Month: March 2026

Uncategorized

Death Investigation Report Template

Mar 9, 2026 by Michael Schentrup 0 Comments

REPORT WRITING TEMPLATE

Death Investigation

This template is designed to assist you in gathering information to complete an unattended death investigation / report.  Obtaining this information may assist you in performing a complete investigation and gathering information vital to your report. Remember: a death call should be treated as a homicide until you rule it out.

1. Opening paragraph: “On (date) at (time), I was dispatched to (location) in reference to a death investigation   or “On (date) at (time), I arrived at (location) in reference to a death investigation.

2. Upon arrival at the scene: In some cases, you will be responding to a call from a person and met at the scene by that person or other persons. This could include a person discovering the body, a relative, a security guard or paramedics, to name a few. In such a case, you would list what you were told by these persons first in your report. In other cases, you might be dispatched to a home where a person is calling in a welfare check on a person who has not been seen or hear in quite some time. In those cases, you would list in this section first what you observed about the home to either justify your entry into the home or why everything appeared in order. See list below for an outline of these two scenarios.

  1. People spoken to at scene
    1. To include relatives, witnesses, discovering parties or EMS personnel, on scene, dwelling, other observations of location.
    1. Brief summary of what deputy was told by people on scene.
    1. Who found the decedent? Who was the last person to see or talk to the decedent.
  2. Observation of body (also include information about what room or part of property body is found).
    1. Position of body: sitting, lying on back/stomach, etc
    1. How is victim dressed?
    1. Age? Gender? Race? Size?
    1. Obvious injuries? Indications of foul play?
      1. If foul play suspected, contact supervisor and detectives immediately.
      1. Search warrant may be required to proceed.
    1. Animal post-mortem activity?
    1. Decomposition, rigor mortis, lividity?
    1. Indications of suicide? Notes? Pill bottles? Weapons?
      1. Suicide by firearm: DO NOT MOVE THE GUN, unless absolutely necessary. If the gun has to be moved, for EMS, then try to photograph first or use BWC to capture the location of firearm.
    1. Indications of an overdose? Narcotics? Narcotics equipment?
      1. If overdose, what is the protocol?
    1. Temperature of room? Air-conditioning on or off?
    1. Identifying marks on body: tattoos, marks, etc.
    1. What actions deputy took to check body (rolling, moving, etc.)
      1. If the death is suspicious and ME response, do not move the body until given the OK.
    1. In any case of suspicious death, the decedent’s phone must be found and secured immediately.
  3. Observations of the location
    1. Type of location (single-family, apartment, business, field, roadside, canal)
    1. Observations from outside of residence to indicate a death has occurred or not. This would include odors, newspapers, mail, outside lights, insect activity through windows, lawn maintenance, etc.
    1. How was location found? Locked? Unlocked? Forced entry? Anything suspicious? And if forced entry, was it done by a third party trying to check on decedent?
    1. Check all windows and doors.
    1. Anything missing from the location?  Any signs of theft?
  4. Investigation and steps taken at scene
    1. Actions taken that altered scene (might include actions to make scene safe for first responders, such as moving a gun, or a hypodermic needle.) This is OK as long as it is documented, including the reasons for such actions. These facts may also be included earlier in report.
    1. Actions taken to preserve scene (crime scene tape, etc.)
    1. Include in your report anything that you touched. Were gloves used?
    1. Was any other barrier protection used by the deputy (latex gloves, booties, etc.)?
    1. Determine time of death (did someone pronounce death, such as an EMT), or an approximation based on evidence or statements.
    1. When was decedent last seen alive? When was he/she found dead?
    1. Medical history
    1. Psychiatric history (if indications of suicide)
    1. Who discovered decedent?
    1. Will a doctor sign a death investigation?
    1. If doctor won’t sign, call Medical Examiner or Coroner
    1. Was sergeant notified? Did he/she respond?
    1. Was a special unit (detective or crime scene) or other agency (ME) notified?
    1. Actions taken to assist family (chaplain, assist with body pickup, etc.)
    1. Was victim advocate or CIT utilized?
    1. Photos taken
      1. Regardless of case, detailed photos of the body should be taken.
      1. Detailed photos of the area immediately around the body should be taken.
      1. Photos of all prescriptions medicine should be taken.
    1. Any property taken into evidence/safekeeping – prescription meds?
    1. Any children on scene? DCF? Relatives?
  5. Disposition
    1. Decedent (to medical examiner or funeral home and list body removal service).
    1. Family or next of kin
    1. Any actions taken to secure home (if FD or you forced entry)
    1. Securing of pets
Uncategorized

Does a College Degree Make You a Better Cop?

Mar 8, 2026 by Michael Schentrup 0 Comments

Written by Mike Schentrup

The question of whether police officers should possess a four-year college degree has been debated in law enforcement for decades. As policing becomes increasingly complex, many agencies and policymakers have examined whether higher education improves the officer’s ability to do their job. While there are compelling arguments on both sides, the discussion ultimately centers on balancing professional standards with practical recruitment realities.

I entered the law enforcement profession after getting my four-year degree from the University of Florida. I always intended to become a police officer and I always knew I wanted to get my degree first. This was my choice and yes, early on in my career I would have said my degree did make me better.  And there are good reasons to believe a degree will improve an officer’s ability.

