Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department GENERAL ORDER LAW ENFORCEMENT ROLE AND AUTHORITY 1.1 POLICY The primary duty of a police officer is to uphold and enforce the law. Members of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department (IMPD) must accept the responsibility of being held to a higher standard and must be able to enforce the laws and protect the rights of citizens. The application and enforcement of the law must be accomplished in the spirit set forth by the framers of the United States Constitution. It is the policy of IMPD to comply with the highest standards of legal and professional conduct in dealing with a person’s constitutional rights. Officers will be mindful of the rights and protections afforded all persons by the United States Constitution and the Indiana Constitution. Coercion or threats, real or implied, will not be used during interviews or interrogations to obtain confessions. PROCEDURE I. Oath of Office All sworn officers must meet with the Chief of Police, or designee, prior to assuming sworn status, to receive the oath of office. The oath of office is as follows: I, ________________, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Indiana, and I will faithfully discharge my duties as an officer of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis, under this appointment, according to law, and city ordinances, to the best of my ability, so help me God. II. Legal Authority A. The Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department is created and authorized under Section 279-102 of the “Revised Code of the Consolidated City and County” and IC 36-3-1-5.1. B. Sworn officers are employees of the City of Indianapolis – Marion County and shall be assigned their duties by the Chief of Police or as required by law. There are three (3) categories of sworn officers: 1. Merit Officers; 2. Park Rangers; and 3. Reserve Officers. C. Each member of the department has the powers set forth in IC 36-8-3-6 (Police officers; powers and duties) RICHARD A. HITE Supersedes IMPD General Order 1.1, Effective: OCTOBER 27, 2015 CHIEF OF POLICE Effective Date: March 4, 2010 Page 1 of 3 LAW ENFORCEMENT ROLE AND AUTHORITY 1.1 GENERAL ORDER III. Authority to Carry and Use Weapons Sworn officers are authorized to carry and use any weapon authorized and/or issued by IMPD in the performance of their duties, so long as the officer has completed proficiency training authorized by the department and IC 5-2-1 (Mandatory Training for Law Enforcement Officers). IV. Constitutional Rights when Interviewing and Interrogating A. Miranda warnings are required when a person is subjected to custodial interrogation, whether in a field interview or more formal interrogation. B. Officers shall use the following procedures for administering Miranda warnings: 1. Miranda warnings shall be given to persons using an Advisement of Rights and Waiver of Rights form or reading from Miranda warning cards. 2. Officers must ensure the person understands the Miranda warnings, but officers are not required to obtain an express waiver. 3. If the person refuses to sign the form, the officer will note the refusal in the signature block on the form and initial the entry. The officer should also sign the form documenting the date and time. If possible, a second officer should sign the witness section. C. If during any stage of the interrogation the person invokes the right to consult with an attorney, the interrogation will stop and no further questioning will be attempted. 1. Access to counsel will be provided before any further questioning. 2. If the person reinitiates communications relevant to the interrogation, officers may continue questioning after re-advising the person of the Miranda warnings and obtaining a waiver. D. If during any stage of the interrogation the person invokes the right to remain silent, but has not requested an attorney, officers must scrupulously honor that request. 1. If the person reinitiates communications relevant to the interrogation, officers may continue questioning and Miranda warnings do not need to be given a second time. 2. Depending on the totality of the circumstances, officers may be able to reinitiate communications relevant to the interrogation after an invocation of the right to remain silent (See Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96 (1975)). Officers should stay current on applicable state and federal court rulings to ensure a person’s invocation of the right to remain silent is scrupulously honored. E. An electronic recording of an interrogation is required when conducted: 1. In a felony criminal investigation; 2. During a custodial interrogation; and 3. In a place of detention. Page 2 of 3 OCTOBER 27, 2015 RICHARD A. HITE – Chief of Police LAW ENFORCEMENT ROLE AND AUTHORITY 1.1 GENERAL ORDER V. Code of Ethics All sworn officers of the IMPD, in order perform their duties and maintain the integrity of the department with the public, must strive to maintain a high degree of