ntoa feature Do I need a SWAT team? Threat assessments for warrant service By Jeffrey J. Noble

olice detectives routinely serve search and arrest warrants to further their Pinvestigations or to conclude their cases. Although there is a risk of danger anytime a warrant is served, particularly when the officer intends to enter the sus- pect’s home, most of these warrants do not require the aid of a specialized team. However, there are circumstances under which the use of a SWAT team is not only reasonable but necessary for the safety of the officers, any innocent parties who may be present and the suspects. The challenge confronting law enforcement is determining when officers or detectives should serve warrants and what criteria would cause a reasonable officer, supervisor or manager to request the advice or assistance of a specialized team. While SWAT commanders and operators understand the parameters for SWAT activations, they can only aid in the decision-making process if reasonable efforts are made to gather relevant intelligence and if they are informed of the intended warrant service. In order to gain a level of assurance that the potential threats have been properly evaluated, police departments should enact policies requiring that a threat assessment be completed during the warrant planning stage regardless of whether Threat assessments the warrant is to be served by patrol, detectives or SWAT. Specific plans are neces- A threat assessment is a list of sary, because without guidelines for making threat assessments, otherwise competent criteria that aids detectives, supervisors, officers may be less thoughtful and thorough in their decision-making and may not managers and SWAT commanders in consider the full spectrum of threats along with the likelihood of occurrence. their decision-making process of choos- ing the appropriate method to safely secure a location or make an arrest. The The challenge confronting law enforcement is determin- threat assessment is a tool to help the ing when officers or detectives should serve warrants case agent or the person planning any and what criteria would cause a reasonable officer, su- operation to conduct an evaluation as to the potential threats, the seriousness of pervisor or manager to request the advice or assistance the threat and the appropriate interven- of a specialized team. tion strategy for the safe resolution of the matter at hand. Although there is

22 The Tactical Edge / Winter 2013 Photos courtesy of Sgt. Chris Kuklok Plymouth (MN) PD

no list that would cover every possible or sent for warrant execution. Other contingency, there is information that A threat assessment is a agencies review the information in its should be obtained which is necessary totality and require a supervisor to as- for informed decision-making. At a list of criteria that aids sess whether a specialized team should minimum, a threat assessment should detectives, supervisors, be consulted. Either method, if com- contain the elements listed in Figure 1. managers and SWAT prehensive and thoughtfully reviewed, Some agencies have developed a commanders in their de- achieves the same purpose of ensuring matrix assigning a point value to each that the proper resources are allocated of the above categories — the higher cision-making process of for the mission. the risk, the higher the corresponding choosing the appropriate points will be assigned. Once a pre- method to safely secure a Decision to activate SWAT determined threshold of points has been location or make an arrest. achieved, the warrant will either be as- While it is the responsibility of the signed to a specialized team for review detective to complete a threat assessment

