Pepper Spray Evaluation Project
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file, please contact us at NCJRS.gov. L~ Pepper Spray Evaluation Project Results of the Introduction of Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) into the Baltimore County, MD, Police Department ~QCIATIONose ' I ~ S~NCF.~s93 I June 21, 1995 I Final Report Prepared for: i National Institute of Justice i ! U.S. Department Of Justice I F IACP PROJECT STAFF I r"" Daniel N. Rosenblatt Executive Director I pRINCIP/~L PROJECT STAFF Jerome A. Needle Director, Programs and Research I John Firman Report Coordinator Charles E. I-Iigginbotham Director, Information and Services John Granfield Project Manager I Steven M. Edwards Research Consultant Jami Long-Onnen On-Site Research Coordinator I! Lynne Hargest Project Specialist i PROJECT SUPPORT Dawn Phoubandith Report Editor I Katherine Spivey Assistant Editor Carolyn Cockroft Staff Specialist Edmund J. Kelly Support Specialist I: Tony Occhiuzzo Staff Specialist Lt. Roger Gross Visiting Fellow Lara Walker Editorial Assistant I David Bright Research Assistant I I I.... I r-- TABLE OF CONTENTS I' " Page Acknowledgments i Executive Summary i I Introduction 1 L Literature Review 2 i Chloroacetophenone (CN) 2 Ochlorobenzylidene-Malononitrile (CS) 4 I Oleoresin Capsicum 6 IL Research Setting 10 1 BCPD Interest in a Force Alternative 11 I IIL Project Methodology 12 Process Evaluation 12 I Outcome Methodology 12 Development of the Measurement Instruments 13 ! Data Limitations 16 ! IV. Findings: Outcome Evaluation 18 Overview Analysis 18 Reasons/Use of Spray 21 ! Application of OC on Animals 44 Summary of Outcome Data 44 Findings Regarding the Five Principle Questions 48 I v. Findings: Process Evaluation 51 I Training Issues 51 BCPD Training 53 Decontamination/First Aid 54 I Standard Operating Procedure 54 Use-of-Force Issues 55 Reporting the Use of OC as a Use of Force 56 I Police Use of Deadly Force in Defense of OC Spray Attack 57 I VI. Conclusion 59 I g :.., I Bibliography i Appendices A. News Release and Article I B. Executive Brief: "Pepper Spray and In-Custody Death" I C. BCPD Precinct Boundaries D. Data Collection Sheet i E. Unstructured Follow-Up Interview ! F. List of Officer°s Comments a G. BCPD Lesson Plan H. Training Bulletin i I. Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) I J. Legal Officer Section (LOS) Opinion ! K. Sample Cases ! ! I i i I I i m :. LIST OF HGURES Page I Figure 1: Monthly OC Sprays 19 Figure 2: Initial OC Contacts 20 Figure 3: OC Use/Location 22 I Figure 4: Weather Conditions 23 Figure 5: Suspect Sex 24 I Figure 6: Suspect Frame Size 25 Figure 7: Behavior at Encounter 26 Figure 8: Force/Threat Used by Suspect 27 I Figure 9: OC Application 29 Figure lO: Distance OC Sprayed 30 Figure 11: Number of Sprays per Incident 31 i Figure 12: Suspect Actions after Application 33 Figure 13: Suspect Incapacitation 34 Figure 14: Officer/Suspect Injuries 38 i Figure 15: Complaints Alleging Force 39 Figure 16: Complaints Alleging Force 40 Figure 17: Officers Assaulted 41 I Figure 18: Officers Assaulted 42 Figure 19: Decontamination 43 Figure 20: Animal Behavior at Spraying 45 I Figure 21: Animal Distance Sprayed 46 I Figure 22: Animal Size 47 LIST OF TABLES I Table 1: Offenses at Initial Contact 35 Table 2: Suspect Behavior at Encounter 35 i Table 3: Actions after Application by Behavior at Encounter 36 I I I I I I ! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I The IACP research staff would like to thank the Baltimore County Police Department (BCPD) i and its staff, particularly Chief of Police Michael Gambrill; Captain James Johnson, Essex District; Officer Michael Daughaday of Internal Affairs; Officer Henry Himpler and Officer Jeffrey Munchel of the Training Division; members of the Firearms Training staff; and Andria Gayer and other members of the Crime Analysis Unit for their support in this research effort. I . Gaining a clear understanding of the use and impact of Oleoresin Capsicum could only have been accomplished through collaboration with a department employing the spray. BCPD understood the importance of this research and cooperated fully with the research team, ! providing complete access to BCPD staff and records. The department is in a large part responsible for the success of this effort and we thank BCPD for its help. In addition, we would ! like to acknowledge and thank the Anne Anmdel Police Department (AAPD), and particularly Chief Robert Russell, for its assistance in the implementation of the OC pilot test conducted for this project. I I/ I ! I I i I I m. I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .? Violent encounters between police officers and individuals resisting arrest have historically been a source of injury to officers and subjects. These violent encounters have often resulted in complaints of the level of force used by the police. Concern for these issues along with I increased civil liability and court imposed limitations on the use of deadly force have necessitated the search for safe and effective less-than'lethal (LTL) force alternatives. One