The FORCE BEHIND CATOCommand+and+Out...Spring 2014 CATOnews 5 The FORCE BEHIND CATO SID HEAL PRESIDENT (909) 732-8325 [email protected] R.K. MILLER (714) 363-1569 [email protected]

Spring 2014 CATOnews 3

Contents Spring 2014

President’s Message ................................................ 6

Chaplain’s Corner ...................................................... 9

In Command and Out of Control .......................... 10

The Making of an Expert Witness ........................ 14

K9 Deployment from an APV ................................ 18

High Stress Tabletop .............................................. 22

News Tracker ........................................................... 27

ADVERTISER INDEX

TCI ....................................................2

Gracie ...............................................4

Robotex ...........................................7

Atlantic Signal ................................8

Canine Liability ............................ 13

Chang Industries ......................... 13

511 ................................................ 16

Code Red Headsets ...................... 26

Patriot Ordnance Factory .......... 28

Cal Tac ........................................... 35

Lenco ............................................ 36

ABOUT THE COVER: Members of the Lompoc Police Department SWAT team keep an eye on an occupant in a vehicle during a drill at the Allan Hancock College Public Safety Training Facility in Lompoc. PHOTO: MIKE ELIASON

22

18

14

10


The FORCE BEHIND CATO

SID HEALPRESIDENT

(909) 732-8325

[email protected]

R.K. MILLER(714) [email protected]

RANDY WINN VICE PRESIDENT

(916) [email protected]

GENE RAMIREZ(213) 624-6900 [email protected]

BOB BENTON TREASURER (760) 839-4767rbenton@ci. escondido.ca.us

BILL LEWISe: [email protected]

ED PECISSECRETARY


SCOTT [email protected]

KEN HUBBSDIRECTOR OF TRAINING


BOARD OF DIRECTORS

REGION 1— R.K. MILLER Lt., Huntington Beach Police Dept. (ret.), e: [email protected]

REGION 1A—BILL LEWIS II Sgt., Oxnard Police Dept. (ret.), e: [email protected]

REGION 2— GARY ELLIOTT Lt., Solano Co. Sheriffs, e: [email protected]

SAL DIMERCURIO Sgt., Brentwood Police Dept., e: [email protected]

REGION 3—BRIAN BARNER Sgt., Redding Police Department, e: [email protected]

REGION 4—RANDY WINN Sgt., Sacramento Co. Sheriff’s Dept., e: [email protected]

REGION 5—JASON SALAZAR Capt., Visalia PD,

e: [email protected]

MATT ALEXANDER Sgt., Fresno Co. Sheriffs, e: Matthew.Alexander@ fresnosheriff.org

REGION 6—CHRIS BOYD Sgt., Carlsbad PD, e: [email protected]

The Official Publication of the California Association of Tactical Officers.The CATO News is published quarterly for the benefit of association members. Chief Editor—Ed PecisManaging Editor—Dan BurgerArt Director—Daniel DiPinto

The California Association of Tactical Officers is a non-profit membership organization which provides educational services and encourages enhancements in professionalism and proficiency among law enforcement special weapons teams and personnel.

The views expressed in any article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the California Association of Tactical Officers.

CATO encourages articles from both members and non-members. Author guidelines can be obtained by emailing [email protected]. The same email address can be used for general inquiries regarding magazine business topics.

Copyright 2014 California Association of Tactical Officers.

REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVESREGION 1Los AngelesOrange

REGION 1ASanta BarbaraSan Luis ObispoVentura

REGION 2AlamedaContra CostaDel NorteHumboldtLakeMarinMendocinoMontereyNapaSan BenitoSan MateoSanta ClaraSanta CruzSolanoSonoma

REGION 3ButteColusaGlennLassenModocPlumasShastaSierraSiskiyouSutterTehamaTrinityYuba

REGION 4AlpineAmadorCalaverasEl DoradoNevadaPlacerSacramentoSan JoaquinStanislausTuolumneYolo

REGION 5FresnoKernKingsMaderaMariposaMercedTulare

REGION 6ImperialInyoMonoRiversideSan BernardinoSan Diego

REGIONS BY COUNTY

Spring 2014 CATOnews 76 CATOnews Spring 2014

President’s Message

BY SID HEALPRESIDENTCALIFORNIA ASSOCIATIONOF TACTICAL OFFICERS

Imagine awakening one morn-ing with stomach pains so severe that you seek medical help. At the doctor’s office,

you first fill out the usual forms. When the doc-tor meets you, he briefly glances at the forms and performs a cursory exam, then assures you that your ailment is commonplace and nothing of concern. As you leave, you are struck by the conspicu-ous lack of any diplomas, certificates, licenses or other credentials that are so common in all doc-tors’ offices and begin to feel unease at the seemingly cavalier attitude that has led to the diagnosis and recommended treatment, and so decide to seek a second opinion.

Upon arriving at the second doc-tor’s office, you again fill out the usual forms and are escorted to a waiting room. While there, an assistant takes your blood pressure, pulse and tem-perature and then asks you questions on your general state of health and current symptoms. When the doctor arrives, she asks questions like: “Is the pain sharp or dull? Is it steady or throbbing? Where, precisely, is it? Does it occur at certain times and not at others? When did it first appear?” Those are followed by a host of similar questions. She then asks for a blood and urine sample for testing. While

awaiting the results, you notice she has her medical licenses prominently posted, along with diplomas, degrees and certifi-cates for internal medicine.

Regardless of the diagnosis and recommended treatment, which of these two scenarios instills confidence?

Sadly, the first scenario is a virtual model for tactical opera-tions and disaster respons-es in American law en-forcement. There are few questions asked because there is little or no under-standing of what is actually unfolding. The common symptoms identify a situ-ation like barricaded or fleeing suspect, high-risk warrant service or active shooter. Each comes with common protocols for correction.

Just as notably, there is no method for determin-ing a true expert from one who simply claims the title.

Consider our medical analogy when the first doctor recommends the standard remedy for stomach pains without further examination only to discover later that the symptoms for indigestion are nearly identical for the onset of stomach cancer. When caught early, stomach cancer (and many other types) is nearly 100 percent curable, but delayed diagnosis increases the risk of dying. Or, what would you think if the doctor said, “I don’t know what this is but I’ll be sure in 90 days?”

Applying the “school solution,” without any knowledge of whether it is appropriate, makes us all the functional equivalent of witch doctors. Whether it is magic potions and chants in cur-ing disease or platitudes and smoke and mirrors in handling tactical operations, our ability to apply bona fide science for informed planning and decisions is decidedly lacking.

In the conventional understanding, we can all legitimately claim we are professionals. After all, we get paid for what we do. The problem is that there is no way to distinguish those who are truly experts from those who simply draw their pay. It is no wonder, then, that juries are easily confused. A plaintiff’s “expert” who provides his credentials seems as credible to a lay jury as the actual decision maker who spent great personal effort in mastering a craft and

anguished over an appropriate course of action. Likewise, all court experts cite their “experience” as one of the factors that establishes their expertise. Many cite the number of years in a particular field, which may sound impressive, but ignores the possibility of tenure with nearly no actual experience.

None of us would choose a doctor solely because she was getting paid as a member of the medical community. We want demonstrated competence before entrusting our health, and even our lives, to a doctor’s decisions. We expect a doc-tor to be current in the latest treatments and knowledgeable in new developments. If he or she specializes, we also expect advanced knowledge in the specializa-tion--obstetrics, orthopedics, cardiol-ogy and the like. Recognition by other professionals for meeting the criteria and standards of their discipline with the requisite knowledge, skills and abilities to adequately perform in a particular field is commonplace. We identify these profes-sional credentials in the form of diplomas, certificates, licenses and other credentials.

The consummate professionals, however, not only meet and exceed all the criteria, but excel in all aspects of the profession and personal conduct. They are the inspirational examples who have a passion for excellence and who strive for the flawless. Their personal creed is based on best practices, not minimum standards. These people are not only interested in being the best of their pro-fession but in improving the profession itself. If cancer was threatening your life, wouldn’t this type of person be the doc-

tor you would prefer? So it is with tacti-cal operations and disaster responses.

As in medicine, tactical shortcomings are measured in lives, and so it is with great excitement that I announce the CATO Board of Directors unanimously voted to adopt a five-year plan to develop a certification program to identify experts in the domestic law enforcement tactical community. This project will be the first of its kind and will seek to identify and prepare bona fide experts who are not only recognized by their professional colleagues, but by courts and laypeople alike, as fully capable in performing the essential skills, functional roles and leadership requirements for domestic law enforcement special operations. Certification will focus on three specific areas: specialized skills, such as chemical agents, first aid, breaching, surveillance, and so forth; functional roles, such as ne-gotiations, entry, canine, TEMS, and the like; and in broader roles such as opera-tor, supervision and management.

The full proposal is available on the CATO website at: www.catonews.com

These thoughts are better and more thoroughly expressed in the book, Going Pro: The Deliberate Practice of Professionalism, by Tony Kern. I highly recommend this book to all tactical commanders and policy makers.

• Did you know that the oldest known hostage recovery operation occurred about 4,000 years ago and is re-corded in the Bible? (14th Chapter of Genesis) The “after action report” describes the intelligence obtained from an escaped hostage and the subsequent rescue operation by using an elite force of 318 trained men in a surprise, two-pronged, night assault, which successfully freed the captives. What lessons might be gleaned for modern operations?

• Did you know that automatic weapons have two commonly used rates of fire? These are the “maximum sus-tained rate,” which identifies that maxi-mum number of rounds per minute that can be mechanically fired indefinitely, and the “maximum effective rate,” which identifies the number of rounds typically fired in combat conditions.

• The first recorded use of a “flash-bang” was July 3rd, 1976 by the Israelis during the successful hostage rescue at Entebbe, Uganda.

FOCUS ON PROFESSIONALISM

Officers can never act with confidence until they are masters of their profession.