www.ntoa.org 23 ntoa feature

Once the decision to use SWAT SWAT should only be activated when the circumstances, has been made, SWAT operators and as outlined in a comprehensive threat assessment, clearly supervisors need to understand their role in a warrant execution. SWAT articulate risks that require special tools, special weap- operators are responsible to confirm ons or special tactics that may only be achieved safely all intelligence, develop an operational through a SWAT deployment. plan and execute the plan for the safety of the officers, the community and the suspects. They are not at the location and the supervisor to refer the threat rant has been fortified against entry or to conduct evidence searches or to be assessment for a SWAT review, it is the that a conspiracy exists in which look- actively involved in the investigation. decision of the SWAT commander or outs are employed for its protection; The SWAT team should make the loca- other department manager to activate • Conditions exist, as identified tion safe, hand off the investigation to the SWAT team. These managers base in the threat assessment, in which the detectives and return to their normal their deployment decisions on good service of the warrant is so hazardous duties as soon as practical. faith and reasonable criteria addressed that it would be beyond the capabili- in the threat assessment report pre- ties of detectives. pared by the detectives prior to the Conclusion SWAT activations are serious, warrant service. There will be times when there is costly, dangerous and time-consuming. SWAT teams were developed to disagreement between thoughtful and SWAT should never be activated for well-meaning individuals about the bring the advantages of specialized training purposes due to a lack of call necessity of a team activation. SWAT weapons, training and tactics to deal outs or warrant executions, nor should leaders are expected to properly assess with high-risk situations. SWAT man- SWAT be the department’s warrant situations and to exercise judgment as agers, supervisors and team members execution team that is routinely used to when and how they should use their are well-versed in making tactical deci- for all warrants regardless of potential power. The ability to make reasonable sions and evaluating circumstances for threats. SWAT should only be activated choices based on training and experi- the activation of a SWAT team that when the circumstances, as outlined ence is the distinguishing factor that is in the best interest of the depart- in a comprehensive threat assessment, makes an individual a professional, and ment, the community and the suspects. clearly articulate risks that require while reasonable people may disagree, Consulting with professionals whose special tools, special weapons or special as long as the assessment was made in training and experiences place them in tactics that may only be achieved safely good faith and based upon proper cri- the best position to make decisions is through a SWAT deployment. teria, the decision should be supported. both rational and appropriate. There will also be times when a Police managers do not take a team is activated and although the SWAT activation lightly. There are threat indicators support activation, it many important considerations in this There will be times when will become apparent after the war- decision-making process, but ulti- there is disagreement rant service that an activation was not necessary. Reviews of decision-making mately a request for the assistance of between thoughtful and should be based on the intelligence SWAT should be initiated whenever well-meaning individuals gathered and the facts known at the any of the following warrant service about the necessity of a time the decision was made without ap- circumstances exist: plying the wisdom of hindsight. • The suspect to be arrested, or team activation. SWAT Finally, detectives and their supervi- any occupant of the location identified leaders are expected to sors should never be criticized for their in the warrant, has a known propensi- properly assess situations decision to seek the advice of SWAT. ty for use of firearms or violence, or is and to exercise judgment It is the detectives’ responsibility to a member of a militant group or gang conduct a risk assessment, it is the having a history of violent acts; as to when and how they supervisors’ responsibility to review the • Information has been developed should use their power. assessment to determine if consulta- that the location identified in the war- tion with SWAT is appropriate and it is

24 The Tactical Edge / Winter 2013 ntoa feature

SWAT supervisors who make the determination of whether About the author or not SWAT is required. Mandating that threat assessments Deputy Chief Jeffrey J. Noble is a 28-year veteran of be completed removes the responsibility from the detective the Irvine, Calif. Police Department. He has served in a and prevents unwarranted criticism that may prevent detec- wide variety of roles throughout his career and has been tives from seeking the assistance of others when necessary, a SWAT supervisor and a SWAT commander. which could lead to tragic consequences. /

Figure 1

Threat Assessment • Subject has current or past military or law enforcement experience • Subject has used explosives or dangerous devices Search warrants during the commission of crimes • Severity of the crime (property crime or crime against • Subject has a history of drug/alcohol abuse persons) • Subject is on probation or parole • Search warrant is for drugs • Subject is associated with an organization that is • Search warrant is for evidence related to crimes known or suspected of violent criminal activity (para against persons military, terrorist, religious extremist, gang, other) • Search warrant is for explosives, weapons or danger ous devices Service location issues • Service location has vicious dog(s) protecting premises Arrest warrants • Service location is a multi-story building • Severity of the property crime or crime against persons • Service location is remote or is located where a sur • Arrest warrant is for drug possession/sales reptitious approach is unlikely • Arrest warrant is for crimes against persons • Service location has video surveillance • Arrest warrant is for weapons violations • Service location is fortified, requiring specialized breaching equipment Subject associated with the location • Subject at the location has property crime history Special circumstances • Subject has an arrest history involving drugs • Clandestine laboratory • Subject has made statements regarding resisting arrest • Firearms are readily available to subject at the location • Subject has made threats of violence • Subject is known to carry firearms or has been • Subject has a history of crimes against persons arrested for concealed firearms • Subject has a violent criminal history or is a third- • Subject is known to have access to illegal explosives/ strike candidate dangerous devices/fully automatic weapons • The subject has a history of assaultive behavior • Subject is confirmed to have access to illegal toward law enforcement, resisting arrest, etc. explosives/dangerous devices/fully automatic weapons • Subject has a mental health condition • Location/subjects are known to have armed counter- • The subject is wanted for murder, attempted murder surveillance personnel present or a serious assault • Subject has used firearms during the commission of Developed from the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office Risk Assessment Matrix as outlined in “The Minkler Incident: Findings and Recommendations,” available through California POST. See crimes or is known to possess weapons also, “Matrix Systems to Classify Warrants,” Donald Burbank, The Tactical Edge (Fall 1999).

26 The Tactical Edge / Winter 2013