Supporters of a four-year degree argue that modern policing demands a broad set of intellectual and interpersonal skills that higher education can help develop. College coursework often exposes students to subjects such as sociology, psychology, ethics, and communication, all of which are directly relevant to police work. Officers frequently deal with individuals experiencing trauma, mental illness, substance abuse issues, and other complex social problems. A college education can help provide a deeper understanding of these issues and offer frameworks for responding to them more effectively.

Higher education also encourages critical thinking and problem-solving. Police officers are often required to make rapid decisions under stressful conditions, and the ability to analyze information, consider alternatives, and anticipate consequences can be crucial. In addition, college graduates may develop stronger writing and communication skills, which are essential for preparing reports, testifying in court, and interacting with members of the public. Some studies have also suggested that officers with college education may demonstrate greater professionalism and may be less likely to rely on force in certain encounters (the studies here are contested for sure).

On the other hand, if you mandated a four-year degree, you may unnecessarily limit the pool of qualified applicants. Many police departments across the country are already facing recruitment and retention challenges. Imposing a strict educational requirement could discourage otherwise capable individuals from pursuing a career in policing. Not all effective officers learn their skills in a classroom. Many develop exceptional judgment, leadership, and interpersonal abilities through military service, trade work, or other real-world experiences.  In fact, some of the best did not have a college degree.  Adding on to that, some of the best bosses did not have a college degree either.

And I think a sincere argument could be made the military experience is just as important as a college degree in the officer’s future performance.

A more balanced approach may offer the best solution. Rather than mandating a bachelor’s degree for entry-level officers, agencies can encourage higher education through incentives. Many departments already offer educational pay incentives, tuition reimbursement programs, or promotional advantages for officers who earn college degrees. These strategies promote professional development while still allowing departments to recruit individuals with a wide range of backgrounds and life experiences.

Ultimately, policing is a profession that requires a combination of education, judgment, integrity, and practical skill. While a four-year college degree can certainly enhance an officer’s abilities, it should not necessarily be viewed as the sole indicator of potential success in the field.

I believe encouraging education while maintaining flexibility in hiring standards may allow law enforcement agencies to build well-rounded departments capable of meeting the evolving challenges of modern policing.

As usual, a nuanced and balanced approach is best.

Uncategorized

The FTO Dichotomy – Trainer or Evaluator

Mar 4, 2026 by Michael Schentrup 0 Comments

Written by: Mike Schentrup

The Field Training Officer (FTO) occupies a uniquely complex role within law enforcement organizations. At its core lies a persistent tension: is the FTO primarily a trainer or an evaluator? The answer, operationally, is both—but the failure to reconcile these competing functions can undermine recruit development and organizational integrity.

As a trainer, the FTO is a coach. This function requires psychological safety, mentorship, modeling of professional standards, and deliberate skills instruction. Adult learning theory supports an environment where recruits can ask questions, make mistakes, and receive corrective feedback without fear of punitive consequence. In this capacity, the FTO builds competence through repetition, guided reflection, and structured debriefing. The goal is growth.

As an evaluator, however, the FTO serves the agency. This role demands objectivity, documentation, and defensible assessments of performance. Daily Observation Reports (DORs), performance metrics, and standardized benchmarks ensure the recruit meets established criteria before independent patrol. Here, the FTO must shift from coach to assessor, protecting the organization and community from liability and substandard performance.

The dichotomy emerges when these roles collide. Overemphasis on evaluation can create risk-averse recruits who conceal deficiencies. Overemphasis on training without candid assessment produces delayed accountability. Effective programs deliberately integrate both functions through transparent expectations: recruits must understand that coaching conversations and formal evaluations serve different but complementary purposes.

A mature FTO program acknowledges that this balance does not occur accidentally; it requires structural safeguards. Clear phase objectives, standardized rating anchors, and supervisory review reduce subjectivity and mitigate the risk of bias. When evaluation criteria are behaviorally defined—specific, observable, and measurable, the FTO is less likely to rely on personality fit or informal impressions. This protects both the recruit and the agency.

Equally important is communication. Recruits should receive explicit orientation to the dual-role framework at the outset of field training. When they understand that coaching interactions are developmental and formal ratings are summative, ambiguity decreases. Effective FTOs separate these moments deliberately: a corrective teaching discussion in the field is distinct from the documented performance narrative in the Daily Observation Report. Transparency builds trust, even in an evaluative environment.

Leadership also plays a decisive role. Front-line supervisors must audit reports for consistency and ensure that struggling recruits are identified early. Remedial training plans should be structured, time-bound, and performance-driven. Avoiding difficult evaluations in the name of mentorship ultimately harms everyone; particularly the recruit who may later face failure without preparation.

Finally, agencies should select FTOs based not solely on tenure or tactical competence, but on emotional intelligence, instructional aptitude, and ethical courage. The ability to encourage growth while rendering honest assessments is not universal. It is a professional competency.

When properly aligned, the FTO dichotomy is not a conflict but a design feature. Training and evaluation, executed with clarity and discipline, produce officers capable of independent judgment, procedural compliance, and principled decision-making under stress.