HENRY KNOX 1750-1806(UNITED STATES FIRST SECRETARY OF WAR)

TACTICAL TRIVIA

BY SID HEAL

8 CATOnews Spring 2014 Spring 2014 CATOnews 9

BY PASTOR GUNNAR HANSON

First and foremost, I am very thankful to be given this opportunity to write my first article for the

new “Chaplain’s Corner” section of the CATO News. I’m not a law enforcement officer, nor have I ever been a SWAT officer. As a former Navy SEAL, I understand and respect the exclusiveness of certain fraternal orders. So thank you for allowing an outsider like me to write an article like this for your publication.

I became a SEAL as a young man, a kid really, with no spiritual back-ground. I became a Christian after I got into some trouble early in my time as a SEAL. To say “some trouble” means that I was charged with resist-ing and evading arrest after a night of drinking. It almost cost me my career as a SEAL. I was devastated because being a SEAL was my whole identity. Thankfully, my career was spared, but only after a very turbulent year. In the midst of this season, I came to faith and became a Christian.

Becoming a Christian as a SEAL led to another crisis of sorts. I wasn’t sure how faith fit with the culture of the warrior class—both within the brotherhood and wrestling with theological implications of using force on others. I’ll never forget my first real-world combat mission as a new Christian. I remember locking the magazine into my MP-5 thinking, “How’d you get yourself into this one, Gunnar?” At the time, I wasn’t sure what God thought about what I was about to do. Was God OK with me roughing up another human being,

or even killing someone if the situa-tion called for it? Regardless of what God thought, I would carry out the mission because I wouldn’t let my brothers in arms down in combat. I would have to wrestle through my questions later.

As a pastor who was a former Navy SEAL, I’m often asked how individuals reconcile their faith with their lives as law enforcement officers or soldiers. I believe the struggles I faced are very common among warriors regardless of branch of service or law enforcement.

I would like to suggest two very brief thoughts:

God endorses the warrior. Throughout the Scriptures, God places His blessing on the warrior class. There is evil in the world and God has given His blessing to the warrior who restrains evil in protect-ing the innocent. There is no clearer example than Romans 13:3-4, where it is explained that God has ordained human government to restrain evil on His behalf. I see nothing in the Scrip-tures suggesting that those of faith must be pacifists and forbidding them from serving in law enforcement. But with this endorsement, the warrior is not exempted from accountability.

God cares about the integrity of the warrior. Great integrity is required by those who serve in the law enforcement field. This is espe-cially true of elite units like a SWAT team. You’ve been given a great trust of authority as a law enforcement officer. There’s an interesting story of a number of law enforcement of-ficers (or military as the lines were blurred then) who respond to John the Baptist’s warning to repent and

get right with God in Luke 3:14. They essentially asked what they should do to get right with God. The first thing that has always stood out to me was that John did not tell them to lay down their arms and walk away from their vocation. John’s response to them was three-fold concerning their integrity of heart. He instructed the following: 1) Don’t extort money from people. 2) Do not make false accusa-tions. 3) Be content with your wages.

It is important to understand that you don’t operate on your own be-half; you are under a greater author-ity that requires great integrity of character.

I’d like to conclude with an obscure verse in the Bible. First Peter 2:17 says, “Honor all people, love the brother-hood, fear God, honor the king.” Did the phrase “love the brotherhood” catch your attention? It caught mine. For those of us who have served, or are serving, in special units like a SEAL or SWAT team, we love a brotherhood that is hard to describe to those who have never been a part of it. To guard one’s integrity from within a special unit like this requires that we under-stand we are accountable to a higher source. This is the importance of fearing God as a warrior—for we each will give an account for our actions. My prayer is that God would help you to live out your calling with peace and integrity of character. J

PASTOR GUNNAR HANSON is a former U.S. Navy SEAL. He volunteers as a San Diego Sheriff Chaplain and Escondido Police Chaplain and is the senior pastor of Valley Baptist Church in Valley Center, California. You can read more about him and his inspirational beliefs at www.sealpastor.com

THE INTEGRITY OF THE WARRIOR

Chaplain’s Corner


BY FRED LELAND

An organization that tries to be in control of everything will not be successful in crisis. In

our efforts to bring order to chaos, the overwhelming focus is to gain control of everything possible. We attempt to control the first responders: the police, fire, EMS and the by-standers who take initiative to help in the response. We in-

tend to control the victims and the bad guys. We angle to control the media that are intent on getting the story. We wish to control the response from fami-lies and friends, who are overwhelmed with emotion and fear. We endeavor to collect and gather information that may shed light on the situation and those involved. We then analyze the informa-tion and distribute it to those who need to know. We plan to control everything in an instant even as we are maneuver-

ing initially to contact the problem, mobilize our resources and set up our long term responses and command and control systems.

In doing so, we are stifling the ef-fectiveness of our responses because of our efforts to control.

Quite frankly, leaders in law en-forcement must become much more comfortable with being in command and out of control. This does not mean we have a free reign and anyone

responding to a crisis does whatever he pleases. There needs to be a clear mission, intent and focus. The need for command arises from—and varies with—the size complexity and differ-entiation of a law enforcement agency and the size and scope of the crisis. A one-man response requires no com-mand, at least not in the sense that a 100-man, mutual-aid response does.

The exercise of command involves a great many things, not all of which

can be clearly separated from each other. There is, in the first place, the gathering of information on friendly forces and their response, a problem that we should not underestimate. We must also gather information on our adversary and on external factors such as weather and the environment or terrain. One man in command cannot have control over all these colliding factors.

Crisis is not a linear cause-and-

effect situation. It has a non-linear and cascading effect that can only be influenced, shaped and reshaped by rapid and sound observations, orienta-tions, decisions and actions--by people on the ground, closest to the action who are processing what’s happening in real time. We saw the effect of being in command and out of control, at the initial response to the Boston Mara-thon bombing last year. Immediately after the explosions, people responded without bosses telling them what to do and where to go; they just did what they knew how to do. Yes, they were prepared for emergency responses--a command post was part of the pre-race planning. But they were preparing for marathon injuries and illnesses, not a terrorist attack. Regardless, that initial response was close to flawless and no bosses directed a thing.

This type of adaptable response illustrates the success of having a common goal, a common mission and robust preparation. This is in contrast to a leader attempting to “puppet mas-ter” all the people into the right places, rather than preparing his team before-hand and having the faith and trust to set them free to do what they know how to do.

Being in command and out of con-trol is rooted in organizations that have developed a high level of mutual trust. Mutual trust is the internal harmony that converts a mob into a team. It un-derlies all components of learning orga-nizations and lubricates the response system so it can work through real-time problems in a timely and effective way. We have seen the power of mutual trust win wars and it has a similarly pro-found effect in other human outcomes. It’s too important a concept for policing to ignore.

“… the first thing I told our staff is that we would be in command and out of control. By that, I mean that the overall guidance and the intent were provided by me and the senior leader-ship, but the forces in the field wouldn’t depend on intricate orders coming from the top. They were to use their own initiative and be innovative as they went forward …”

—General Paul Van riPer, uS Marine coMMander

IN COMMAND AND OUT OF CONTROLCOMPLEX AND CHAOTIC EVENTS require adaptive interaction and an adaptive response

PHO

TO B

Y D

ANIE

L D

IPIN

TO


“SWAT supervisors become ‘K9 supervisors’ when a K9 team is de-ployed under their supervision during a real-world operation.”

CANINE LIABILITY 360Canine Liability 360 is the most comprehensive liability seminar now

being offered to K9 handlers, supervisors and SWAT team leaders (from teams that integrate with a police dog) to prepare them for their potential

“legal defense” in the event of litigation. Are you prepared?

Contact Sergeant Bill Lewis II (Retired) for more information at [email protected] or visit http://tacticalk9usa.com/canine-liability-360

Only open systems can adapt adequately to change, so an organ-ism needs to maintain interaction with its environment if it is to sur-vive, writes Frans P.B. Osinga, in his book “Science Strategy and War: The Strategic Theory of John Boyd.” This open systems theory, when applied to the street or to conflict and crisis response, means we are open to con-tinued learning--exploring the current situation with all our senses and experimenting with tactical options rather than solely applying solutions to text book scenarios. This requires responders be adaptable and able to make effective change to an altered salutation. Leaders must understand that attempting to control responses hinders adaptability, creates friction and slows decision making which is detrimental to effective responses.

Organizations such as police de-partments must take responsibility for how they lead, educate and train their officers if they are to thrive in the chaos and uncertainty of crisis and conflict. No longer is the policy- and procedural-driven disposition that has engulfed policing over the past 25 years good enough at handling the adaptive challenges we face in crisis and conflict. Especially in the initial stages, when uncertainty and chaos are creating disorder at its great-est level, we need actively thinking responders who possess the explorer and experimental mindset. We are starting to see our profession evolv-ing ever so slowly toward this under-standing.

The California POST steering committee “Edge of Chaos” concept definition of crisis response is to: “Improve the Incident Commander’s ability to function within the ‘gold-en hour’ of critical incidents. This ‘golden hour’ is defined as the chaotic stage of an incident in which the crisis is still fluid, meaningful information is difficult to obtain and situational awareness seemingly impossible to establish. In this initial period, it is difficult to determine how to set mul-tiple people, groups and agencies on a path towards resolution.”

Ultimately this group’s focus is about leadership and developing the ability to make good decisions in

extreme conditions while applying intuitive, sensible strategies aimed at working through chaos and toward the implementation of productive op-erational incident command. In other words they are beginning to develop first responders who are indeed prob-lem solvers by teaching them how to think instead of telling them what to think.

This is important definition be-cause there are already ideas on how to create and nurture adaptability in the changing face of crisis and con-flict; it’s described as adaptive leader-ship. The theories of Col. John Boyd, in his briefing titled “Organic Design for Command and Control” advocates the type of command structure and command climate focused on leader-ship and appreciation that inspires unity and cohesion. I describe this as mutual trust. It’s what I believe will help police thrive in complex and cha-otic situations.

