Author: Michael Schentrup

Camaraderie Cuts Both Ways

By Senior Deputy Keith Walmsley (ret)

“United – We Stand, Divided – We Fall” 

The very thing I cherish most about my 21+ year career in Law Enforcement, is also the very thing which hurts most. I’ve always believed that LE is a profession that chooses YOU, not the other way around. It’s truly a Calling, and bless everyone who answers that Call.  

March 19th marked the 12 year anniversary of the LOD loss of my Brother and former partner, Ricky Delfiorentino. 12 years is ample time for people to get over most things, but I have tears in my eyes just writing that sentence. He was a big man with a bigger heart, and he touched the lives of every single person he ever met. He was literally an unforgettable presence, a center that so many revolved around. I only worked with Ricky for 5 years on the Mendocino Coast, but he continues to be a presence in the lives of my family and I to this day. 

Working for a rural agency can be challenging and, as many others, I sought greener pastures with another agency. Even working several hours away, the bonds you form with your partners during the trials of the Job, endure. I remain close with many of the Brothers and Sisters I have worked with.

I had been working at my new agency for 4 years when a Brother of mine who still worked in Mendocino called to tell me about Ricky. I was crushed. My grief was enormous. This was quickly followed by an all-encompassing rage at the (insert your own expletive here) who took him from all of us. I’ve never committed that name to my memory, because he doesn’t deserve to be in the same thoughts as Ricky. He also died at the scene.

The following days included Ricky’s Memorial Service, which was as majestic and heartbreaking as you’d expect. The days following that, included everyone returning to their duties, Protecting and Serving, Representing and Enforcing. For me, I also went back to work, but with a Ride-Along…

I was the only Deputy working in a small, upscale, contract-town with my new agency. I hit the street with my Ride-Along, which was the rage, sorrow, and overwhelming survivor’s guilt of having lost someone I loved. I was in full uniform, driving around town, crying in my patrol car. The unlucky recipient was my first traffic stop, a little old lady who did not come to a complete stop at a stop sign. I would call it more of a detonation than a citizen contact, and my tirade was volcanic. 

Immediately following that stop, I returned to the office and called my Sergeant. I informed him that he was likely to receive a citizen complaint, and that it was 100% founded. He understood what I was dealing with, and told me to just go home. I didn’t have to be there. My response? “My other Brothers don’t get a day off. Why do I deserve one?’ 

What I was avoiding was the fact that I was not dealing with my loss well, and even more importantly, that I didn’t know HOW to deal with it.  As LE Officers, we are expected to control every situation, handle every problem, and look good doing it, maintaining a courageous calm in the midst of chaos. 

I displayed a strong face to others while, inside, I was reeling, drowning, suffering. This manifested as my Ride-Along, and doom on anyone who crossed my path! At this particular time, it should not be surprising that I was also in marriage counseling. During a session, my Ride-Along let my ex-wife have it during an exchange, and thankfully our therapist recognized the anguish I was in and stopped the session. 

Our therapist did not let me off of the hook. He told me that he would work with me individually, or refer me to another therapist for solo grief counseling, but I absolutely needed more help.   

This is really the thrust of this writing. LE is a difficult job to do and not everyone can do it. I’ve always been proud of that, to be a Spartan, a true Warrior against Evil and Injustice, but I’ve never seen a Spartan cry, have you? There is an expectation that we as cops are tough (and we are) and a stigma that tough guys don’t ask for help because they don’t need it. This is just not the case. Think of any call where you called for back-up…

Back-up is essential to our jobs, and also in our lives outside of uniform. Take advantage of Employee Assistance Programs or Peer Support groups when available. They are there because you are not the first or last Officer who needs it. There is no shame in asking for assistance. It doesn’t mean you’re weak, it means you’re still Human. Think of the suicide rate among our fellow Officers and returning Veterans. Please, call for back-up when you need it! 

