Our last full session of the Hatboro and Horsham Citizens Police Academy was held on April 8.  The topics were Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) squads and the skillful discipline of hostage negotiation.

The SWAT concept was born out of a range of incidents that occurred in the late 1960s.  Incidents like the University of Texas clock tower sniper and the riots that followed the murder of Martin Luther King, Jr. dramatically highlighted the need for teams of law enforcement officers trained specifically in more skillful and specific methods of resolving complex crises.

The clock tower sniper shootings occurred over just an 80-minutes,16 people were killed, 32 wounded in a systematic attack launched from a strategically difficult to suppress firing position.  It wasn’t resolved until three police officers took matters into their own hands.  Accompanied by a civilian, they arrived on the balcony hiding the sniper’s 27 stories above the university mall.

These officers had no specific tactical training for the event or anything similar to what present day SWAT team members receive.  They had no special weapons, using their normal service weapons, a rifle and shotgun.  They were successful primarily because the civilian accidentally fired the rifle he was carrying, which distracted Charles Whitman, the U.S. Marine-trained sniper, as two officers approached his sniper’s nest from the other direction.

The evening started with a demo room incursion by members of the Eastern Montgomery County SWAT.

Eastern Montgomery County SWAT (EMCSWAT) was formed in 1989 and currently holds responsibility for the communities of Hatboro, Horsham, Rockledge, Upper Moreland, Lower Moreland, Bryn Athyn and Jenkintown.  There are plans to incorporate the SWAT teams and areas of responsibility for Abington and Cheltenham with EMCSWAT to form Montgomery County SWAT East.

Some statistics on SWAT activity:

• 17,000 police departments in the U.S.
• 1200 tactical SWAT teams
• Only 49 SWAT teams are “full-time”, dedicated fully to SWAT assignments
  • usually located in large metropolitan areas (Philadelphia, Chicago, New York City, etc.)
• 1999 study showed 566 SWAT incidents nationwide
  • 520 were resolved without shots fired
  • 368 wanted criminals or suspects apprehended
• In the Eastern Montgomery County area, 90% of SWAT assignments are for serving warrants or to resolve barricade situations (taking of hostages or refusal to surrender within a structure)
• EMCSWAT averages 1 assignment per month, and has had just ONE INCIDENT where shots were fired!

All SWAT operations consist of the following responsibilities:

• Perimeter: Outer perimeter manned by uniformed patrol, inner perimeter by SWAT team members
  • Inner perimeter: containment of immediate hostile environment, relay close-in intelligence to Command, ready to control or neutralize threat in any attempt to escape containment or in hostile action.
• Negotiator: Sole contact with person-of-interest (POI).  Works to calm subject and control situation.  Relies on available intelligence to decipher situation looking for a “hook” that will appeal to the subject and resolve the standoff.  Stationed away from immediate scene.
  • Assistant Negotiator writes all communications down; monitors progress; reminds Negotiator of pertinent information
•  Sniper and Observer:  Occupies high ground and provides cover to other responders
  • Average SWAT sniper shot distance: 60 yards
•  Entry team:  Responsible for entry with a plan should situation warrant
• Emergency Action Team:  Prepares for “hot” entry without a plan should situation suddenly change requiring quick entry action.
• Intelligence Unit:  Looks to develop information (the hook) on the POI that can be used to de-escalate situation and elicit surrender
• Command:  Manages the overall operation; ensures negotiators get what they need; responsible for overall safety

Controls:

• Pennsylvania prohibits negotiators from recording Negotiator-POI communications unless a warrant is obtained.
• All potential SWAT incidents are evaluated BEFORE SWAT in authorized to act.  Instrument is a one page chart/questionnaire used to summarize the hostile situation, scored on a weighted scale
  • 0-14:  no SWAT action required
  • 14-20:  requires consult with on-scene commander to determine SWAT appropriateness
  • 20 <:  SWAT action required

Qualifications and training:

• Minimum two years of service in police duties
• Rookie school:  40 hours training, usually off-site (e.g. FBI school, Quantico, VA)
• Regular shooting qualifications: must shoot at 90% proficiency
• Two scheduled 12-hour training days per month, attendance at one required
• Annual trips to Ft. Indiantown Gap or Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst where building mockups are available

The most interesting insight was the expression of what a successful SWAT intervention consists:  no shooting, no assault, no injuries, and the peaceful resolution of the immediate situation.  Another interesting perspective was the answer to the question often asked these days about the “militarization” of police departments.  The point was straightforward and one with which it is hard to argue.  The most successful SWAT operations occur when the POI sees scores of cops, some dressed in a full complement military gear.  They see the vast array of equipment and perhaps the sounds of a helicopter overhead.  And they decide the most reasonable course of action is to walk out of the building – empty-handed – to be taken into custody safely.