The only tools we have right now to solve these complex situations are the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the Incident Com-mand System (ICS). ICS/NIMS are top-down oriented and rigid despite the effort and mantra that it is grown from the ground up and meant to be flexible. All too often responders and incident commanders are overly con-cerned with the process of ICS and setting up structures (command posts, staging areas, rally points, etc.), which affect the fluidity of the initial course of action.

“Each episode of crisis is the tem-porary result of a unique combination of circumstances, presenting a unique set of problems and requiring origi-nal solution. Nevertheless no episode can be viewed in isolation. Rather, each episode merges with those that precede and follow it, shaped by the former and shaping conditions of the latter, creating a continuous, fluctuat-ing flow of activity chock-full with fleeting opportunities and unfore-seen events.” That’s a quote from the USMC Warfighting Manual.

Because crisis and conflict are fluid phenomenon, response to crisis and conflict requires flexibility of thought. Success depends in large part on the ability to adapt--to proactively shape

changing events to our advantage--as well as to react quickly to constantly changing conditions.

Before applying the ICS structure, first responders can help resolve or minimize the crisis by gathering real-time information that reduces the uncertainty and disorder that attracts the right course of action. Beyond that, first responders can create and nurture adaptability throughout the organization. Not everyone has the skill set to do that, but it can be de-veloped and influenced with the right training and education and adaptive leadership.

What can we distill from our cur-rent culture to make people successful at handling unconventional crisis? What skills should we nurture?

The theory to help us in this arena is already out there. We need to adapt it to our culture. That takes hard work and time. We did not form the top-down leadership structures overnight, nor can we overnight change to a bottom-up culture. Engaging others in developing new values and prin-ciples evolved over time in an effort to continuously improve step by step, is what it will take.

ORGANIC DESIGN FOR COMMAND AND CONTROLBoyd proposed a set of command and control thinking principles that he included in his “Organic Design for Command and Control” briefing.

The fundamentals he emphasized include:

• The insight and vision to unveil adversary plans and action as well as to foresee your own goals and appropriate plans and ac-tions.

• The focus and direction to achieve some goal or aim.

• The adaptability to cope with uncertain and ever changing circumstances.

• The security to remain unpredict-able.

As Boyd explains:“Without insight and vision there

can be no orientation to deal with both present and future. Without focus and direction, implied or explicit, there can

be neither harmony of effort nor initia-tive for vigorous effort. Adaptability implies variety and rapidity. Without variety and rapidity one can neither be unpredictable nor cope with chang-ing and unforeseen circumstances. Without security one becomes predict-able, hence one loses the benefits of the above.”

When you are dealing with adap-tive challenges, which are what con-flict and crisis are made up of, there is no obvious answer to the question: “What is going on here?” Trying to define the problem at hand is a con-tentious act in itself. Leading through this uncertainty requires courage, te-nacity, and an experimental mind-set: You try things out, see what happens, and make changes accordingly. When you adopt an experimental/explorer mind-set, you actively commit to an intervention you have designed while not becoming wedded to it. That way, if it misses the mark, you do not feel compelled to defend it, and instead you are adaptable. This mind-set also opens you to other, unanticipated pos-sibilities or other tactical options.

Being in command and out of con-trol requires adaptive leadership and bottom-up decision making by highly trained and developed professionals. It’s a command system that will allow you to foster harmony and initiative while maintaining variety and rapidity to exploit opportunities to get things done. Unfolding conflict situations require leaders be in command and out of control … are you?

Stay Oriented! J

FRED T. LELAND, JR. is the Founder and Principal Trainer of LESC: Law Enforcement & Security Consulting (www.lesc.NET). He is the author of “Adaptive Leadership Handbook: Innovative Ways to Teach and Develop Your People, written for police and security professionals, published in January 2014, and is available on Amazon. In addition to his work with LESC, Fred Leland is an active Lieutenant with the Walpole (MA) Police Department. He previously worked as a deputy with the Charlotte County (FL) Sheriff’s Department and before that spent six years with the United States Marines including as a squad leader in Beirut, Lebanon. Leland is an accomplished

trainer with more than 28 years’ experience teaching law enforcement, military and security professionals. His programs of instruction include handling dynamic encounters; threat assessment; non-verbal communications; decision making under pressure; evolving threats; violence prevention; firearms; use of force; officer created jeopardy and adaptive leadership. He is also a 2004 graduate of the FBI National Academy Class 216, and a current instructor for the Massachusetts Municipal Police Training Committee. Outcomes based training and education (OBTE) is his approach to creating and nurturing decision makers to observe, orient, decide and act while considering consequences.

Resources for the article:

Science Strategy and War: The Strategic theory of John Boyd by Frans P.B. Osinga, available on Amazon

United States Marine Corps Warfighting Manual, available on Amazon

Raising the Bar: Creating and Nurturing Adaptabil-ity in the Changing Face of War by Don Vandergriff, available on Amazon

Col John Boyd’s briefings available at http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Boyd-Papers.html


EXPERT WITNESS QUALIFICATIONSBecause the expertise and competency of the expert witness is tested by not only an adversary but also by the court, his or her professional credentials must be impeccable. For this reason, attorneys will usually scrutinize a witness’ professional creden-tials when selecting their experts; inquiring into such factors as the expert’s education, professional licenses and certificates, membership in professional societies, academic and teach-ing appointments, publications authored if any, publications subscribed to or read regularly by the expert, experience in the field, miscellaneous professional achievements, personal information, and bias4. The expertise should correspond with the relevant subject matter as precisely as possible. Accordingly, attorneys will usually take proper measures to verify their expert witness’ professional credentials when the resources are avail-able to them.

In light of the severe scrutiny placed on expert witnesses, anyone interested in becoming an expert should take steps for preparation as soon as possible. Expert witnesses must accept responsibility for the quality of their instruction, the quality of their writ-ten documentation or records, test-ing, and their knowledge. Because expert witness resumes are essential for attorneys to perform the neces-sary credential check, a current resume is mandatory. It must be a reflection of positions held under employment history, educational background, honors and awards re-ceived, articles or books published, videos produced, any other profes-sional credits, training programs attended, certifications, training programs taught, and any member-ship in professional associations. However, when preparing your expert witness resume, it is impor-tant to never overstate credentials. In fact, it is often better to understate than overstate.

Potential expert witnesses should also be prepared to explain any “skeletons” or “daggers” hiding in their professional pedi-grees. They will be expected to maintain their records and stay current in their particular fields. This can be shown by engage-ment in research and major studies, knowledge of any recent important case law (e.g., Graham v. Connor, Tennessee v. Gar-ner, and Monell v. Department of Social Service) and department policy and procedures and any recent changes, contributions to professional publications, and membership in professional organizations.

Lastly, skills can be honed by watching other expert witness-es testify, reviewing depositions, debriefing following deposition and trial testimony, networking with other experts, and consult-ing with law enforcement attorneys.

EXPERT WITNESS SELECTIONAlthough attorneys usually strive to retain the most highly qualified expert available at a reasonable cost, attorneys will also consider a number of other factors when making their final

decision5. In selecting an expert from among many qualified persons, attorneys usually assign the most importance based on a particular purpose6. The other factors to be considered depend on the particular purpose for which expert assistance is sought7.

If the expert is to be a trial witness, he or she must be suf-ficiently qualified so that any testimony offered will be deemed admissible8. Moreover, the expert witness’ qualifications must mirror as closely as possible the issues upon which testimony is sought. . For example, if a particular firearms specialty is at issue in the case, the expert witness should be highly qualified in that area of firearms specialization9.

In addition to having proper qualifications, an expert witness should have an appearance and demeanor that the jury and judge can relate to and not be alienated. Successful experts are also able to speak about technical issues in a way that is easy for lay people in the jury to understand10. Each expert witness who is retained will be evaluated not only for his or her ability to work side-by-side with attorneys and communicate effectively to

a jury and judge, but also for relevant knowledge and practical experience warranted by the facts. For example, in addition to a specialist firearms expert, it may be necessary for the attorney to further consult with a human factors expert or an accident reconstruction expert with regard to the role that human error played in the subject incident11.

On the other hand, if an attorney reasonably does not expect to have to call his or her expert witness to the stand, the demeanor and appearance of the expert are insignificant12. In cases where experts are strictly used as consultants to attorneys in the pre-trial phase of the lawsuit, attorneys will strive to strike a proper balance between an expert’s qualifications to

assist and the cost of the expert. In many cases, an expert who is not sufficiently qualified to provide trial testimony, but whose time can be purchased at a less expensive rate, renders ad-equate expert assistance to attorneys in conducting simulations, examinations, or tests13 and with discovery14. Accordingly, there are numerous factors that are taken into account in the selection process of an expert witness.

EXPERT WITNESS CREDIBILITY Why does a jury believe one expert witness over the other? The jury is seeking out a credible, trustworthy expert to ob-jectively explain why police officers take the actions they do, including commands given, positions taken, and tactics and techniques employed. Potential experts will benefit significantly in remembering the following general tips for minimizing damage to one’s credibility with the jury or judge. First and foremost, experts should never lie, or bend or extend their testimony for any reason, regardless of whether they support police officers. It is equally important for experts to concede a well-made, factual point and never under-

BY EUGENE P. RAMIREZ & ADOREE YU

Discovering what it takes to be an expert wit-ness is not the hard part. Preparing yourself to become an expert witness is where the work begins. And the first thing you need to

do is ask yourself the question: “Do you have what it takes?First off, what is an expert witness? The fast and easy

answer is a person possessing more knowledge on a specific subject than a layperson. Expert witnesses pro-vide expert testimony regarding matters that the jury has insufficient personal knowledge. The goal is to provide information that allows the jury members to make the necessary inferences that leads to an intelligent conclusion

on the material issues in dispute1. The expert has acquired knowledge from unique experience not typically shared by the general population2. That level of knowledge must be at least equivalent to that of his or her professional peers to qualify as an expert.