The therapist I was referred to was actually a former cop, so he was uniquely qualified to help me compartmentalize my grief over losing Ricky. I still live with his loss, but learned how to function in spite of it. I was able to show up for my family, my partners, and my community again, not letting that POS effectively end my life too on that day. I was able to experience “Post Traumatic Growth”, which is something I had never even considered was a possibility. I was able to incorporate the lessons I learned into other traumatic events I’ve experienced since then, and you can too.

I am relatively new to the concept of Stoicism, but I practice it every day and it has helped me identify and deal with the stressors in my life. I feel lighter and much more confident knowing that I can handle future problems, and that I have back-up if I need it. 

While writing this, I came across something that Leo Tolstoy wrote: “Only people who are capable of loving strongly can also suffer great sorrow, but this same necessity of loving serves to counteract their grief and heals them.” 

Please remember that you are not alone and have hundreds of thousands of Brothers and Sisters who’ve got your back.

Thank you for reading and Stay Safe.
K. Walmsley

“Anxiety hates a moving target.”

By Sergeant Steve Sweeting

As I write these newsletters week after week, you might think that I have a plan or that I follow a schedule of topics or ideas that I want to share… Nope, not at all. I go out there, work the streets and live my life, and at some point every week the topic reveals itself to me.

This week it was a phrase that I heard during a podcast. The host and guest were talking about modern life and how prevalent anxiety is nowadays, when the guest said something that really struck home. He said:

“Anxiety hates a moving target.”

As I heard the phrase, I knew it was true and I knew what this week’s newsletter would be.

Reduced anxiety is one of the main benefits that I first noticed when I started practicing Stoicism, and I’ve heard many of my students comment on how following the Stoics has helped them with their own anxiety.

See more content from StreetStoic.com

But why? At first, I thought maybe that increased confidence was why the philosophy reduced anxiety. It makes sense that if you are more confident in yourself, you will worry less about yourself… Maybe? Next I thought that maybe the answer was in Stoicism’s focus on rational thought and facing things head on. I suspected that because most fears and anxieties are irrational, exaggerated, and overblown, and that once you started insisting on logic that a lot of that would naturally fall away. I still think that maybe it is something like that. But now with this new phrase on my mind, I have a new theory. I’m thinking that the reason why the practice of Stoicism does so much to eliminate anxiety is the Stoic bias towards action.

The bias towards action is a thread that runs through all the writings and lives of the Stoics. Act, do, engage, take initiative, take responsibility, take ownership, or as my friend Bryce Lee sometimes says, “Be the main character in your own life.”

When you have this inclination to take action, you very much become a moving target. It makes it very hard for anxiety to take aim at you.

I know from personal experience that it is hard to be actively engaged in doing something about the problem and worry about the problem at the same time. When I am productively working in the here and now, I don’t have much time or bandwidth to worry and fret about the future or dwell on the past.

Maybe the simple answer to a lot of anxiety is “do something.” Maybe the trick is to be too busy to be anxious.

“Not in passivity, but in activity lie the evil and the good of the rational social animal, just as his virtue and his vice lie not in passivity, but in activity.”
– Marcus Aurelius

I’m a big fan of Jocko, and I think one of his famous sayings applies to this. He tells people that they should “default aggressive.” I think maybe he’s not saying that you should be confrontational with people all the time, but instead be aggressive about your life. If you have a problem, attack it. If you have a worry, confront it. This is very much a bias towards action.

When you look at Stoicism, this way of thinking is built into the Dichotomy of Control. It’s not just “don’t worry about the things you don’t control.” <– That’s the rookie version. The actual lesson of the DOC is that you actively focus on and work with the things that you DO control and the choices you CAN make. When you practice the DOC and actually use it, you learn to ask yourself constantly, “what can I do?” As long as you are alive, there is always something that you can do. The thing you learn through repetition is that if you only focus on internals, you never fail. The outcome is entirely up to you, and that is nothing to be anxious about at all.