Shock and awe might be the cop’s best friend!

The second half of the session addressed hostage and standoff negotiations, where the first choice of law enforcement is – once again – the peaceful resolution of the most easily inflamed situations.  The presentation was given by retiring Detective Dave Bussenger, a former negotiator who stepped aside to ensure experienced negotiators were developed before he left the force to retire.

Bussenger’s presentation, rich in personal experience and the insight gained through years of being the #1 Negotiator, made you want to pay close attention.  His most surprising tidbit was his belief that the movie Dog Day Afternoon (Al Pacino, John Cazale) was perhaps the best portrayal of what an actual negotiation situation is really like.

Detective Bussenger confided that what drove him to be successful in his negotiations was to consider the consequences of failure … the lives affected on both sides if a subject could not be talked out peaceably.  He allowed that one of the most important skills he had as a negotiator was the ability to understand what a subject was feeling and experiencing during a standoff.

He allowed that the BEST thing he could hear from a barricaded criminal was a set of demands, no matter how bizarre or impractical.  The reason?  It indicated that the  ensnared individual WANTED to live because they had a plan for surviving.

The worst scenarios were those where the individual had hostages trapped with him that he knew intimately (spouses, parents, siblings, friends) yet made no demands for resolving the standoff.  This characterized an expressive form of behavior that set a red flag for the negotiator.  Many are suffering from psychological issues like severe depression or chemical imbalances or inappropriate emotional responses.  These situations hold the greatest potential for suicide.

Bussenger listed the characteristics of a good negotiation:

• Patience
• Soothing voice
• Finely tuned listening skills
• Ability to leave emotion out
• Conveying the message that the negotiator is there to help

Negotiators with potential suicide victim

A successful negotiator insists from the very beginning that the subject must come out; he can never lie to the subject; never say “no”; and must be able to empathize with the subject’s perspective.  And in cases where suicide is a possibility, the negotiator must be able to stress the stark realities of taking such action versus the other positive options and outcomes available.

The first 15-45 minutes of any potential standoff situation is the most important.  In cases where mental instability is present the negotiator can never indulge in the subject’s hallucinations, less he set himself up to caught in a lie and destroying all trust.

Negotiating teams generally include 4-10 individuals.  The primary negotiator will conduct all direct contact with the POI.  A support negotiator takes note of all communications and assists the primary in tracking progress and keeping tabs on details.  In the meantime an Intelligence component of the group will speak to family and friends in an attempt to glean pertinent information and discover a “hook” which can be used to bring a standoff to a successful conclusion.

Even deep in the heart of Texas …

During the course of two sessions the Hatboro and Horsham Citizens Police Academy covered Crime Scene Investigations (CSI).  Although I was unable to attend the first session, where Horsham detectives presented the framework of CSI work, do to more pressing matters.  As a result, those observations come to you through the eyes of a fellow classmate, Emily Ann.

The first CSI class was led by two of Horsham’s finest, Detectives David L. Bussenger and Robert J. Waltz.  The second CSI session came two weeks later, led by Montgomery County Detective Richard J. Nilsen, Jr. of the Forensic Services Unit in the Office of the District Attorney for Montgomery County, PA.

In the following description, only the names have been changed to protect the innocent …

Crime scene investigations are geared towards determining Who committed a crime by answering the questions

• What took place?
• When did it occur?
• Where?
• How?
• Why?

The purpose of CSI is to determine what happened and who is responsible.  The ultimate goal is a proper “Guilty” verdict and punishment as set forth by the Court.

The investigative process begins with the initial police contact.

The first responding officers at any potential crime scene are responsible for rendering first aid and to summon an ambulance, if necessary.  They must also note what they see, hear, and smell … Time of day, weather conditions, people and vehicles at the scene and that might leave before investigators arrive.

Responding officers must also protect the crime scene from unnecessary traffic, disturbance, or contamination.  Responders will listen for what might be said by people on the scene and must separate any witnesses isolated from one another.  Witnesses are separated to prevent any comparison of their version of events and – if involved – to ensure they do not rehearse their stories.  All observations are then passed on to the assigned investigators.