Courts exercise broad discretion in determining wheth-er a particular expect is qualified to provide expert testi-mony. In reaching its determination, the court will consider the witness’ knowledge, skill, practical experience, train-ing, or education in the relevant subject matter. Generally though, expert testimony is regarded as merely advisory so it is the jury, not the court, which ultimately assesses the expert witness’ credibility and determines his or her persuasiveness.

THE MAKING OF AN EXPERT WITNESS

EXPERTISE and COMPETENCE blend with CREDIBILITY and TRUSTWORTHINESS

... when preparing your expert

witness resume, it is important to never overstate

credentials. In fact, it is

often better to understate than

overstate.


estimate the jury. Arrogance and bias never go unnoticed by the jury; keep in mind that if the jury does not like you, they will not hear what you have to say on stand. Further, expert witnesses should maintain eye contact with the jury through-out testimony. On direct examination, experts should look at the questioning attorney when providing shorter answers. When providing longer answers, experts should make eye con-tact with the jury. On cross-exami-nation, experts should never look to police officers or the police officers’ attorneys for assistance or approval or seek feedback in front of the jury. Experts taking the stand need to be wary of compound questions. There are often nasty surprises, tactically hidden in the way the questions are phrased by opposing counsel, so it is important to request a breakdown of any compound question before responding.

In preparation for a trial, the expert witness should review ques-tions with the attorney and shape the responses to objections and interruption by opposing counsel. Practicing the use of common expe-riences to explain technical issues is also highly beneficial for com-municating effectively with the jury (e.g., analogizing the projectile impact on plaster to a cue ball striking a rack of billiards).

Generally, an expert’s expression of belief is not consid-ered a mere guess, conjecture, or speculation, but rather is considered a positive, qualified opinion. On the other hand, an expert’s opinion that is utterly lacking in factual support will be considered nothing more than a guess15 and will likely not be admitted as evidence. An expert witness is not permitted to give an opinion, which is a mere guess. Nor is an expert per-mitted to give an opinion based on mere speculation or con-jecture16. Any opinion stated in terms of a “best guess” will be deemed an inadmissible opinion by the court. Although courts have held that expert testimony is not speculative merely due to the fact that the expert used the phrase “I think” or “it is possible,” courts have also held that terms such as “perhaps” and “possibly” indicate conjecture or speculation rather than a qualified opinion17.

Like any other witness, an expert is permitted to testify as to facts of which he or she has personal knowledge. However, unlike other witnesses, the expert is permitted to testify even if he or she was only able to observe and assess the relevancy of those facts because of his or her unique skills or practical expe-rience. Further, only experts are permitted to respond to hypo-theticals, as well as offer opinions as to the applicable standard of care in the law enforcement community. An expert should be completely clear on hypotheticals and know all factors he or she wishes to incorporate into the expert testimony. An expert should also be prepared to deal with opposing counsel’s hypotheticals. Further, an expert should be prepared to discuss the training standard in the United States, State of California,

and other departments; officer survival training and principles, escalation/de-escalation of force; reaction time; use of force policy training; application of the use of force policy; and any changes in training or policy and the reasoning behind such changes. More importantly, to minimize any surprises, an ex-pert should be familiar with any prior testimony given and also be aware of his or her potential problem areas.

Hopefully this article was able to shed some light on what makes an expert witness and whether you have what it takes! J

EUGENE P. RAMIREZ is a founding member of the law firm Manning & Kass, Ellrod, Ramirez, Trester LLP. He serves as an advisor to several public entities on the issues of use of force, canine and SWAT issues and policies and procedures. He is also experienced in defending SWAT Teams in civil liability cases. He is an instructor on liability issues for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s Basic SWAT School and also an instructor for the California Association of Tactical Officers (CATO) and for the National Tactical Officers’ Association (NTOA). He is also a member of the CATO board of directors. He was a member of the State Attorney General’s Blue Ribbon SWAT Committee, and he was

a member of POST’s Executive Advisory Committee for SWAT Teams. He was a member of the LAPD Board of Inquiry, which examined LAPD SWAT operations. He is an approved California POST instructor. His email address is [email protected]

ADOREE YU is a law clerk for Manning & Kass, Ellrod, Ramirez, Trester LLP and a Whittier Law School J. D. candidate.

Resources for the article:

1. Fed. R. Evid. 704

2. 1 Expert Witness Checklists § 1:3 (3d ed.)

3. Id.



6. Id.

7. Id.

8. Fed. R. Evid. 702

9. See 1 Expert Witness Checklists § 1:128 (3d ed.); 3 Expert Witness Checklists § 15:11 (3d ed.)






15. 31A Am. Jur. 2d Expert and Opinion Evidence § 55

16. Id.

17. Id.

Generally, an expert’s

expression of belief is not

considered a mere guess, conjecture,

or speculation, but rather is considered a

positive, qualified opinion.


BY SGT. BILL LEWIS II (RETIRED)

Armored police vehicles have added an extra layer of defense for patrol-related deployments, res-

cues and tactical operations like never before. The ability to “get up close and personal” during an operation with

an armored vehicle, while providing a higher level of safety and position of advantage, is unparalleled.

I was invited by Integrated Tactical Concepts, a training company based in Santa Clarita, California, to attend a three-day “Tactical Armored Vehicle Operations” class they conducted in California so I could observe the train-ing. During the classroom portion on

the morning of day one, we had a brief discussion about the best ways to de-ploy a K9 team from the APV.

Throughout the three days, I watched and learned and also began evaluating the different ways that a police dog could be deployed from the APV. The APV continually proves to be a great tool, but just like every tool we acquire or latest tactic we consider,

it’s necessary to undergo the proper training before real-world deployments occur—especially when deploying with a police dog.

Experience has taught me that risk levels vary depending on factors such as changing environments, the control of the K9 and the police dog’s ability to search. Each of those factors can change within an operation in a split-second. Every dog searches a little differently based on its training, drive, experience, search area and the control of the handler. For these reasons, this article will not be a lesson plan how to specifically deploy the police dog using an APV. It is designed as a guideline for training that will prepare for deploy-ments under real-world circumstances.

Your training will depend on the ex-perience and skill level of you and your support team; together you will create training exercises and scenarios to introduce this tactic, allow you to evalu-

ate the dog’s performance and deter-mine the most effective ways to deploy safely. Each approach and strategy will be determined individually by the real estate you encounter – rural open area, rural forest, vacant flat land, residential driveway, public park, carport, apart-ment complex, parking lot, or “the alley from hell.”

GETTING COMFORTABLEBefore you begin, familiarize the dog with the inside of your APV and its oc-cupants. A part of your training should include some downtime in the APV—parked and driving—with the dog, handler and involved team members. As you might imagine, some police dogs are not comfortable in close quar-ters with other officers and can get a little restless and stressed when sitting on the floor of an APV crammed with officers and equipment--particularly during a long (and maybe bumpy) drive

or extended standby at a staging area. If your APV is really noisy, get your dog accustomed to the noise. In time, the dog should feel as comfortable within the APV as its own K9 car.

It’s important to choreograph and rehearse the exits from the APV many times during training and maybe a few times before each actual operation to make sure the handler, dog and team members are confident and comfortable before proceeding through the doors. When commanded, the dog should learn to exit on its own and behind of-ficers or operators exiting first. Depend-ing on the height of the APV, you may not want your dog to

K9 DEPLOYMENT FROM AN APV

Real-World Guidelines for COMBINING TWO USEFUL TOOLS

18 CATOnews Spring 2014

PHO

TO B

Y V

ENTU

RA C

OU

NTY

STA

R-RO

B VA

RELA

PHO

TO B

Y T

IM K

ELLE

Y

As the situation develops, risks are assessed and a specific area to be searched is determined. The handler and other officers should exit the APV and use it as their cover while the handler watches the dog and the officers provide cover and watch for a suspect.


muffled (not quite as bad as a gas mask) and, depending on the distance, the dog may not hear or understand the com-mands. The PA system could be used by the handler, but it might not be effective unless previous training proved other-wise. Another option allows operators to watch and report to the handler at the open back door (but still within the APV) so the handler can give louder com-mands without barriers.

The ability of the dog to search away from the handler for a short distance and/or a prolonged period of time is an essential tactic when using the APV if team members are confined within the APV. Handlers are encouraged to watch their dogs during a search whenever possible. It’s for the safety of the dog as well as the safety of others who may or may not be the suspect and it’s becom-ing more of a control and liability issue. Some dogs are reluctant to search when unable to see their handler. Your dog should be comfortable and productive when searching away from the handler and accompanied by the APV.

Depending on the search area and potential obstacles, a long line might be effective for some short-distance searches closer to the APV. However, the standard lines are usually 30 to 40 feet in length. You could attach two long lines or consider getting a long line that is minimally 100 feet in length.

OUTSIDE THE APVAs the situation develops, risks are assessed and a more specific area to be searched is determined, the handler and other officers should exit the APV and use it as their cover while the han-dler watches the dog and the officers provide cover and watch for a suspect.

The number of operators used as a contact team (or search team, cover team) depends on the situation and personnel available. The contact team should minimally consist of the han-dler and three officers or operators. Handlers would rather have an eight-person team under ideal circumstances. Areas of threat should be addressed – and the handler should ideally be watching the immediate area where the dog is searching, looking for any behavior changes that may indicate a suspect is nearby. A contact team may be supplemented with a pre-designated

arrest team who remain in the APV until a suspect is located. Or, the con-tact team may assume the role of arrest team if needed.

During training, the outside team (contact team) should walk around and assemble in the many locations next to and around the APV to get familiar with the various positions of cover based on a direction of the threat. The handler should move within the contact team to view the dog work if possible, but not get exposed to a potential threat.