“Make the best use of what is in your power, and take the rest as it happens.”
– Epictetus

When we experience trauma or situations that induce PTSD, I think this bias towards action can be a real lifesaver. After 20 years of living it and seeing it play out in the lives of others, I can tell you with a lot of confidence that the only wrong answer is to do nothing. Your action might be talking to a friend, your move might be to go get some therapy, you might attack a stack of books or a new philosophy like I did, you might get up and go to church, or maybe you get busy doing some good in the world or improving things. However you choose to be a moving target, I think that strategy is going to work out much better than staying still, doing nothing, or inaction.

If you deal with any anxiety, worry, or dread this week, maybe it’s time to turn yourself into a moving target and see if you can’t dodge the worst of it.

Amor Fati
– Sgt. Steve

Death Investigation Report Template

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

The FTO Dichotomy – Trainer or Evaluator

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.

Training to Lead with Wayne South

ONE HOUR RECORDED WEBINAR FEATURING WAYNE SOUTH AND MIKE SCHENTRUP

VIDEO LINK

“Training to Lead” is a practical, experience-driven guide for public safety professionals who train, mentor, and shape the next generation. Drawing on three decades in law enforcement and corrections, Wayne South breaks down what it truly takes to be an effective Field Training Officer and frontline leader. This book delivers clear, actionable strategies on adult learning, communication, stress management, feedback, and navigating daily challenges in high-stakes environments. Whether you are beginning your training journey or refining your skills, Training to Lead equips you to inspire professionalism, build confidence, and elevate performance across your agency.

Become a Master FTO – see what it takes to get this sought-after certification. Check out the program here.

Training to Lead on Amazon.

Were You Prepared? A Leadership Article for Training Officers

Written by Wayne South (BIO)

I remember the moment vividly, even though it was twenty-nine years ago. I was a patrol officer at a small agency. It was Thursday morning, and I was patrolling my assigned area.  The radio crackled, and the dispatcher said to return to the station and report to the Chief’s office. Naturally, I did what we all do. I replayed every encounter with a citizen, every traffic stop, and every call I had responded to over the last few days to figure out where a complaint came from.  I walked in, and the Chief didn’t even look up from his desk and said, “Sit.”  The chief was a retired Army Colonel, I thought, “colonels don’t tell people to have a seat, this is bad, I’m getting fired.” The Chief looked up and held out a pair of sergeant’s chevrons. He proceeded to tell me, “You have been doing a good job, and I am promoting you to sergeant, report to the midnight shift on Saturday.”

Was I prepared? Mentally, no. Preparedness is not a simple matter of memorized procedures, equipment checks, or years of experience. It is a leadership discipline, and nowhere is this more evident than in the leadership influence of our training officers. Training officers must be ready for two things at once: the challenge in front of them and the responsibility beside them. Training officers lead from their influence rather than their formal position. This requires a level of preparation that goes far beyond technical skill. What I didn’t realize then was that this feeling of sudden responsibility is the same moment many field training officers experience the first time they receive a trainee: leadership finds you before you are ready for it.

Preparedness is built long before critical incidents occur. It is a blend of competence, mindset, habits, training, and ethical grounding. You simply cannot fake preparation. When that moment arrives, and you get your first trainee, you realize they are relying on you, your judgment, and your ability to train and lead; your preparation is exposed. Trainers should ask themselves, “Am I prepared to not only perform, but to teach, guide, and influence under pressure?”

I believe there are four dimensions of being prepared. They are technical preparedness, mental and emotional preparedness, situational preparedness, and ethical preparedness.

Technical preparedness is the foundation of any high-risk profession. This consists of policies, procedures, tactics, and the ability to communicate effectively. But for the FTO leader, technical skills alone are not enough. A trainee will watch your every move, absorbing your habits long before they understand your explanations. FTO leaders are sending a message, intentionally or not, about what “right” looks like. Technical preparedness is modeling mastery and humility at the same time: “I know my job, and I am committed to learning more.”

Stress does strange things to people. It narrows vision, accelerates our heartbeat, and often drives impulsive decisions that are not technically sound. FTO leaders must be mentally and emotionally prepared to operate under pressure. The trainer must also be able to teach new officers how to survive in this environment. Mental preparedness could include staying calm when others can’t, knowing what your triggers are, and making decisions rather than reacting. Leadership is emotional work. The way you regulate yourself is often more influential than the words you speak.

