Yes, officers are required to wear and record all police interactions when responding to calls for service or   other proactive encounters such as traffic stops. Vacaville has been recognized for its early adoption of body worn cameras, which began in 2010. Our fleet is also equipped with cameras as well.

Responding to resistance training is already being taught by the Vacaville Police Department. De-escalation training is required for all officers. These tactics and techniques are regularly used to avoid the use of force when feasible.

Vacaville Police Officers continuously review policies and receive training related to responding to resistance.  The use of force as a national discussion as well as a local concern raises lots of questions.  Officers are involved on a daily basis in numerous and varied interaction, and, when warranted, may use reasonable force when carrying out their duties.  Officers must have an understanding of, and true appreciation for, their authority and limitations.  The Vacaville Police Department recognizes and respects the value of all human life and dignity without prejudice to anyone.  Vesting officers with the authority to use reasonable force and to protect the public welfare, requires monitoring, evaluation and a careful balance of all interests.  Officers are expected to carry out their duties, including the use of force, in a manner which is fair and unbiased. (Penal Code 7286(b)(10)). 

Each time force is used in response to resistance officers report the incident and a review process occurs.  We expect all officers to be professional and when using force.  Officers shall use only that amount of force that reasonable appears necessary given the facts and the totally of the circumstances.  Known to or perceive by the officer at the time of the event to accomplish a legitimate law enforcement purpose.  (Penal Code 835(a)).

Several legislative reforms include calling for a nationwide use-of-force policy standard modeled after California law, expansion of accountability and disciplinary actions, an increased emphasis on transparency, ongoing focus on diversity in recruitment, programmatic support for officer mental health and wellness, and continued development of specific training practices. It is evident that our nation remains host to structural divides caused by racial injustice, and although peace officers are not the root cause of this, we are also not immune from the impacts of our shared past.

In 2019, California set a new legal statewide standard for peace officers’ use of deadly force (AB 392, Weber) and CPCA sponsored legislation, which set national precedent by establishing a minimum use of force policy standard for all departments (SB 230, Caballero). Most of the policies outlined in the ‘8CantWait’ campaign have been captured by these two new landmark laws. However, several provisions, most notably the requirement that officers’ exhaust all alternatives, were not included in either bill due to shared concerns by law enforcement and policymakers. Instead, alternatives to those provisions were embraced to accomplish our shared goal of reducing deadly force incidents. 

Outlined below are the provisions in the 8CantWait platform already captured directly in statute, or concerns and alternatives with what is being proposed: 

1. Ban Chokeholds and Strangle holds: 

Vacaville Police Department does not authorize or condone the use of choke holds or strangle holds. However, the Vacaville Police Department does not currently ban the carotid control hold and recognizes that in situations when officers are subjected to serious bodily injury in violent encounters with combative subjects, this force may be necessary. The carotid restraint does not compress the trachea or restrict airflow to an individual, and is particularly effective with persons who are under the influence of controlled substances and are violent and/or combative. The Carotid Restraint allows for the effective and safe detention of these individuals, where other forms of restraint would be much more damaging and intrusive, including deadly force. This is being debated nationally and legislation will soon determine whether it will be banned entirely or with few exceptions. Currently, California law under SB 230 (2019) requires that “an officer may only use a level of force that they reasonably believe is proportional to the seriousness of the suspected offense.” Any force beyond this requirement is unreasonable and excessive.

2. De-Escalation Requirement: 

SB 230 requires that “officers utilize de-escalation techniques, crisis intervention tactics, and other alternatives to force when feasible.” SB 230 also mandates each policy require officers to conduct all duties in a manner that is fair and unbiased. Additionally, SB 230 requires all officers be trained in alternatives to deadly force and de-escalation techniques. De-escalation is a prominent and important part of our training and daily operations. De-escalation is not practical in all situations, as it requires a measure of cooperation and compliance of the part of the individuals the police encounter. Our officers are trained in tactics and techniques that reduce the likelihood of defiant encounters, but cannot prevent them all. In our Crisis Intervention Incidents policy (GO 466) de-escalation is a major factor in our response to crisis intervention incidents. The Vacaville Police Department already includes these in policy and the following training:

• In 2019, Vacaville Police personnel received 26 hours of de-escalation training ranging from Verbal Judo to Critical incident / Active Shooter training.
• In 2020, Vacaville Police personnel will receive 26 hours of mandated de-escalation training.
• California POST (Police Officer Standards and Training) requires de-escalation training curriculum in police academies, as well as on-going officer training. This is included in the Vacaville Police Department training program for all police officers upon hire and ongoing advanced officer training.

3. Require warning before shooting: 

AB 392 states: “where feasible, a peace officer shall, prior to the use of force, make reasonable efforts to identify themselves as a peace officer and to warn that deadly force may be used, unless the officer has objectively reasonable grounds to believe the person is aware of those facts.”  This requirement is consistent with federal case law. The Vacaville Police Department already includes these in policy and training. These issues have been scrutinized by the courts and recognized the complexity of such oversimplified expectations that mandate such a strict requirement. The courts have given clear direction on the reasonableness of such practices. Our training includes such warnings, however it does not require them, depending on the circumstances. Pursuant to our current Use of Force policy (G.O. 300), when applying deadly force to stop a fleeing subject:  

• “An officer may use deadly force to stop a fleeing subject when the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed, or intends to commit, a felony involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious bodily injury or death, and the officer reasonably believes that there is an imminent risk of serious bodily injury or death to any other person if the subject is not immediately apprehended. Under such circumstances, a verbal warning should precede the use of deadly force, where feasible.”