The handler should be in a better position to give verbal commands when outside the APV. If the handler is not able to view the dog and verbal commands are necessary, other operators should be able to do so without delay. Recalls and returns to the handler and other operators should be practiced so that the dog becomes comfortable returning to the APV and doesn’t hesitate doing so. And, if your APV is noisy when its idling or being driven, practice some of your verbal commands and recalls outside the APV with the engine running.

The APV can be used for mobile and progressive searches by the dog with the dog in front of or to its side dur-ing training as the contact team walks alongside, maintaining cover and a visual of the dog.

If a suspect is located by the dog and a bite occurs, part of the training should include navigating the APV closer to the suspect and providing cover for the outside team during the approach “Verbal outs” being called from within and outside the APV as options should also be practiced during training.

When the APV can be driven up to or directly alongside a vehicle contain-ing a barricaded suspect, the ability to send the dog on a deployment behind cover from a close distance reduces the risks to the handler and cover officers when the opportunity is right and justi-fication appropriate.

Ideally, the positioning of the first (and maybe only) APV should be to the rear of a barricaded vehicle for three reasons minimally. 1) It forces the occu-pant to turn and look from the interior of the vehicle to the back instead of a front view. 2) It allows the team to pre-pare for a vehicle assault from the rear of the vehicle with or without the dog.

3) It provides the dog (and other team members) a better view of the occupant as doors are being opened in the event of a deployment with or without an im-mediate assault.

The APV can be driven onto the front lawn of a house where the front door may have been left opened or soon will be – forcibly or not – and the nose of the APV placed within feet of the entrance. The police dog can be de-ployed into the house if needed without unnecessarily exposing the handler and other operators and drastically reduc-ing the distance the dog will travel to prevent any roaming or misdirection that could occur en route.

Obviously, two APVs are better than one in some situations, but your agency budget (or recent grant) probably will not accommodate that type of invest-ment. Agencies with an APV should reach out to a neighboring agency with an APV to establish a reciprocal agree-ment that initiates a response by either agency with its APV upon request to support a tactical effort with two ar-mored vehicles – and conduct training together in advance.

After each training exercise or ac-tual deployment, it’s critical to debrief the event thoroughly with respect to the APV. What lessons did you learn? Did the angles of the APV and its positioning provide adequate cover for the officers outside? Did the police dog perform well outside the APV? How could you have done better as a team? And, if you learned that you could have performed better or think a safer tactic could have been used – discuss it – chalk it out – and then go physically practice, practice, practice.

If you have not trained or deployed a dog from an APV, you will realize there may be some initial challenges, but there are absolute benefits once you have mastered the tactic. J

SGT BILL LEWIS II retired from the Oxnard Police Department with more than 27 years of service. He was a K9 handler, K9 supervisor, and served on SWAT for more than 25 years. Lewis is currently a board member and Region 1A Representative for the California Association of Tactical Officers (CATO). He is the owner of TAC Team and facilitator for TacticalK9USA.com and TacticalDebriefs.com. He can be contacted at [email protected]

jump out each time in training – increas-ing the chances of injury. So, lifting and carrying the dog by other team mem-bers – not always the handler - from the back or side of the APV should be conducted as both a “social exercise” and injury-prevention application. You can use a muzzle, if necessary, when first introducing the concept.

There are two primary ways to deploy from an APV with the police dog: every one inside the APV (with the possible exception of an operator in the turret) or a contact team (handler and cover officers) working outside the APV. As a side note, it’s important the APV driver be an experienced team member and not learning to operate the APV for the first time.

INSIDE THE APVYou might be thinking a good way to observe and direct the dog for a search would be from the turret--by either

the handler or another operator--if the risk level and unknown location of the suspect makes it unsafe to be outside the APV. However, that assignment conflicts with the presence of a cover operator with a long gun for over watch responsibilities. And, unfortu-nately, there’s only room for one in the turret so the priority should normally be long gun cover, not watching the dog specifically. The turret operator could be used to verbally recall the dog without the responsibility of maintain-ing constant dog watch if directed by a team leader or the handler.

The ability to direct the dog toward a specific search area while controlling the distance is a challenge when send-ing the dog from within the APV. You may need the dog to search directly in front of the APV if the driver is not able to get a better angle for the initial deployment of the dog.

Repetitious training may be initially

required to assist in launching the dog left or right with or without a verbal command. Placing a decoy on the driver’s side out of view with a “search right” (or simply “right”) command (or something similar) will allow positive reinforcement as the dog exits out the back, goes right and immediately sees the decoy. The training should prog-ress with a decoy a little farther from the APV but still visible and eventually the decoy will be hidden accessible and inaccessible at varied progressive distances. The goal of this training is to avoid the dog searching to the left when you want it to search right.

The handler and other operators can watch the dog through the windows to determine if the dog is searching the right places within a designated distance and provide verbal direction if the dog is trained to react accordingly. It’s difficult to give clear commands through the port holes as the voice is

PHO

TO B

Y T

IM K

ELLE

Y

If a suspect is located by the dog and a bite occurs, part of the training should include navigating the APV closer to the suspect and providing cover for the outside team during the approach.

Spring 2014 CATOnews 2322 CATOnews Spring 2014

BY TI GOETZ

THE TENSION HAD BEEN BUILDING for the past two hours as containment was set; the REACT team was staffed, briefed and deployed; and long-rifle teams moved into concealed positions and began scanning for the suspects’ and sending in their intel reports. CNT was on scene and negotiations had been vacillating between agree-ments to surrender and outrageous demands that brought the suspects mental status into question. At the center of it all, an understaffed command post was organized, set up and quickly began trying to filter the flood of information coming in from multiple sources.

Now, everyone could feel it; during the past 30 minutes the hostage drama had moved from a controlled negotiation into a rapidly spiraling series of events that threatened to overwhelm the OODA loop of everyone involved. As the team

struggled to stay on top of the quickly changing scenario, the command post personnel struggled to understand the frag-mented, and often times, conflicting information they were receiving. The fog and friction, so commonly associated with real life call outs, was taking its toll as the team struggled to put together a coherent picture of what was occurring, come up with a sound game plan, and respond to the rapid series of suspect actions. To compound the chaos, the incident commander was demonstrating little understanding of SWAT methodology, sound tactics or even his role in the life-and-death drama playing out only a short distance away.

The acting team commander cursed the “good fortune” that had resulted in his ascension to the throne of leadership on such a tumultuous day. Who would have ever thought that the entire leadership of the part-time SWAT team would be absent on the one day that they were so sorely needed? Whatever the reason, fate had dealt him aces and eights and the inexperienced team commander had no choice but to play out the hand to the best

of his abilities. He struggled to think as information overload threatened to push him over the threshold into condition black. The suspects had already thrown half a dozen shots at contain-ment personnel, were demanding a helicopter take them to Ha-waii, and had made repeated threats to kill the hostages if their demands were not met. CNT was still reassuring the incident commander that they could talk the suspects out. The press was on scene and clamoring for an interview, the chief was repeat-edly calling on the phone asking for an update, and the out-of-his-depth and panicked I/C kept distracting him with an irritating barrage of silly questions and pointless demands for information that the team commander did not have.

Suddenly, all activity at the CP froze in place as the voice of two-side containment excitedly cut through the radio chatter, “Suspect one is coming out the two-side door with a gun to the head of a hostage!” The radio traffic was fast and furious; the long rifle was having a hard time getting a clear and unobstruct-ed shot, another hostage was crawling out a rear window and running for the fence and the REACT team leader was frantically asking for permission to go with an emergency assault! The team commander quickly weighed his options, and then reached for the radio when he was stopped cold in his tracks by the wild-eyed incident commander stridently demanding to be briefed on what was happening right now, as continuing radio traffic battered his senses with an incessant clamor for direction.

The team commander hurriedly briefed the incident com-mander on his plan of action, followed up by an almost desper-ate plea for the go ahead. The clearly overwhelmed incident commander stared back in panic and horror, overcome by indecision, a lack of training, and a not uncommon reluctance to make the big call when lives hung in the balance. Stunned, the team commander stared in dismay at the runaway freight train that the operation had become. What was he going to do now?

While I can tell you what our acting team commander did in this incident, I can’t tell you what your own people might do, given the same set of circumstances. And

that’s the purpose of the high stress tabletop; it gives you an opportunity to test your team’s abilities from the neck up. It seems unnatural that a mere tabletop exercise can become as stressful, or even more stressful, than a real life callout, but it’s true. With the proper planning, and execu-tion, a SWAT tabletop can rank right up there at stress factor ten while pushing your people into uncomfortable, unforgiving and downright demanding scenarios bound to test a wide variety of skills, including their abilities to perform under pressure.

As SWAT operators, we tend to think in terms of the physical tactics: How do I assault this house or vehicle? How do I clear this bedroom, carport or open space? Our minds, and training days, tend to be occupied by equipment, tactics, techniques and procedures rather than some of the essential functions that must work for a tactical plan to succeed (com-mand, control and communications). By design, tabletops force you to operate on a more intellectual level, an area of training that we often overlook.

The thing I like about tabletops is that they cost almost

nothing, are fairly easy to set up, require very little room, and can be completed in as little as two hours. They can also last up to several hours, depending on how complex and drawn out you want the operation to be. Tabletops, if planned and run effectively, can often expose weaknesses and/or flaws in your command set up and decision making, point out de-ficiencies in your communication abilities or SOPs and/or demonstrate to team members the importance of being able to think and react quickly to unusual events.

This is how I usually like to set up and run a high stress table top exercise.

PRE-OPERATION PLANNINGThe first thing I always do when planning training is figure out what I am trying to teach, emphasize or demonstrate. In the simplest of tabletops (which is where I recommend you start), I often focus on communications. It is my experience that when communications start to fail, or don’t exist in the first place, the operation itself often quickly follows in a simi-lar downward spiral.

If my emphasis is going to be communications, then I plan a scenario that forces containment, long rifle, REACT and the command post to constantly engage in dialogue, over the ra-dio and cell phone, as occurs in real operations. This sounds simple enough on the face of it, maybe even easy, but there are plenty of ways to induce stress and complexity into these operations, which we will discuss later.