Situational preparedness is the ability to read a scene, anticipate what’s next, and make decisions based on what you see. Great training officers excel at this. They run mental rehearsals, mentally preparing for multiple outcomes before they occur. The trainer must reinforce these skills in new officers through after-action reviews, situational awareness habits, and asking the “what if” questions. Training is not about producing a perfect response but developing a prepared mind.

Ethical preparedness is where real leadership begins. The public trusts us because they expect us to do the right thing even when nobody is watching or shortcuts are tempting. As a trainer/leader, you should know your “why” and your values. Recognizing when lines start to blur and model integrity daily. This is where trainees begin to learn what kind of professional they will be and where leaders show whether they are truly prepared to lead.

So, I ask you the same question I asked myself twenty-nine years ago, sitting in the Chief’s office, “Am I ready for this?”  In case you are wondering, I reported on the night shift and at our first briefing, I told them the same story. I added the fact that I did not feel prepared, but if we worked as a team, we would be okay. The team accepted my humility and made me a successful sergeant.

So, you may be asking what my first step is in improving my preparedness? Everything discussed in this article, technical competence, mental readiness, situational awareness, ethical decision making, and the ability to lead through influence, is at the heart of what we have built into the Master FTO Program. This program recognizes that FTOs are not just trainers but rather leaders first. They are the first leader a trainee ever follows. Trainers shape culture, teach expectations, and model professionalism in real time, often in moments where preparation makes all the difference.

The Master FTO program is designed to strengthen:

• Leadership readiness: Helping trainers understand their influence and use it intentionally.
• Coaching and communication: Building the skills to guide and develop, not simply evaluate.
• Ethical leadership: Reinforcing the responsibility that comes with shaping the next generation.
• Preparedness habits: Creating leaders who train for the moment before the moment arrives.

If you are ready to take the next step, check out the Master FTO program at https://waynesouth.com/master-fto  and get started on your journey.

Wayne South is a retired law enforcement lieutenant with 30 years of service and over 25 years of experience as an instructor at both the executive and line levels. He is a nationally recognized leadership and Field Training Officer (FTO) instructor and speaker, serving organizations such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Advanced Police Concepts, and the Southwest Virginia Criminal Justice Academy. Wayne provides leadership development, instructor training, and performance coaching that helps officers, supervisors, and executives reach their full potential.

He is the author of multiple publications on modern policing and leadership, including his recently released book Training to Lead, as well as A Lifetime of Service. Wayne holds a Master of Business Administration degree as well as a Master of Arts in Criminal Justice. Wayne serves on the Board of Directors for the Southeastern Field Training Officers Association.

Enhancing Patrol Response to Barricaded Subjects: A three-step strategy

The “3 Cs” can increase the chances of successful decision making and scene management during these complex incidents.

Written By: Lieutenant Charlie Ward (RET)

The topic of a barricaded subject is frequently discussed, but it is usually only addressed in tactical team training or command-level decisions. I’ve noticed that these calls often don’t receive the priority or attention they deserve at the patrol level even though this is typically where such situations arise.

Whether due to a lack of understanding of the situation’s severity, or uncertainty and hesitation about the first steps toward a resolution, patrol officers often proceed as if responding to any other call for service and primarily rely on luck being on their side. This isn’t their fault, as they often lack the necessary knowledge, training and planning on how to initiate the appropriate procedures.

This article is aimed at patrol-level officers, offering a quick, three-step method to employ when responding to a barricaded (or potentially barricaded) subject. These are three simple actions that can help set the event on the right course from the outset.

I’ve labeled them the “3 Cs” of patrol response to a barricaded subject, and they don’t necessarily have to be executed in any specific order. It is just crucial that they are completed and completed quickly. I coined the term the “3 Cs” to help officers remember them under stress. The goal is to execute these three tasks swiftly, allowing you to slow down and process the rest of the situation. While this method isn’t a comprehensive solution for the entire event, it can help guide officers during the initial moments of a patrol response.

