Police Practices

Feeling, Thinking and Policing

Introduction

Does the way a police officer responds to a situation have a significant impact on its outcome? We think that it does. The following encounter between a San José officer and a group out on the town demonstrates how a relatively benign incident escalated until two unarmed people were injured, one with a facial disfigurement that will last a lifetime. Exploring this question should alert us that our actions are controlled, not by what is happening externally, but how we interpret the situation. In short, we, ourselves, create the experience. The experience is not created for us.

Emotions run the whole gamut, from sadness to irritation to anger to rage and joy and calm. Our choice of behaviors depends on our state of mind and our mood at the time. We can explain a situation any number of ways. For example, suppose that you interview for a job at Target and do not get hired. How you react depends on how you are feeling at the time. You might think that you didn’t get the job because (1) “I am too high-class” (2) “Ï can’t do anything right” (3) “I wasn’t prepared for that question about my long-term goals”, and on and on. Notice that each of these thoughts will call on a different set of behaviors.

First responders, being part of the human race, experience emotions. There is nothing wrong with a first responder feeling a moment of panic. After all they are often faced with new, unique and potentially dangerous situations. That is when their training and their commitment to professionalism comes into play. It is not unusual for first responders to feel a rush of adrenaline. That is the signal that they have business to take care of. As a professional this is the time to evaluate what they need to do from a space of competence and knowledge.¹

Exploring a recent incident in San José might lead to a better understanding of the way feelings and thoughts affect the behaviors of police as first responders. The incident is based on an encounter between a group of people and a police officer which ended with the officer using his Taser and his gun.

The Situation as Recounted in the Mercury News

Outside an upscale bar in downtown San José a couple was confronted by a San José police officer. By all accounts the confrontation ended with the wife being tased twice and the husband being shot in the face. The couple was tried in court on misdemeanor resisting arrest charges. The husband was also charged with misdemeanor battery according to the San José Mercury News. (ww.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_16372694 ) The following focuses on the testimony of the officer involved in this confrontation as described in the news article.

Officer Paolini was cruising in downtown San José on an overtime shift when he was alerted by a bar owner who clicked his flashlight for help with what appeared to be a loud disturbance outside the bar. Paolini, interpreting this as a sign of trouble, stopped and the bar owner pointed

out Marcos Zuniga as the troublemaker. Paolini claimed that the bar owner said that Zuniga had threatened that he would come back “and shoot us”. A security guard told the officer that Zuniga had thrown a punch. He also heard that someone in the Zuniga party had been ejected by the bouncer. By this time Zuniga was walking away from the bar with his group. Several times Paolini told him to stop which he ignored. Paolini pulled out his Taser. When the group did stop

he returned the Taser to its holster. He then ordered Zuniga to turn and put his hands against a wall so he could frisk him. Zuniga evidently balked at this command. (The officer later, in court, would call this encounter with Zuniga a “Mexican standoff”)

The situation now gets murkier. An unidentified woman grabbed Paolini’s arm. He pushed her away and threw her off balance. The officer next saw liquid coming at him “out of the corner of his eye”. It might have been Zuniga’s wife, Cindy. He took out his Taser and shocked her. The irate husband came at the officer when he saw his wife screaming in pain. The officer pointed the Taser at the husband and mistakenly hit the wife again.

After trying the Taser and punching the husband, Paolini finally pulled out his gun. He felt Zuniga’s hand on his pistol. At that point he shot Zuniga in the face. (Later he would say he did this because the thought Zuniga “would take the gun away from me and kill me”) This in essence describes the apparent 47-second incident that took place outside an upscale downtown bar.

Feeling, thinking and policing

Here we have a 10-year veteran of the San José Police Department describing his assumptions during an emotionally-charged encounter with a group of people who had been drinking.

The officer confirms that he is working beyond his original shift. He has been alerted by a flashlight that there is trouble. He learns from the bar owner that there is a noisy group of people who have been ordered to leave. He hears that somebody is threatening to come back with a gun. What alarms are causing the officer’s adrenaline to rise? From his subsequent actions (as recounted in the courtroom) we have an officer who may be somewhat tired because he is working beyond his regular shift. He hears “gun “,”noisy party”, “fight”, “bouncer ejected”. The bar owner has also pointed out the offending individual. Because he later refers to his encounter as a “Mexican standoff “, the officer seems to have identified Zuniga as Mexican which suggests certain preconceptions about Mexicans.

After these alarms hit his consciousness, the officer is then faced with a decision. One decision might be to go with his reflex fight, flight, or freeze response which is the decision this 10-year police force veteran makes: Paolini acts as if commanding a group will automatically control it. . When it doesn’t provide the effect he wants, he then relies on weapons. First a Taser, then a pistol, resulting in a twice-tased woman and a man with a gunshot wound in his face. ²

Was there an opportunity for Paolini to have acted differently thus avoiding testifying in court and being placed on administrative leave? We think that there was. A replay of the incident might look something like this: Officer working overtime is alerted by a bar manager that a loud, antagonistic party has been ejected from his bar; he also has some concerns that members of the group may want to retaliate. Officer acknowledges his heightened feelings and recognizes that he might need to compensate for being somewhat tired. He might think, “What can I do to stabilize this group and get them on their way or, if there is resistance, how will I handle that?” He might think of calling on extra help since it is a group and he might need back-up to corral them. He also knows that they have been drinking which suggests that their control centers are impaired. He may even want more information from the bar owner. This kind of thinking is less reactive and more proactive which will automatically lead to a different level of behavior. One would wish that, after ten years on the force, this officer would have had the presence of mind to evaluate the situation by mentally stepping back before adopting the course of action that he did.

Concluding Observations

We are using this news story from the Mercury News to highlight the fact that what police officers feel and think affects their behaviors. San José has been cited for a disproportionate

number of Latino individuals, compared to its Latino population, in arrests for drunk-in-public (647f) and resisting arrest 148 (a). Did the fact that the Zunigas’ might have been Mexican influence the officer’s actions? There is also some ambiguity about the issue of a gun. The bar owner never mentioned a gun in his initial interviews, according the newspaper reports. However, he did so in court. Was this to back up the officer’s testimony because, as the defense attorney suggested, the bar owner had every reason to maintain good relations with the police?

Also were the decisions made by Paolini examples of best practices? Why would he not expressly ask for back-up before confronting a group who had had trouble at a bar? Why would he determine to frisk an individual without backup? The fact that he did without incident suggests that the group might have been trying to be cooperative.

Finally, what is the curriculum in police training which touches on how humans make choices?

Police as professionals should be aware that the initial choice made in responding to an incident need not be the final choice.

¹ There are occasions when the preferred response is almost automatic. That is based on experience, background and wisdom. Even then this doesn’t preclude thinking because thoughts can travel faster than light.

² The bullying officer as victim. You might notice that the police officer’s thinking that the Zunigas’ are dangerous places him in the victim position. As a victim one only has the option of succumbing to the outside force or attacking it with whatever tools are available. Not a pretty experience for anyone: the officer and the targeted group.

Betsy Wolf-Graves

11-21-10