If I am looking to work on SOPs (roll calls after shots fired, emergency deployment of gas, man down drills, etc.), then I design a scenario where these things occur. Yes, these things may not actually occur in a physical sense (as might hap-pen in actual training), but I can still make them a valuable experience by forcing the team to work through the theoreti-cal experience (mentally) by injecting confusion, uncertainty and problematic scenarios that require quick thinking and decisive decision making.

Whatever you decide to work on, you then need to build out a scenario with that, or those, objectives in mind. The trick to tabletops is to plan with sufficient foresight to keep everyone involved and active. What I mean is that your com-mand post almost always takes a beating in tabletops. Since the entire operation is run over the radio, is theoretical in nature, has very little lead in time and is typically filled with difficult decision making, the CP will get worked out like a fat man on “Biggest Losers.”

What you want to ensure is that the other elements in your tabletop (such as CLR) also get worked out and aren’t allowed to coast while the CP does all the heavy lifting. You have to keep the other elements busy with reports, sightings, chal-lenges, and decision making scenarios that erupt unexpect-edly. To do that, I will make a list of all the possible “injects” that might keep the operation going. Here’s a list of examples: escaping prisoners, shots fired, CNT input or requests, I/C input, assets stretched thin, requests from higher up for cer-tain actions or information, intel reports, sightings of suspect or hostages, requests for assistance to or from neighboring agencies, suspect requests or demands. I also make a basic plan of how I am going to insert these injects into the operations. When planning these injects, I give

HIGH STRESS TABLETOPTRAINING FROM THE NECK UP

Spring 2014 CATOnews 2524 CATOnews 18 CATOnews Spring 2014

considerable thought to the reactions I am hoping to see from the team and what follow up injects I might use (or not) based on how team members respond.

You will also need a plan for how you want to end the op-eration. Whether it’s a barricade, a sniper, active shooter, or hostage situation, you want to plan a series of events that will force your team decision makers to choose a course of action, to bring the crisis to some type of reasonable resolution—a surrender, hostage rescue, or sniper-initiated assault are a few examples.

With the basic plan and injects in mind, your next step is to pull all the intel needed to support the running of the tabletop. As much as possible, choose real locations and suspects. Giving your team real photographs of local target sites, surrounding area and suspects, along with hard intel such as criminal history, prior reports on location or suspect, vehicle print outs of photographs, and past operations plans that dealt with the location. This adds realism to the train-ing. I typically provide the information only at selected times of my choosing (to support the scenario) or when the team thinks to actually ask for the information. That is part of the

mental-stress game of not getting the information they need when they want it, or forcing them to remember to ask for it in the first place.

Having run high stress tabletops in the past, I can tell you that events--no matter how well planned out--rarely go as envisioned. Like real life, there are variables such as chance, fog, friction and the “human factors” that always have a say in how your tabletop will play out.

THE RESET BUTTONWhen possible, it’s a good idea to have the operation run uninterrupted, from start to finish, just like it would in real life. However, sometimes that’s just not possible due to the training objectives or due to the team’s reaction, or lack thereof, to injects. With those limitations in mind, the “reset button” during training, and in tabletops, is a nice feature to use. It is not uncommon for completely unexpected results to arise from a team scenario. Sometimes you will be pleasantly

surprised or astounded at the team’s ingenuity, and some-times you will just be astounded.

The reset works just like it seems. When an inject results in an unexpected termination of the exercise (i.e. the REACT team conducts an emergency assault when you thought they would hold), you simply call for a reset. That means the op-eration is temporarily halted while everything is reset exactly the way it was prior to the terminating event (kind of like a time out in football). You then restart the operation and con-tinue as if it never ended. This can be used effectively when you want to conduct planned events such as REACT drills that, in real life, would most likely abruptly end the operation (suspect comes out shooting, suspect tries to escape, suspect comes out with a hostage and sniper takes the shot) or you simply want to reset an operation that has spun so wildly out of control that all benefits are lost.

PROCTORSIt is almost impossible to run a tabletop by yourself. At a minimum, you need one other assistant to help monitor and inject information and scenarios. Ideally, it works best if you

have one proctor at the command post and one proctor with each element (containment, long rifle, REACT). That way, each element can be kept busy by the proctor and monitored at the same time. However, if you only have two proctors, one monitors the command post and the other takes care of all the other elements.

By far, the most difficult position to monitor is the command post. That location should be a whirlwind of activity if you are running the operation like in real life. If you have the people, two to monitor the command post is highly advantageous.

LOCATION AND SETUPAs mentioned earlier, tabletops are great because they can be conducted anywhere, at any time, and in very little space. I typically run mine out of the station. I will have the command post set up in the back lot and then have the CLR elements inside the station in different rooms (if the number of proctors allow) or in one big room in far

corners (if I only have one proctor). It’s best if all of the elements are actually out of sight of each other so that no verbal or non-verbal “assistance” can be given between elements. Any variation of this theme will work, includ-ing containment in four corners of a room and REACT / long rifle in two corners of another room (three proctors needed). The benefit of having elements in visually sepa-rate areas is that it forces them to rely on the radio and cell phones (as they typically do in real life). The goal is to force performance in an environment similar to a real callout (limited visual clues).

RUNNING THE TABLETOPObviously, it is important to make sure your proctors are aware of not only your plan, but also your objectives. Know-ing your intent leaves them a lot of room to improvise and adapt as the scenario progresses. I’ve found it’s best for you and your proctors to be loosely coupled to your script, since no plan (including a tabletop) survives contact with the enemy. Like real life problems, scripts soon take on a life of their own and go where training (or lack thereof) and circumstances take them. Again, with the planning done, the supporting documents ready to go, and the proctors briefed and in place, all that’s left is the fun.

There are many ways to start off a tabletop (full on briefing with PowerPoint, limited information given similar to what is received on a call out, no information and the scenario progresses from some critical incident that has just kicked off) or other variations you might imagine. The last tabletop our team ran, everyone suited up in full gear (adds the discomfort and realism of gear and equipment to a static event) and put them in a closed room with radios turned off. Then we called them out by ones or twos and sent them into an immediate deployment scenario. The first operators coming out were the youngest on the team and were briefed on an ongoing hostage incident. Just like a real immediate deployment, they were briefed by a proctor playing a patrol sergeant. They got the basic CP set up (in the rear lot) and told to take over command of whatever critical element needed them the most (in this case the REACT team). We then start briefing and directing responding operators as they were brought out and directed into the problem. As operators arrived at the command post, they were briefed by whoever was at the CP and either took over command or were assigned to a CLR position.

Prior to departing from the CP, any operators heading out to a CLR position were directed by the proctor to provide him with a written list of any items they wanted to take with them, before moving to their assigned positions. Once the list was provided, they were directed to rooms in the station where they were provided with photographs depicting only their view of the target location. We held back the senior operators and command element until the problem was up and run-ning (testing SOPs for callouts, decision making by younger team members and communication skills by everyone). Just to add to the stress, we took the command personnel (team commander and team leader) out of play and forced a senior operator (a sergeant) to take over command and control of the team (as called for in our SOPs).

You will find that getting the operation up and running can be tougher than you might have imagined. Having operators walk into a problem cold, with either very limited informa-tion or a flood of information, with very little visual stimuli for orientation (other than photographs you may have provided), then forcing them to communicate theoretical issues by radio/cell phones only can be confusing and difficult. (Sounds like real life, right?). Usually, it’s best to let the operation get up and running with only moderate stress induced. You don’t want people lollygagging or getting too comfortable but, on the other hand, you don’t want to completely derail the op-eration before it begins.

After the operation gets its legs, start injecting stress and discomfort. As a proctor, you will have to play multiple roles to keep the scenario flowing (witness, detective, I/C, CNT, family members, press, and local politician, for instance). Aside from the intelligence and/or rapid series of injects com-ing in from all quarters, you can add confusion and uncer-tainty to the operation by injecting conflicting, contradictory and/or erroneous information into the scenario. Designing scenarios that are highly time sensitive or time competitive are also usually stress inducers, even for those with extensive SWAT experience. Simply having proctors who question, poke, prod and ask questions of their elements adds signifi-cant stress and forces the operators to divide their attention between the fast paced operation and the proctor (a stressor all on its own). Most of the time, your proctors will have to be prepared to ad-lib as your scenarios go on tangents or take unexpected twists and turns. It usually does not take much to turn the entire operation into an E-ticket ride.

You will know your team members are the pros you think they are when they can separate the flood of information they are receiving into credible/workable intelligence, then use that information to come up with a coherent strategy and relay that to the rest of the team.

WHAT YOU WILL LEARNMore than you thought! A good high stress tabletop can test anything and everything, from your teams’ rapid response planning to the containment personnel’s ability to observe and report, the long rifle team’s ability to call out a sniper-initiated assault, your teams’ ability to communicate under stress and, of course, the leadership skills of the team hier-archy.

So, next time you’re trying to come up with a new idea for training, consider a high stress tabletop. You might be sur-prised at the results. And that’s the beauty of these exercises, no matter how good or bad the exercise actually goes, I guar-antee that you and your team will never fail to learn valuable lessons about yourselves.

Stay safe and never stop thinking! J

TI GOETZ is a lieutenant with the Hawthorne Police Department, where he has been a member of the department for 20 years. He has a bachelor’s degree in law and society with a criminal justice emphasis from UC Santa Barbara and a master’s degree in negotiations and conflict management from CSU Dominguez Hills. Goetz has served more than 12 years on the department’s SWAT team and is currently the team commander.

Training can be conducted anywhere, at any time, and in very little space. It can be run out of the station with the command post set up in the back lot and the CLR elements inside the station in different rooms.