both moral and ethical standards. In addition to the Code of Ethics for all City-County employees, the police department has adopted the following Law Enforcement Code of Ethics by which all sworn officers must abide: LAW ENFORCEMENT CODE OF ETHICS "As an Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Officer, my fundamental duty is to serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property; to protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation, and the peaceful against violence or disorder; and to respect the constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality and justice. I will keep my private life unsullied as an example to all; maintain courageous calm in the face of danger, scorn, or ridicule; develop self-restraint; and be constantly mindful of the welfare of others. Honest in thought and deed in both my personal and official life, I will be exemplary in obeying the laws of the land and the regulations of my department. Whatever I see or hear of a confidential nature or that is confided to me in my official capacity will be kept ever secret unless revelation is necessary in the performance of my duty. I will never act officiously or permit personal feelings, prejudices, animosities or friendships to influence my decisions. With no compromise for crime and with relentless prosecution of criminals, I will enforce the law courteously and appropriately without fear or favor, malice or ill will, never employing unnecessary force or violence and never accepting gratuities. I recognize the badge of my office as a symbol of public faith, and I accept it as a public trust to be held as long as I am true to the ethics of the police service. I will constantly strive to achieve these objectives and ideals, dedicating myself before God to my chosen profession ... law enforcement." RICHARD A. HITE – Chief of Police OCTOBER 27, 2015 Page 3 of 3 Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department GENERAL ORDER BIAS-FREE POLICING 1.2 POLICY The Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department (IMPD) is dedicated to providing law enforcement services in an unbiased, equitable, and respectful manner. This policy is intended to reaffirm IMPD’s commitment to bias- free policing and to clarify the circumstances in which agency personnel can consider race, national origin, citizenship, religion, ethnicity, age, gender, disability, socioeconomic status, gender identity, or sexual orientation when carrying out duties. DEFINITIONS Biased Policing – The inappropriate consideration of specified characteristics in carrying out duties. Specified Characteristics – Race, national origin, citizenship, religion, ethnicity, age, gender, disability, socioeconomic status, gender identity, or sexual orientation in relation to making law enforcement decisions. PROCEDURE I. Officer Responsibilities A. Agency personnel may only consider the specified characteristics when credible, timely intelligence relevant to the locality link a person or people of a specified characteristic to a specific unlawful incident(s), or criminal pattern(s) or scheme(s). In those circumstances, personnel may rely on these specified characteristics only in combination with other appropriate factors. B. It is biased policing if an officer’s decisions/actions are based on the fact the individual’s demographics (e.g., race, income, etc.) are different from the demographics of the majority of the residents in the area in which the individual is found. C. These restrictions on the use of these specified characteristics do not apply to law enforcement activities designed to strengthen the department’s relationship with its diverse communities. II. Training and Compliance A. Personnel shall receive annual training in bias-free policing, including the legal and psychological aspects of it and the content of this policy. B. All IMPD members shall perform their duties in a bias-free manner and are responsible for promptly reporting any known instances of bias-based policing to a supervisor. Where appropriate, officers are encouraged to intervene at the time the biased policing incident occurs. C. Supervisors shall ensure all personnel in their command are familiar with the content of this policy and will be alert and respond to indications that biased policing is occurring. D. There shall be an annual administrative review of agency practices including citizen concerns. BRYAN K. ROACH Supersedes IMPD General Order 1.2, Effective: JULY 31, 2019 CHIEF OF POLICE Effective Date September 18, 2012 Page 1 of 2 BIAS-FREE POLICING 1.2 GENERAL ORDER III. Complaints of Biased Policing A. The department will investigate all complaints of alleged biased policing against its employees/members. Those found to be in violation of this policy are subject to discipline in accordance with this department’s disciplinary policy. B. A report of biased policing may be filed in person, in writing, on Citizens Complaint Form, IMPD Form No. 6-5-32 R5, or by telephoning the department.