The investigators will call upon additional specialists as needed.  They include photographers, sketch artists, evidence recorders who maintain the “chain of custody” for all physical evidence, and experts from more specific fields of study … anthropologists, blood pattern analysts, and the medical examiner in cases of death.

Physical evidence is the bread and butter of law enforcement investigative work.  The chain of custody for that physical evidence is crucial to successful prosecutions.  Proper chain of custody allows for the identification and description of all aspects of the physical evidence months or years after its collection.  The chain of custody must be protected from any contamination and preventable degradation of biological samples.  For that reason, the chain of custody must be able to prove that all evidence was properly preserved and kept properly secured from tampering until presented in Court during the criminal trial.

Predictable physical changes in evidence, such as degrading tissue and blood samples cannot be entirely prevented.   The potential for an investigator to cause changes in evidence through improper technique must be anticipated and prevented.  Evidence recorders must be able to address anticipated changes in physical evidence (e.g. normal degeneration of blood and tissue samples) from the time the evidence is collected until it is presented in Court.

Once investigators begin processing the immense amount of data from a crime scene, it’s important that they NEVER overlook the obvious.  After all evidence has been collected, photographed and sketched, and all witnesses have been interviewed, investigators will compare their initial findings to ensure all observations and individual perspectives are included.

Other considerations during an investigation:

• Physical evidence does not lie.  Let it tell you what happened.
• A hypothesis developed from the evidence and interviews is an important step.  But an investigator can never be afraid to change the theory especially if the physical evidence indicates a change is appropriate.

My friend, Emily Ann, described for me the highlight of that first CSI night … the crime scene adaptation presented by Detectives Bussenger and Waltz.  Emily Ann described a burglary crime scene laid out for the CPA participants with an array of physical evidence, challenging questions put to the participants, and the interesting way the detectives explained how they process such a crime scene.

Emily Ann found it interesting and quite instructive to see a crime scene laid out as an investigator might find it; and learning how they would go about weaving a theory from the physical evidence documented.

This was the angle that Detective Nilsen was really able to hammer home during his presentation on the second night of CSI.  He was able to provide both context and bit of visual discomfort as he provided very real and very graphic crime scene photos.  (All photos were carefully taken and framed so as to not reveal any details on the specific case or any information about the victims who were portrayed.)

But first Detective Nilsen had to blow away all my preconceived notions of detective work as I have gleaned from years and years of watching CSI: Miami/Las Vegas/NYC, eight different versions of Law & Order, and a healthy dose of Criminal Minds!  Apparently, most everything I have come to believe in watching detective TV is a farce, perpetrated by television’s need to fit a weeks or months-long story into 44 minutes (sans commercials).

Penelope Garcia, Master Cyber-Detective Criminal Minds

There is no Garcia pounding furiously on a computer keyboard and able to provide everything from hat size and favorite color to the specific location and contents of last meal eaten for every crime victim, perpetrator, and key witness privy to the macabre details of any violent crime. There is no magical finger-printing system that churns through potential print matches as a detective watches, then spits out the matching perp in the time it takes to fix your mocha latte.  There is no crime lab that would let a regular detective jump right in, complete with a blue Tyvek hazmat suit to twiddle around with the DNA sequencing systems and scanning electro-microscopes (unless properly certified).

Great … Now I have another 6 hours a week I’ll have to find something productive to do …

Detective Nilsen’s presentation highlighted how such crime scene evidence as blood spatters, ballistics dynamics, corpse conditions (lividity, stage of mortis, wound dynamics, etc.), transference of materials from perpetrator to victim, etc. all come together to prove the detective’s favorite adage …

Dead men DO tell tales!

Modern day detective’s best friend

My personal “wow moment” was watching the animation generated by a piece of equipment called a Scan Station, a surveying type tool that provides a 360°, computer-generated survey of any potential crime scene.  The equipment is so sophisticated that once scanned a detective can visualize a crime scene from any angle (above, below, any side), even from “outside” the scene, as was proven when the class visualized a particular crime scene from outside then “flew” in through a window to view the interior of a virtual crime scene depiction.

Detective Nilsen, a former Lower Merion officer and Widener Law School graduate, also provided an in-depth look at fingerprint analysis and AFIS (Automated Fingerprint Identification System), the dynamics of projectiles (bullets), DNA and blood collection, and a case study in the arrest and conviction of Charles “Acme John” Eichinger, one of his first cases as a MontCo detective.

The most important thing I learned from these two nights of CSI …

Crime is definitely not a good long-term job choice!