Spring 2014 CATOnews 2726 CATOnews 18 CATOnews Spring 2014

News, Notes and Happenings from Around the Country

News Tracker

Improving inter-agency cooperation is often one of those easier-said-than-

done propositions. Everyone can think of benefits that would result from training with other SWAT units in your region, but it’s one of those things that finds itself on the back burner. Heck it’s hard enough to sched-ule your own SWAT training.

CATO Region 1A was able to organize a training event in April that brought together 110 participants from Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties and included tactical teams from Santa Barbara Sheriff’s, Santa

Maria Police, Lompoc Police, Santa Barbara Police, San Luis Obispo Regional Team—SLO Police, Grove Beach Police, Paso Robles Police and Arroyo Grande Police; and the U.S. Penitentiary at Lompoc. It also included the Santa Barbara Hostage Nego-tiations Team and SLO Regional Crisis Negotiation Team.

It was held at the Allan Han-cock College Public Safety Train-ing Complex, a state-of-the-art training facility for law enforce-ment, fire, EMS, and environ-mental technology. The complex is designed to accommodate training related to homeland

security, disaster preparedness, and emergency response.

The agenda featured demon-strations of equipment such as robots, infrared optics training equipment, electronic surveil-lance gear, and a long-range acoustic device for crowd disper-sal. A portion of the demonstra-tions covered how-to-deploy information and some time was devoted to sort of a resource inventory operation that focused on training and tactical gear that can be shared among the agencies.

The event also put teams through three training stations.

Two of the stations involved the deployment and placement of ar-mored vehicles with the objective of learning how multiple teams and multiple vehicles can work in concert. At one station was a scenario involving the rescue of a downed citizen. At the other ar-mored vehicle station, the scenario involved

CATO Region 1A Joint Training Day

PHO

TOS

BY M

IKE

ELIA

SON

Members of the Santa Barbara Police Department and US Federal Penetentary SWAT teams perform an officer down/rescue drill at the Allan Hancock College Public Safety Training Facility in Lompoc.


a subject barricaded in a vehicle. The third training station featured force-on-force drills using infrared training weapons that are owned by Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Depart-ment. The scenario put a sniper in a six-story tower.

“Armored vehicles are assets that are shared most frequently. Focusing on shared resources is one of the important reasons for getting together,” said Sgt. Mike Perkins of the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department. Perkins was the event coordinator.

A debrief took place at the

end of the day with a discus-sion regarding the value of joint training and the intention of staging events like this one more often.

“There were recommenda-tions that we do this maybe once a year,” Perkins said, “but everyone has a training tempo and a list of priorities. If we can’t schedule it every year, then every two years maybe we can get all the teams in the region together. There’s a lot of value in getting together and talking tactics and get familiar with the

gear that each team has with the idea of sharing equipment. The departments in the area work together operationally, so joint training is valuable and so is meeting and becoming acquainted with other teams and individuals and understand-ing what kind of resources and equipment are available.”

The last time a training day involving this many of the region’s tactical teams occurred was 2010.

Bellevue SWAT members cleared in 2013 shooting death

By Brandon MaczBellevue ReporterBELLEVUE, WASHINGTON—A six-member jury found members of the Bellevue SWAT team who shot a Seattle man to death in March 2013 were justified in their actions at the conclusion of a four-day inquest on Thursday.

Russell Smith was shot inside his Mercedes Benz on the early morning of March 22, 2013, after Bellevue SWAT members approached his vehicle on the 5000 block of 43rd Avenue South in Seattle to serve an arrest warrant and search his property. He was suspected of at least three robber-ies in Bellevue and two in Seattle going back to November 2012.

The 51-year-old Seattle laborer is alleged to have backed out of his driveway, striking a pickup, before accelerating forward at several SWAT members who fired on him after they reported fearing for their safety. Three officers collec-tively fired 21 times and Smith was hit eight times, one bullet entering his brain.

King County Executive Dow Constantine ordered an inquest into the shooting back in June. The hearing before a six-member jury was set to start in early December; however, it was pushed back twice after Smith’s family retained an attorney.

Jacob Bement, Casey Hiam and Jacob Childers, identified as the of-ficers responsible for the 21 shots that struck the Mercedes and the eight that struck Smith — one fatal shot to the head — were found by the jury to have had reason to believe Smith presented an im-minent threat of death or serious bodily injury

News Tracker

In this training scenario, Santa Barbara Police Department SWAT team members are dealing with an active shooter in a multi-story building. All total, 110 tactical officers participated in the CATO Region 1A training event.

Lompoc Police Department SWAT team members utilize the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department Bear, while concluding this barricaded suspect in a vehicle drill.


to himself or others.In their interrogatories — a

series of 29 questions related to the inquest — all jurors agreed the details of March 22, 2013, as reported by numerous Bellevue and Seattle officers, were accurate. All six jurors, however, were unsure whether it was likely anyone around Smith’s Columbia City residence that morning would have been able to visually identify the SWAT members’ uniforms given the available lighting.

Russell Smith was a dangerous felon who was wanted for a string of armed robberies,” the Bellevue Police Department stated in a release Thursday. “Instead of complying with police commands and surrendering, he tried to use his car as a deadly weapon against the officers. Mr. Smith was shot as a result of his own.”

The department reports Police Chief Linda Pillo has ordered a firearms review board convene to determine if the officers’ actions followed department policy. The board will consist of a deputy chief, commander of the department’s training unit, commander of the patrol section and the department legal advisor. The board is set to meet early next week and no further statements will be made until the review board releases its findings.

REPRINTED WITH PERMISSION OF THE BELLVUE REPORTER

Louisville SWAT team rarely pulls trigger

By Mark BoxleyLouisville Courier-JournalLOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY—The Louisville Metro Police Department is cracking down on potentially violent criminals, sending out its SWAT team more often to stop any potential danger.

In 2013, the team saw a 132 percent increase in calls to deliver high-risk warrants for dangerous criminals.

It responded to about 70 total calls in 2012 and 110 in 2013. The number of standoff and hostage situation calls was 12 each year, but the warrant calls jumped from about 40 to 93, SWAT Commander Lt. Brent Routzahn said.

The dramatic jump in warrant calls, Routzahn said, is because the SWAT team is automatically called out any time there is a threat of automatic weapons, explosives or booby traps during a warrant service.

As dangerous as the team’s deployments are, the last thing SWAT officers want to do is pull the trigger, Routzahn said.

“We want all of (the suspects) to surrender peacefully,” he said. “Mis-sion failure is when someone dies.”

In every situation, the SWAT team will try to use one of the many non-lethal options in its arsenal, including 12-gauge beanbag shotguns, tear gas, Tasers or pepper spray.

There are a lot of high-tech non-lethal weapons out there — like the personnel halting and stimulation response rifle, or PHASR, which uses a laser to “dazzle” targets — but the team tries to keep things simple, Routzahn said.

SWAT team leader Eric Culver said sometimes the most useful tool is a mirror attached to a stick. Having $5,000 night-vision cameras sounds great, but something as simple as the batteries dying can make them useless, Culver said.

The mirror always works, he said. “You’ve got to have the basics.”

When Routzahn started on the team 13 years ago, many of the non-lethal options didn’t exist or weren’t used. Now the SWAT team is much more advanced. The problem is, so are criminals, he said.

Non-lethal weapons don’t

always work in deterring

criminals, so when things get

dangerous and lives are at risk, SWAT needs lethal options, Routzahn said.

“We have to be able to go up against AK-47s,” he said.

Each SWAT member carries an au-tomatic weapon and a police-issued handgun, and is outfitted with body armor, Routzahn said. Some might also carry shotguns, with snipers shouldering .308-caliber rifles.

Those snipers, while trained to kill, have never had to, Routzahn said. In the 13 years he’s been on the SWAT team snipers have been used more for observation that anything else and no one has taken a “kill shot,” he said.

Officers are not eligible to apply for SWAT until they’ve been on the force for three years, and then they are put through a rigorous physical test — a mile-and-a-half run, 500-meter swim, 10 minutes treading water, pushups, sit-ups and pull-ups — before they can move on to specialized training, Routzahn said.

There is a 40-hour basic-training course, followed by a 40-hour ad-vanced course, he said. If an officer wants to become a sniper, there is another 40 hours of training.

Each of the 44 officers on the SWAT team—except Routzahn, who coordinates the team full time—pulls double duty on the force, working everything from patrol to investigations.

Culver, who has been with the team since 2003, still remembers the rush of adrenaline he felt the first time he breached a building with the SWAT team.

“Everything seems so fast,” Culver said. “It’s kind of like organized chaos.”

In each dangerous situation, the safety of hostages tops each SWAT member’s list, while their own safety falls somewhere closer to the bot-tom, Culver said.

“Our job is to save lives,” he said. “Ninety-five percent of what we do is making the decision not to shoot.”

REPRINTED WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE COURIER-JOURNAL

News Tracker

30 CATOnews 18 CATOnews Spring 2014

RENO, NEVADA • NOV. 18 thru 21

TACTICAL VENDOR SHOWNOVEMBER 18-19

Bill Lewis II, Conference Coordinator [email protected] • Randy Winn, Vendor Coordinator [email protected]

TOP SPEAKERSINCIDENT DEBRIEFS

GRAND SIERRA RESORTRENO NEVADA

CONFERENCE 2014CONFERENCE 2014

Chief or Sheriff of the Year

CATO is looking to identify the Police Chief or Sheriff who has done

the most to support his or her SWAT team.

Special Weapons Team of the Year

CATO will identify California’s outstanding SWAT Team Operation.

SWAT Officer of the Year

CATO will bestow its SWAT Officer of the Year Award to the

SWAT officer, deputy, or supervisor who displayed

courage, integrity, and perseverance in the face

of extreme danger.

2014

CATO ANNUAL AWARDS

Please make your nomination(s) to CATO

as soon as possible. California’s Best Chief/

Sheriff, SWAT Team, and SWAT Officer - It’s up

to you. Let CATO know what you think!!