alternative that has gained popularity is Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) spray, or as it is commonly I called, pepper spray. Despite extensive field application in virtually hundreds of police departments, few evaluative I studies of OC have been conducted. To address this issue, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) awarded a grant to the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) to evaluate the I effectiveness of pepper spray. The IACP, in turn, partnered with the Baltimore County, Maryland, Police Department (BCPD) as the site agency for pepper spray implementation and I evaluation.Key elements of the study include pre- and post-introduction assessments of assaults on officers, subject injuries and the number of use-of-force complaints. Implementation/process issues, including product selection, training and operational considerations, were also examined. I I. LITERATURE REVIEW i Various forms of chemical agents have been used in war as offensive weapons for centuries. After World War I, however, officials expressed an interest in extending the use of chemicals into the realm of law enforcement. It was hypothesized that these agents could effectively l control criminals and riotous crowds as effectively as they controlled enemies during warfare. I Chloroacetophenone (CN) This organic compound, in its most pure form, is a white crystalline solid resembling salt or I . sugar. It is available in many forms (e.g., mist, vapor or dust), and must be projected into the air to disperse the lacrimating (tear-producing) material. For use as a liquid aerosol, CN must be mixed with alcohol or ether. CN is a te.~ng agent that causes the eyes to water profusely I and the respiratory passages to become irritated. Breathing thus becomes shallow and difficult. Other physical symptoms include tightness in the chest, stinging sensations on the skin and ! nausea. Psychological effects of fear and panic may also occur (Jones, 1976). As an irritant that relies on pain compliance, CN is most effective on those individuals who are lucid and have a normal pain threshold. Those who are intoxicated, extremely agitated and/or I mentally ill are generally less affected by the agent because of their greater tolerance for pain (Jones, 1976). I Although humans are susceptible to agent effects, animals suffer little, if any, from the " I -i- I symptoms induced by CN. In addition, CN effectiveness is temperature-dependent. Although the agent is useful in any temperature over 50* F (Oleoresin Capsicum Chemical Agent Study, 1991), it is most effective when utilized in temperatures of 72* F and above (Jones, 1976). I .... CN presents an additional problem of decontamination. The microscopic particles can remain airborne for some time after being discharged. Dissipation time depends upon the amount of ! the agent dispensed, the air current, temperature and humidity. Finally, CN cross-contamination between subjects and police officers is common. Officers note | that they are often contaminated by the agent when arresting and transporting sprayed subjects. This cross-contamination is purportedly responsible for officers' reluctance to use this agent. I Ochlorobenzflidene-Malononitrile (CS) The U.S. Army and the National Guard continued to use CN as a riot control agent until 1960, I whereupon it was replaced with the oehlorobenzylidene-malononitrile (CS). Officials held that CS was considerably less toxic and more effective than CN (Jones, 1976). Following military II protocols, American law enforcement agencies subsequently adopted CS in 1965. In pure form, CS is a white, crystalline substance similar to talcum powder that can be discharged in smoke, liquid or dust form. Like CN, it is classified as a solid, not a gas, since I it requires a carrying agent to disperse it into the desired target area. II CS is a lacrimating irritant that immediately affects the mucous membranes producing tears, runny noses, and persistent coughing and/or sneezing. Additional symptoms include respiratory distress accompanied by tightness in the chest, a burning sensation on the skin, and nausea or il vomiting. In addition to the physical effects, CS also causes intense fear, panic and cognitive disorientation. According to military and law enforcement personnel, CS is a preferred alternative to CN (Selected Military Reports on CS Riot Control Agent). It produces immediate effects and is less toxic (Jones, 1976). Like CN, CS is also more effective on those areas of the skin that are II moist (Compton, 1987) and virtually ineffective on animals. Unlike CN, CS is considered to be effective over a wide temperature range. The I, microparticulate nature of CN results in agent persistency and thus can make decontamination problematic, especially in enclosed/confined spaces. I Serious injury to an individual is improbable if CS is used properly. Extensive toxicological testing indicates that in spite of the potency of CS, it is a more safe, less toxic and more I effective alternative to CN (Special Summary Report on the Toxicology of CN, CS and DM).