|
|
REPORT RAPPORT |
|
|
REPORT RAPPORT |
|
DATE:
|
07 February 2011 |
|
TO/DEST:
|
Executive Director, Ottawa Police Services Board |
|
FROM/EXP:
|
Chief of Police, Ottawa Police Service |
|
SUBJECT/OBJET: |
USE OF FORCE: 2010 ANNUAL REPORT - REVISED
|
That the Ottawa Police Services Board receive this report for information.
The Police Service has a comprehensive policy that outlines the roles and responsibilities of members with respect to the use of force. The policy addresses training topics, re-qualification cycles, administration of records and reporting on incidents involving use of force. It ensures that the OPS meets the requirements for “Use of Force” set out in Regulation 926 of the Police Services Act as well as the Provincial Adequacy Standards and Police Services Board policy. In accordance with these policies, an annual Use of Force study must be prepared, be reviewed by the Chief and the Board, and be made available to the community.
This Annual Report presents statistics on the number of incidents of use of force in 2010, categorized by the levels of force outlined in the Ontario Use of Force Model established by the Province. As required by the above-noted polices, staff are presenting the Annual Report to the Board for review and to make it widely available to the community and other partners.
The staff of the Professional Development Centre are responsible for many of the roles outlined in the Use of Force Policy. They:
· Formulate and deliver Use of Force Training (UFT).
· Analyse each report submitted by an officer in every instance in which force is used to ensure it was appropriate.
· Based on that analysis, adjust the training curriculum as necessary and/or provide remedial training to individual officers.
· Maintain all training records.
· Prepare the Annual Use of Force Study.
In accordance with the OPS policy, Use of Force training is delivered in accordance with Provincial Adequacy Standards using the Ontario Use of Force Model (2004). The model indicates the appropriate Use of Force option based on the situational factors as well as the subject’s behaviour. A diagram of the model is included below.
Ontario Use of Force Model (2004)
Summary of 2010 Use of Force Activity
The Ottawa Police Service responded to 386,327 calls for service in 2010 compared to 366,018 calls for service in 2009—an increase of 5.5%.
In 2010 there were 740 ‘use of force’ applications used by members of the Ottawa Police Service, an increase of approximately 55% from the 479 ‘use of force’ applications reported in 2009. This information was gathered from Use of Force Reports submitted by officers. A Use of Force Report is required to be submitted when: a firearm is discharged (except during training); a firearm is displayed to the public; an intermediate weapon or weapon of opportunity is used; or when physical force is used resulting in injury. Various applications of force can be submitted on one Use of Force Report. From these standards it is clear that the reported figures may not necessarily give an accurate depiction of all incidences in which Ottawa Police interacted dynamically with the public.
Consider the following example:
An officer, while trying to control a subject, with good reason draws and expands their baton in anticipation of needing to use it. The subject’s behaviour calms so the officer puts away the baton. The subject then becomes assaultive towards the officer who performs a ‘text book’ empty-hand grounding technique, handcuffs the subject and transports the uninjured subject to cellblock. Since the weapon (baton) was not used on the subject and no medical attention was required following the incident, no Use of Force report need be submitted for this case.
Force Reported
The 740 use of force applications can be broken down as follows:
Physical Control Techniques………………………. 68
Aerosol Weapon…………………………………... 46
Conducted Energy Weapons (Taser) ……………... 24
Firearm Drawn…………………………………… 276
Firearm Pointed at person………………………... 249
Firearm Discharged……………………………….. 70
TOTAL: 740
Reports for incidents involving firearms have a tendency to skew annual figures since there are multiple combinations in which the firearm may have been drawn, pointed and/or discharged during the incident. In an effort to clarify the figures for force option choices, the following two charts do not include reports of firearms drawn or pointed at a person. This approach represents 215 applications of use of force in 2010 and 138 in 2009:
Comparison Chart – Force Options Used 2009 & 2010
Use of Force (Including Firearms Drawn and Pointed)
Reports per Month 2010
The average number of reports submitted per month in 2010 was 46. As can be seen above, peaks occurred as would be expected during holiday periods in the winter and summer months while activity dropped during the period of poor weather conditions between February and April.
Physical control can be defined as any physical technique used to control a subject that does not involve the use of a weapon. The Ontario Use of Force Model identifies two levels of physical control: soft and hard.
Soft techniques are control oriented and have a lower probability of causing injury. They may include restraining techniques, joint locks and non-resisting handcuffing.
Hard techniques are intended to stop a subject’s behaviour or to allow application of control techniques and have a higher probability of causing injury. They may include empty hand strikes such as knee strikes, punches and kicks.
Although the total number of applications of Physical Control rose sharply from 20 in 2009 to 68 in 2010, it should be noted that on only 23 occasions was Physical Control the sole use of force reported. This may be attributed to all officers having received increased training on transition between force options resulting in a greater willingness to use alternative responses, and training on Use of Force report completion whereby more than one option may be chosen.
Note: Use of Physical Control techniques need only be reported on Form 1 if it results in an injury requiring medical attention.