Completing these three steps doesn’t guarantee that officers avoid a lethal encounter, the use of force, or any number of unpredictable situations. However, it does increase the chances of effectively managing curveballs and making more successful decisions as the event unfolds. Just like in golf, where a successful drive from the tee box requires properly teeing up the ball, handling a barricaded subject call successfully requires properly setting up your response. Achieve this by accomplishing these three tasks as quickly as possible.

What is a barricaded subject?

For this article, let’s clarify my use of the term “barricaded subject.” I’m referring to situations where a subject, aware or unaware of law enforcement presence, has sequestered themselves within a structure, whether they are alone or not. I approach both scenarios identically, ensuring that if the subject does become truly barricaded, our personnel and teams are already in position and prepared. I’m not referring to a hostage-taker in either case, but rather an individual who is inside a structure with others (such as family, children, friends, etc.). During your planning, it’s crucial to consider what actions should be taken with these individuals.

For the purposes of the initial patrol response, I also do not distinguish between a subject who is armed and one whose armament status is unknown. This approach is based on the preference to have all necessary measures in place should the situation escalate to an armed encounter, rather than being ill-prepared due to uncertainty about the subject’s armament. It’s generally easier to de-escalate and adjust strategies as more information becomes available, rather than having to rapidly escalate under pressure.

The principles I discuss for a barricaded subject can also be applied to scenarios in open-air environments where the subject is confined to a specific area. For instance, I encountered a situation with an armed suicidal subject who had self-inflicted wounds and was isolated in a space akin to a ball field. We managed to contain him to the field, established multiple contact teams with the necessary equipment, and confirmed that he had not committed a crime. However, due to his armed status and mental crisis in the middle of a public facility, we couldn’t depart from the scene.

The Three Cs

These are the 3 Cs for patrol’s initial response to a barricaded subject:

• Containment
• Contact team
• Confirm the crime

Containment

Containment is a straightforward yet frequently neglected or overlooked strategy when responding to barricaded subjects.

If a subject’s location is known and they are believed to be inside a structure or a specific open-air area, the initial responding officers must prioritize containment. Often, officers may not have complete information about the situation upon arrival. However, spending valuable time gathering that information without first ensuring containment can risk losing the suspect. They might have been in a specific location, but without containment, they could escape unnoticed.

Based on the information received from dispatch, if there’s a belief that the incident involves a subject inside a structure or localized area, one of the first priorities in your patrol response should be to contain them within that area.

Contact Team

Contact teams are integral to barricaded subject responses. The importance of beginning to establish a contact team as one of your first priorities cannot be emphasized enough. Once it becomes clear that an incident may lead to, or already involves, an individual barricaded in a location, responding officers and supervisors should start coordinating a contact team. This includes deciding who will be on it, what tools they will need and where they need to be positioned.

This doesn’t require much time. Begin by determining “who” will be on the team and their location. Given the personnel you have available, who are the best “players” to assign to the team? Consider their tactical experience, ability to handle stress, communication skills, and qualifications with certain tools (e.g., shield, ram, LLIM, etc.). If you don’t have someone for every required role, that’s okay. Establish an initial team that can handle the task and adjust as more resources arrive.

Initial thoughts on location must involve points of cover and concealment. How close can you be while maintaining both? Are there multiple exits, and do you need a team at each? Does the team have security, meaning, can you prevent onlookers and other individuals in the area from approaching or driving up to the team?

Additionally, don’t fall into the trap of forming a team solely for the purpose of making an arrest, contacting a suspect, or making an entry if exigent circumstances arise. While these are all important tasks that the team may need to complete and should be prepared for, they are not the only tasks.

The team will also need to manage victims or witnesses that are inside a structure (this is a frequent occurrence so plan for it). Sometimes these individuals exit immediately upon realizing the presence of law enforcement, and the team needs to be ready for that. The team will also be used to provide vital intelligence on the location, surrounding buildings, adjacent areas that may need to be evacuated, etc.

