Student Review:

      After recognizing that the police have awesome powers and work in dangerous surroundings, the authors note that a need exists to define the parameters of police force.  Often the police lack real guidelines that determine the boundaries of excessive force.  There also exists a lack of statistics on police use of excessive force, although studies show that many individuals feel that the police often use excessive force.
      The current legal measure regarding police force is an objective reasonableness' standard under the Fourth Amendment.  Officers who do not violate clearly established laws are not liable for personal injuries.  However, often in practice, there is a question as to what the exact law was at the time of the incident, and whether an officer's good faith belief in his use of force will establish reasonableness.  Often expert witnesses are produced to determine what defines reasonable force.  And yet, the authors find that often citizens expect the police to be both aggressive in serious cases and to show restraint in other situations.  Alpert and Smith label this dual standard as subjective objectivity and argue that the current standard to measure police force is unworkable.
      Studies of laws, police policies, and court opinions show that there has been no clear definition between excessive force and reasonable force.  The authors discuss how other scholars have dealt with the problem of police force and focus their study on the hazards of a suspect's escape and a physical threat to the officer.  When a suspect attempts to flee a police officer, the officer must decide when to allow a suspect to escape, and when to increase the level of force used against him.  In situations where the suspect presents a physical threat to the officer, much of the decision regarding the use of force revolves around the perception of the officer.  To determine reasonableness in both of these situations, it is necessary to analyze the events that lead up to the use of force.  The actions of the officers and suspect in the preliminary frames of the situation are often vital to the determination of what level of force is necessary.  Courts and police training should not merely focus on the immediate situation, but look at the events that preceded the use of force.
      In order to evaluate the officer's decision to use force, many different aspects need to be reviewed.  First, the training that the officers received and the culture of the police station may affect the decisions that officers make in the field.  The seriousness of the accused's offense and the suspect's behavior also influences the way a officer determines what amount of force to use.  Furthermore, the environment that the officer faces (i.e. a high crime area) may also change an officer's judgment.  Finally, the relationship between the officer and the suspect as well as any injuries the suspect has sustained will change the necessity of force.
      The authors suggest that all these factors be used to assess the reasonableness of the use of force.  Their general rule is that officers must use no more force than necessary to control the situation, and reduce their use of force as the threat is removed.  This is especially true in the case of fleeing suspects who pose no immediate threat to the police or civilians.  A clearer standard for the use of police force must be established rather than relying on the concept of a reasonable person.  The categories described are a initial step to create more effective guidelines regarding the use of police force.

Article Summary by: Corrie Noir
Wake Forest University School of Law 1999