This use of force option involves the use of less-lethal weapons. Less lethal weapons are those whose use is not intended to cause serious injury or death. Aerosol spray, Conducted Energy Weapons and Impact weapons fall under this heading. Impact weapons can be further divided into soft and hard categories. In a soft manner they are used to assist in restraining an individual who resists arrest. In this capacity they are normally employed as a tool to augment physical control restraint and control techniques. Impact weapons can be used in a hard manner when a police officer or a member of the public, is being physically assaulted. In this capacity, the impact weapon can be used to deliver strikes.
The standard impact weapon on issue to OPS is the ASP collapsible baton.
Intermediate Weapon Deployments 2007 - 2010
During 2010, the Province of Ontario adopted the term Conducted Energy Weapon (CEW) for use when referring to any ‘Taser’ type weapons. Ottawa Police Service currently has 83 qualified CEW operators. Operators are deployed as front line supervisors and Tactical Unit officers, as well as 4 qualified Professional Development Center Instructors. The increase in deployments during 2010 may be attributed to the inclusion of CEW as an option in decision making training scenarios during officer’s annual Use of Force requalification.
From the diagram above it would appear that the extremely high figure for impact weapon use in 2007 was an anomaly. The reduction in subsequent years may also be attributed in part to increased availability of and use of CEW in circumstances in which an impact weapon may previously have been used. Use of impact weapons has continued to decrease in recent years despite sustained emphasis on their use and benefits during officer’s annual Use of Force requalification.
Lethal Force-Firearms
Firearms documented in this report include: officers’ side arms, carbines, as well as Tactical firearms. With respect to carbines and Tactical firearms, officers at times would not indicate the weapon being drawn since it did not come out of a holster. This resulted in a discrepancy between firearms drawn and firearms pointed.
Of the 249 instances when a firearm was pointed at a person, on 59 occasions this was as part of the execution of a warrant by the OPS’ Tactical Unit team in line with their tactics and training.
Firearms Pointed at a Person 2007 - 2010
The marked increase in reports of firearms pointed between 2009 and 2010 may be due, in part, to improvements made in training officers to report all options used during an incident.
Note: In line with Provincial Guidelines, a single team report may be submitted for all members of a specialist team involved in the same incident. Therefore, on occasion, several Tactical team members may have pointed firearms during an incident but only one report would have been submitted.
Officers on patrol are each required to submit an individual report when appropriate. This, in turn, results in a number of reports being received for one incident. For example, in May 2010, six patrol officers attended a call in which a pit bull dog had attacked three civilians. All six officers drew their firearms to protect themselves against the dog and subsequently six separate Use of Force reports were received.
Animal Control
Of the 70 times firearms were discharged by officers in 2010, 68 of those times were to put down animals. Of the remaining two incidents, one was accidental, while the other involved a member of Tactical unit shooting and injuring a suspect who was armed with a knife and a handgun.
As can be seen above, when incidents involving firearms discharged to control dangerous or injured animals are removed from the annual figures, Physical Control and OC Spray were by far the most common uses of force by officers during the year.
Information and Analysis
From statistics available and analysis of details submitted by officers completing Use of Force reports during 2010, the following should be highlighted:
Years of Service of Officers:
- The current average police experience of OPS officers on patrol is 5.7 years.
- 235 reported incidents in 2010 involved an officer with less than 5 years Police service.
- Of these, on 45 occasions the officer dealt with the incident while alone.
- On 68 occasions involving an officer with less than 5 years service, a suspect was later confirmed as having been armed with a weapon during the incident.
Cellblock:
- 12 incidents occurred in OPS Central Cellblock
- Of these, 10 involved officers deploying OC spray, one Taser deployment and one physical control.
Tactical Team:
- OPS Tactical Team completed 104 Use of Force reports in 2010
- 79 of these incidents were during the execution of a warrant.
- On 84 occasions Tactical reported using force in order to affect an arrest.
Carbine:
- OPS currently have 85 officers qualified to carry the C8 carbine—22 of who qualified for the first time in 2010. The carbine is designated as a perimeter rifle and was therefore used on most occasions to provide longer range security for other officers.
- In 2010 the C8 carbine was deployed on 107 occasions by patrol officers.
- On 26 of these incidents a suspect was later found to have been armed with a weapon.
Arrests:
- During 2010, Ottawa Police received an average of 44 calls for service every hour, which translates to roughly 365,000 calls annually. Of those calls, 9,797 arrests were made and in 210 instances, use of force was required to affect the arrest, or 2.1% of the time. While each call for service has the potential for use of force, in fact, it is rarely used.
CONSULTATION
By submitting this report to the Board, use of force statistics and background information will be available for discussion with the community and other partners.
Not applicable.
Use of Force monitoring is a critical function which provides opportunities to evaluate specific personnel in various fact situations and determine whether training and policy compliance standards have been met. In addition, it permits analysis of data to identify trends that may or may not be indicative of the need for training intervention. Use of force monitoring allows: an assessment of the appropriateness of officer interventions through a mandated Use of Force continuum; it allows an assessment of the efficacy of equipment; and ultimately through the public disclosure of this data, it allows for a level of public scrutiny around the kinds of interventions being undertaken.
Given the information and analysis in this report, it is clear that despite a heavy workload, use of force by Ottawa Police officers is in fact quite rare. Officers deal with a wide variety of incidents and individuals, while continuing to exercise patience and diligence while using force in a judicious and appropriate manner.
Vern White
Chief of Police