Please email your nomination to the CATO office at: [email protected]

Or mail to: CATO PO Box 191462 San Diego, CA 92159


SWAT sniper encounters vulnerability in meditation

By Rebecca Woolington The OregonianHILLSBORO, OREGON—Stephen Slade went to the little yoga studio once a week for eight weeks last spring.

There, the Hillsboro police officer would take a little time for himself. He learned a variety of exercises. Stretches and meditations were among them.

It was new territory. It was also part of his department’s new train-ing, designed to keep cops mentally tough. It was mindfulness.

Simply put, mindfulness is a prac-tice of being present in the moment. The department’s training is focused on building resiliency in officers.

It’s different than typical police training. Some cops let participants know that.

“You get the ‘tee-hees’ and ‘ha-has’ from your peers’” Slade said. “Like, what are you doing? Big tough SWAT guy going into a room that’s relaxation and yoga mats.”

The teasing didn’t stop him.Slade has put in 14 years in Hills-

boro. He works patrol and is a sniper on the county’s SWAT.

Between March 2012 and January 2013, Slade fired his duty weapon during two police shootings. One re-sulted in a lawsuit, which is still pend-ing. The other involved a drunken, off-duty co-worker firing at police and was recently resolved.

Months passed after the Janu-ary shootout with the ex-Hillsboro officer. A lieutenant asked Slade if he’d take the mindfulness training. He agreed.

“I think law enforcement, in gen-eral, just needs better health, so to speak,” Slade said. “Not just physical, on the outside. But, for me, it’s more the mental, on the inside.”

Slade describes himself as pessi-

mistic. But he had no problem trying something new. Yoga mats, chimes and “Zen-type music” were quite new, he said.

The training fell just before Slade’s scheduled swing shift. At first, that was tough because he was ready to work. He struggled to slow his racing mind. It was hard to let his guard down.

“I was self-conscious of lying in the room, where we’re all un-armed,” he said. “And anyone

could have walked into that door and taken advantage of us.”

Within a few weeks, Slade got over that fear. He felt more at

ease.Halfway through the class, he was

into it.Some things, he admits, were a

little corny for his taste. He thinks, if he remembers correctly, they hummed once. He felt no need to do that again.

“I think law enforcement, in general, just needs better health so to speak. Not just physical, on the outside. But, for me, it’s more the mental, on the inside.” -- Hillsboro Officer Stephen Slade

But he liked most of the course. The stretches were nice. He saw that it could be a long-term way to help handle stress.

“Whether you’re taking children away, or an abusive spouse…,” he said, “everything has negative conno-tations to it. And you’re dealing with that call to call to call to call every single day.”

People lie. They don’t want cops around. They call them names.

“So, after a while, it slowly breaks down even the stronger people,” he said.

The mindfulness class taught him to take a few moments to breathe, pause and scan his feelings.

In a job full of multitasking, the training helped him notice what’s important now.

When Slade finished the train-ing, his two shooting cases were still pending. That made it harder to reap the

News Tracker

Be one of the leaders when it comes to Emergency ResponsesJoin the California Association of Tactical Officers

INDIVIDUAL DIGITAL MEMBERSHIP—$ 15 PER YEAR (Members receive all membership discounts and CATO News in a digital format instead of printed and mailed. We pass the savings on to you.)

INDIVIDUAL MEMBERSHIP—$ 30 PER YEAR

TEAM MEMBERSHIP—$ 100 PER YEAR. (Teams receive 3 copies of the CATO News as well as multiple access to the secured areas of the CATO Web site)

ARE YOU A CURRENT OR FORMER MEMBER OF: SWAT K-9 NEGOTIATOR TEMS NARCO ENF. GANG ENF. CORRECTIONS

NAME______________________________________________________________ RANK______________________ AGENCY ________________________________

MAILING ADDRESS ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

AGENCY ADDRESS _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PHONE __________________________________________ FAX __________________________________________ AGENCY SIZE______ SWAT TM SIZE ________

EMAIL ADDRESS __________________________________________________ LIST YOUR EMAIL IN THE DIRECTORY ON THE CATO WEB SITE? Y N

NAME OF SWAT COMMANDER ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SWAT COMMANDER’S EMAIL _____________________________________________________ PHONE ________________________________________________

COPY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ID CARD MUST ACCOMPANY APPLICATION. Mail application and check or money order to: CATO • PO Box 1700, Escondido, CA 92033 or go to www.catonews.org or email: [email protected]

JOINTODAY!

REGISTER ONLINE!

www.catonews.org

NEW!

CATO Advanced SWAT Commander’s Course Scheduled

The California Association of Tactical Officers’ Advanced SWAT Commander Course is being offered February 9

through 12, 2015 in San Diego, California. This 40-hour course is designed for the

experienced SWAT Commander interested in expanding knowledge, experience, and learning from and sharing lessons learned with other experienced commanders. It is California POST certified with Plan IV reimbursement procedures.

The Advanced SWAT Commander course builds on the material presented in the CATO SWAT Commander course, which is a prerequisite for enrollment in this course along with a minimum of two years’ experience as a law enforcement SWAT commander.

Topics included in Advanced SWAT Commander course include:

• Lessons learned from several major incident debriefs

• Challenges to the contemporary commander

• Contemporary tactical issues

• Training

• Thorough documentation of training and operations

• Defending your decisions

• Tools, Weapons, and Equipment

• Emerging technologies

• Specialty munitions

• In-depth tactical planning

• Crisis decision making

• Defending civil claims

• Facilitated tactical discussions

Instructors for this course are: Sid Heal, Commander (Ret.), Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department; Ken Hubbs, Lieutenant, San Diego Police Department; Steve Ijames, Major (Ret.), Springfield Police Department; RK Miller, Lieutenant (Ret.), Huntington Beach Police Department; and Greg Herbert, Captain, San Bernardino Co. Sheriff’s Department.

Tuition is $455 for current CATO members and $487 for non-members.

Registration opened April 16. The deadline for registration is December 30, 2014, or when the class is full.

benefits, he said.Memories of the shootout with

his former co-worker have stuck with him.

“Words can’t even do it justice,” he said. “It’s hard to explain. It’s just hard to explain … It’s still kind of like a raw nerve.”

He doesn’t want to talk about it.Slade juggled emotions through

the training and after. He was angry. Stressed.

Still, the timing for mindfulness seemed right. He needed to slow down.

Slade had noticed that he wasn’t present on his days off. He was checked-out, somewhere else. Recognizing that, he said, is half the fight toward changing it.

Slade has used his exercise time as mindfulness time.

He runs and bikes, trying to experience the activities while they happen. It’s his way to relax. It’s his release.

REPRINTED WITH PERMISSION OF THE OREGONIAN

Agents Seize 176 lbs. of Meth in Central Valley

By California DOJFRESNO, CALIFORNIA—Agents from a California Department of Justice task force joined with California Highway Patrol and federal investigators March 20 to seize 176 pounds of crystal methamphetamine during the execution of a search warrant at a Madera home. The seizure is one of the largest methamphetamine caches uncovered in the Central Valley.

Preliminary evi-dence indicates the methamphetamine in the residence was likely smuggled into the U.S. from Mexico in liquid form, then converted into its crystalized form at the Madera residence for subse-

quent distribution.Agents discovered the

methamphetamine, much of it in crystalized form, scattered throughout multiple rooms in the Madera residence. They also found a lab used to convert liquid methamphetamine into its crystal-ized form. While initial estimates place the value of the seized methamphetamine at approxi-mately $750,000, authorities say it could exceed $1 million, pending final laboratory tests to determine its purity.

In addition to the drugs, investi-gators also seized other evidence at the scene, including $58,000 in cash. The residence was vacant at the time of the search and no arrests were made overnight. However, authorities emphasize the investigation is continuing.

The ongoing probe is being conducted by the Central Valley Marijuana Investigation Team (CVMIT) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), with substantial assistance provided by the California Highway Patrol (CHP). Other agencies par-ticipating on the Central Valley

High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Initiative (HIDTA) include the U.S. Drug Enforcement Admin-istration; the Fresno Sheriffs Department, Madera and Tulare counties; the Fresno and Madera Police Departments; and the State of California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

“There’s no question this seizure has dealt a significant blow to the criminal organization behind this operation,” said Tatum King, acting special agent in charge of HSI San Francisco, which oversees the agency’s enforcement activities in the Central Valley. “Metham-phetamine is a powerful drug that devastates entire communi-ties. By keeping this dangerous contraband from reaching our streets reaching our streets, we’ve potentially saved untold lives.”

Thursday’s search warrant was the result of intelligence informa-tion provided by the CHP.

“This case is a prime example of the ongoing collaborative efforts between local, state and federal authorities to combat the illicit flow of narcotics through our communities,” said Jason Daughri-ty, CHP canine unit sergeant. J

News Tracker


Check out the CATO STORE:

www.catonews.org

GET YOUR CATO GEAR!

Transnational Organized Crime in California

A report analyzing the current state of transnational criminal organizations in California and the threats they pose to the state’s

public safety and economy was recently released. This new report, “Gangs Beyond Borders: California and the Fight Against Transnational Organized Crime,” addresses the three areas of transnational criminal activity: the trafficking of drugs, weapons and human beings; money laundering; and high-tech crimes, such as digital piracy, hacking and fraud.

The report highlights the work of law enforcement in combat-ting transnational crime and details strides made to stop this threat. It analyzes how transnational criminal organizations are innovating, and outlines recommendations to adapt to new challenges, includ-ing sustained funding for law enforcement, and strong collaboration between federal, state, local and international governments.

The report estimates that Mexican organized crime groups smuggle an estimated 70 percent of the foreign-produced U.S. supply of methamphetamine through California’s border crossings.

View the report here: https://oag.ca.gov/transnational-organized-crime

Documents

The FORCE BEHIND CATOCommand+and+Out...Spring 2014 CATOnews 5 The FORCE BEHIND CATO SID HEAL PRESIDENT (909) 732-8325 [email protected] R.K. MILLER (714) 363-1569 [email protected]