused much of their evidence to go untested. Another August report, this one from Jacksonville, Florida, states that the crime labs of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement have evidence from approximately 1,000 cases on hold, waiting to be examined by their forensic scientists.

A study conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2005 shows that Tennessee’s crime labs are among the most backlogged laboratories in the country. In fact, the same report indicates that a typical crime lab has an average monthly backlog of approximately 400 cases. The 351 publicly funded laboratories in the U.S. ended the year 2002 with a backlog of over 500,000 requests for evidence examination.

Television shows us scientists who work almost exclusively on DNA evidence, firearm comparison, and blood and trace evidence analysis. Actually, scientists and other specialists who work in these laboratories spend only about 5% of their time examining DNA evidence (which by the way, normally takes a minimum of three days to examine, not the fifteen or twenty minutes TV suggests). The rest of their time is spent examining and testing other evidence, such as narcotics and fingerprints, with narcotics being the most often examined piece of evidence in nearly all crime labs.

A backlog in a forensic laboratory slows the entire judicial system. Criminals who are incarcerated while awaiting trial must often remain behind bars until the testing of the evidence from their crime-scenes is complete. This delay often results in continuances of their trials over and over again. The costs for this wait-time can be staggering. Attorneys and judges schedule court cases and police officers, witnesses, and other experts are often subpoenaed for those cases only to find out the case has been rescheduled. The list goes on.

Actors on CSI shows depict the life of crime-scene investigators as action-packed. In reality most of their time is spent in a well-lit (not darkened like we see on TV) laboratory or office. Most CSI technicians are not sworn police officers. They don’t question suspects, they don’t chase bad guys, and they don’t carry firearms. And, they don’t drive Hummers!

A real-life crime-scene investigator has an enormous responsibility. They are sometimes the people who discover the identity of a serial killer or a pedophile. Their jobs are an integral part of law-enforcement, but they’re not magic, and they shop at the bargain stores just like you and me.

If you want to see real police work on TV, do yourself a favor and tune in to a rerun of the Andy Griffith Show. Andy and Barney…now there were two top-notch CSI folks.

Until next time, I’m 10-7, out of service.

Lee Lofland is a retired detective and author of  The Book of Police Procedure and Investigation, which comes out in July 2007 from Writer's Digest Books. Visit his site at www.leelofland.com.