The contact team plays many roles and will be one of the most valuable components in resolving the situation effectively. Therefore, the sooner a shift can start forming the team, the smoother the decision-making process will be, and the more effective the communication will be as the event progresses.

Confirm the crime

Confirming what information you have as soon as possible will help determine priorities and adjust them as new information emerges. We are all aware that the information received during the initial call dispatch is not always accurate or complete. That’s why confirming a crime (gathering pertinent information) and relaying it to the responding personnel is one of my top three priorities.

Understanding the context within which you are working is crucial. The response and setup for a suicidal individual in a mental crisis will differ from those for a wanted violent felon inside a structure. Both of these scenarios will require different approaches from a response to a suspect who has just committed a non-violent misdemeanor, a hostage-taker, and so on.

Knowing the elements of a crime and whether they have been met, as well as what the crime is (or isn’t), will help guide the course and the subsequent decisions that need to be made.

Summary

Every day, law enforcement officers nationwide respond to calls that involve or could lead to encounters with barricaded or isolated subjects. These incidents require numerous considerations, many of which aren’t time-sensitive and can be addressed as the situation unfolds and as resources or tactical teams arrive. For the initial responding patrol officers and deputies, I’ve found that quickly accomplishing and then communicating the above three tasks − Containment, Contact Teams and Confirmation − often sets them up for success.

These tasks not only foster an element of confidence within the shift, but they also ensure everyone begins the incident on the same page. Officers know what is needed, what has been accomplished, what gaps might need to be filled, and can then guide the course of the incident. For responding supervisors and command staff, numerous decisions are to be made. Having these three tasks completed and communicated allows them to focus on command-level factors.

If patrol officers can accomplish these three tasks quickly, they’ll be well-positioned to react and overcome any obstacles that arise during the initial moments of a barricaded subject call.

Communication is a key element in all these tasks. As officers complete the tasks, they must communicate their progress to everyone else. This prevents duplication of efforts and continues to build confidence among the team and responding supervisors, assuring them that the shift has the incident under control.

Achieving these 3 C’s − Containment, Contact Teams and Confirmation − is a goal that can help you “control the chaos” in these complex situations.

About the author

Lieutenant Charlie Ward (RET) is a 20-year veteran with the Gainesville (Florida) Police Department. He has served on all three of his agency’s tactical units as an operator and as the Team Commander of the Emergency Services Team. In his career he also worked in patrol, undercover narcotics, served as a K9 handler in street crimes and highway interdiction, as a patrol sergeant, and most recently three years as a watch commander. He is currently assigned as an Executive Lieutenant in Operations. He and a fellow Lieutenant helped create and now coordinate the Gainesville Police Department annual Leadership Academy. 

Ways to Build Trust

By Mike Schentrup

Students ask me all the time, how do I build trust with my team. Here are some easy and proven ways to build trust and ultimately, good relationships with your teammates.

From WatchTower Leadership Solutions.

• Keep Commitments –  when someone asks you to do something, either one of your team or your boss, follow through. Make sure it doesn’t fall through the cracks.  Keeping you commitments demonstrates the basic level of trust.
• Deliver Results – or as Jocko Willick says, “PERFORM!”  The is no better way to build trust with your boss and Command than performing well.  Whether as an individual or as the team leader, when a task is assigned, dominate it. And always look for opportunities to help improve your organization.
• Be present – you can’t be part of team if they never see you. Get out in the field and help. You don’t have to supervise them, just help them.  Let them run the call and just ask what you can do to help.
• Admit mistakes and apologize – I always say, and I have posted a lot, there is no better way to build trust that to admit when you are wrong.
• Build relationships – if the cornerstone of leadership is trust, then the BEST way to build trust is through relationships. John Maxwell said, “Nobody cares how much you know until they know how much you care about them.”
• Extend trust – we must give people our trust before they will trust us.  Trust is a two way street.  We have to extend trust first.
• Humility – the second cornerstone of leadership.  Humility help you to be open, sometimes even vulnerable, and always approachable.

Work hard on these things every day and you will build a great team!