4. Require Exhausting All Other Means (alternatives) Before Shooting:

Arguably, the most controversial provision in 8CantWait’s platform, this requirement was rejected in AB 392 debate because of the untenable position it puts officers and departments in, by permitting second-guessing of split-second decisions. Instead, the focus should be on training alternatives to deadly force, requirements on proportional force, and de-escalation requirements, all of which are contained in SB 230 and in our Department General Order 300. If this requirement is implemented, an officer’s decision concerning the use of force alternative should be judged based upon the totality of the circumstances and reasonable officer standard in AB 392. 

5. Duty to Intervene: 

The Vacaville Police Department has long maintained the “Duty to Intercede” in our policy manual. In fact, the duty to intercede to unlawful or unreasonable force is the first operational guideline in the Use of Force policy (G.O. 300.2.1). This policy states as follows:

• “Any officer present and observing another officer using force that is clearly beyond that which is objectively reasonable under the circumstances shall, when in a position to do so, intercede to prevent the use of unreasonable force. An officer who observes another employee use force that exceeds the degree of force permitted by law should promptly report these observations to a supervisor.”

California law SB 230 (2019) sets forth a “requirement that an officer intercede when present and observing another officer using force that is clearly beyond that which is necessary, as determined by an objectively reasonable officer under the circumstances.” This provision is consistent with federal law as well. 

6. Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles:

Vacaville police officers are discouraged from shooting at (or from) a moving vehicle. Outright prohibitions in all circumstances does not account for situations where the driver of a vehicle may be threatening death or great bodily injury to others. California law SB 230 (2019) requires “Comprehensive and specific guidelines for the application of deadly force,” which should include guidance on the limited situations that would warrant shooting at moving vehicles. The Vacaville Police Department already includes these in policy and training, specifically the shooting at (or from) a moving vehicle is outlined below:

• "Shots fired at or from a moving vehicle are rarely effective. Officers should move out of the path of an approaching vehicle instead of discharging their firearm at the vehicle or any of its occupants. An officer should only discharge a firearm at a moving vehicle or its occupants when the officer reasonably believes there are no other reasonable means available to avert the threat of the vehicle, or if deadly force other than the vehicle is directed at the officer or others. Officers should not shoot at any part of a vehicle in an attempt to disable the vehicle.”

7. Require Use of Force Continuum: 

The use of force continuum is an outdated model that has proven impractical, even dangerous, when applied in real life situations. Instead, policies should focus on requiring officers to create space and separation in an attempt to utilize de-escalation techniques, which is captured in the training and policy requirements within California law SB 230 (2019).  In the past, the Use of Force Continuum was seen as similar to a “Ladder of Force” beginning with command presence, and ending with use of deadly force. Officers were expected to “work their way up the ladder” prior to utilizing deadly force. Policing has evolved based upon federal and state court decisions, so use of force options are now in the shape of a “wheel,” and officers are expected to utilize the minimum amount of force necessary to make the arrest or stop the threat by choosing the force which would reasonably be necessary and effective. If a specific use of force is determined to be ineffective, or unreasonable (given the subject’s actions or compliance), then the use of force tactic or technique is adjusted up or down. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has clearly ruled on this issue. In regards to officer’s use of deadly force (i.e. firearm):

• “Requiring officers to find and choose the least intrusive alternative would require them to exercise superhuman judgment. In the heat of battle with lives potentially in the balance, an officer would not be able to rely on training and common sense to decide what would best accomplish his mission… Officers thus need not avail themselves of the least intrusive means of responding to an exigent situation; they need only act within that range of conduct we identify as reasonable.”

 Scott v. Henrich, 39F.3d912 (9th Cir. 1994)

8. Require Comprehensive Reporting: 

California law SB 230 (2019) already requires “comprehensive and detailed requirements for prompt internal reporting and notification regarding a use of force incident.” Additionally, legislation from 2015 (Assembly Bill 71) requires statewide detailed reporting requirements on serious use of force incidents. SB 230 also requires officers to report excessive force they witness. The Vacaville Police Department already include these in policy and training. Use of force in response to resistance by Vacaville police officers is comprehensively reported and evaluated at all supervisory levels (Sergeant, Watch Commander and Bureau Commander) to determine appropriateness.

The “Use of Force Continuum” is an outdated concept. In the past, the Use of Force Continuum was seen as similar to a “Ladder of Force” beginning with command presence and ending with use of deadly force. Officers were expected to “work their way up the ladder” prior to utilizing deadly force. Industry best practice has evolved based upon federal and state court decisions, and use of force responses are now in the shape of a “wheel,” and officers are expected to utilize the minimum amount of force necessary to effect the arrest or stop the threat by choosing the force which would reasonably be necessary and effective. This is consistent with our policy and new state law. Vacaville Police Department Defensive Tactics instructors teach officers to constantly evaluate the use of force being applied to determine both its reasonableness, as well as its effectiveness. If a specific use of force is determined to be in-effective, or unreasonable (given the subject’s actions or compliance), then the use of force is adjusted up or down.

 The 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals has clearly ruled on this issue of deadly force used by officers, and according to Scott v. Henrich, 39F.3d912 (9^th Cir. 1994), “Requiring officers to find and choose the least intrusive alternative would require them to exercise superhuman judgment. In the heat of battle with lives potentially in the balance, an officer would not be able to rely on training and common sense to decide what would best accomplish his mission… Officers thus need not avail themselves of the least intrusive means of responding to an exigent situation; they need only act within that range of conduct we identify as reasonable.” 

Vacaville Police Department General Order 341 deals with Standards of Conduct by Police personnel. This policy specifically prohibits excessive force by officers. Additionally, this policy outlines and explains the discipline policy should an officer violate policy. Sustained officer complaints are investigated, and discipline is determined on a case-by-case basis. Based on the severity of the violation, reprimands and/or termination can occur at the first instance.