Check out Mike’s leadership course, Leadership for Front Line Supervisors

Integrity

By Steve Sweeting (aka Sgt Steve)

Every Police Officer knows that the #1 rule is “Do not lie”. Our Integrity is the cornerstone of who we are and what we believe in. If you can’t trust a Police Officer, then who can you trust?  Integrity and honesty are so important in our profession,  that lying is usually the one violation capable of having you fired immediately. 

The whole point of Stoicism is to become a good person, and as a good person, you will be fulfilled and at peace with the world around you. A person who does not have integrity will have A LOT trouble being a good person or being at peace with the world around them. How much stress and anxiety will you have if you are lying and are constantly worried about people learning the truth.? 

Integrity is more than just not lying. Having integrity means that you are a person who is committed to taking the right action no matter what the circumstance. I like to think of Integrity as being a combination of reliability, good intentions, and honesty. 

The Stoics didn’t use the word Integrity much. The author Vincent Kennedy said that the Stoics “Saw it (integrity) as part of being human – part of being virtuous.” Kennedy went on to quote Albert Camus the existentialist philosopher who said:

“Integrity has no need of rules”

I like this quote, because it speaks to some of the seeming contradictions that Police Officers practicing Stoicism sometimes experience. In order to enforce the law, we are given wide leeway to break many laws. We can speed, run red lights, we can hit people first, we can carry weapons where others aren’t allowed, and we are allowed to lie to suspects and offenders during investigations. If you aren’t constantly focused on being a good person, it may be easy to lose your way with all of this rule and law breaking. On the other hand, if you have integrity, it is fairly easy to understand when and where the rules apply to you and when they don’t. 

• You can run that redlight to go save someone in an emergency, you shouldn’t run that redlight just because you don’t feel like waiting. 
• You can lie to that suspect, or tell half-truths in the pursuit of justice, but you can’t lie on your timecard or to your spouse. 
• You can tackle a suspect who is about to resist, but you can’t hit someone just because they annoy you. 

Check out more of Steve’s content here.

While the Stoics didn’t use the word “integrity” much if you explore their works, you can draw some pretty obvious conclusions about what they thought. Marcus Aurelius had a lot to say on the topic, and he was often succinct and to the point: 

Do not act as if you were going to live ten thousand years. Death hangs over you. While you live, while it is in your power, be good.

– Marcus Aurelius

Never esteem anything as of advantage to you that will make you break your word or lose your self-respect.

-Marcus Aurelius

A man should be upright, not kept upright.

-Marcus Aurelius

If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it.

-Marcus Aurelius

While your reputation is something that is outside of your control in many ways, you can influence others to have a positive perception of you. In Law Enforcement, the number one way to accomplish this is to have a high degree of integrity. If you practice integrity and honesty it will be obvious to all you deal with. 

“How rotten and fraudulent when people say they intend to ‘give it to you straight.’ What are you up to, dear friend? It shouldn’t need your announcement, but be readily seen, as if written on your forehead, heard in the ring of your voice, a flash in your eyes — just as the beloved sees it all in the lover’s glance. In short, the straightforward and good person should be like a smelly goat — you know when they are in the room with you.”

—Marcus Aurelius 

I’ll leave you with one last thought and quote from the great Marcus Aurelius. If you have not been being a person with integrity, if you have piled up the lies and it feels like there is no way out. If you have made a habit out of lying to yourself and others, Stop it, and start behaving better. Start being a person that you respect. If you have to lie cheat or steal to obtain or keep a thing, you probably don’t need it.

If you are lying to maintain a relationship, consider that the person you are lying to isn’t in a relationship with you, they are actually with the fake version of you that will cease to exist the second that the truth is found out. Whatever situation you are in, if you are looking to live a better more meaningful life, Marcus Aurelius has some good advice. 

“Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one.” 

– Marcus Aurelius

Behaving with integrity can be a challenge at first, but it is achievable and worth the effort. If you follow the four stoic virtues (Wisdom, Justice, Courage, and Temperance), behaving with integrity should come fairly naturally.