Home Contents Search Feedback

Expert Witness

 

                                  Force Paradigm Seminar Training

                                       Connecticut Pistol Permit Class

                                        13thjuror Use of Force Training Seminars

13th Juror, LLC

Up
Profile

 

 

Police Procedures & Practices Liability Consultant
Expert Witness & Trainer
 
Since 1971 - In the Service of "Public Safety"
 
The "Cardinal Principle of Police Use of Force restraint" is that "if it is not necessary to use more force, it is necessary not to use more force."TM

If it is bound to happen, sooner or later, train for it, sooner, rather than later!TM

If you forgot what you have learned in Training, the jury is sure to remember it for you!TM

The “Doctrine of Necessity” states that “The least amount of force reasonable is the greatest amount of force necessary”TM

13thjuror Use of Force Training Seminars

Less Lethal Force and Lethal Use of Force;  Domestic Violence Arrest protocols. State Court and Federal Court qualified expert on the standard of care necessary for the use of justified and necessary constitutional counter force. Use of Force Policy Design for Deadly Force Shooting Decisions, Search & Seizure Arrest Protocols, Lethal and Less-lethal Defensive Tactics, Baton Use, Taser(ECD) Protocols, OC aerosol tactical use, Police Pursuits, and safe  prisoner custody, restraint , transport, and Jail Suicide prevention. Best Practices Auditing of Law Enforcement agency Policies and Practices for "Best Practices" litigation inoculation.

In determining whether expert testimony on the use of force by a police officer is properly admissible under the appropriate standard, we note that "[a]s a general proposition, the 'objective reasonableness' standard may be comprehensible to a lay juror. On the other hand, any 'objective' test implies the existence of a standard of conduct, and, where the standard is not defined by the generic--a reasonable person--but rather by the specific--a reasonable officer--it is more likely that [federal rule of evidence] 702's line between common and specialized knowledge has been crossed." Kopf v. Skyrm, 993 F.2d 374, 378 (4th Cir. 1993) (analyzing plaintiff's claim that court improperly excluded expert testimony concerning defendant's use of non-deadly force in effecting arrest). In Kopf, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit stated that "[w]here force is reduced to its most primitive form--the bare hands--expert testimony might not be helpful. Add handcuffs, a gun, a slapjack, [M]ace, or some other tool, and the jury may start to ask itself: what is [M]ace? what is an officer's training on using a gun? how much damage can a slapjack do? Answering these questions may often be assisted by expert testimony." State v. Smith, 73 Conn.App. 173, 807 A.2d 500 (Conn.App. 10/22/2002)

As a practical matter, it is inappropriate to assess credibility without having watched a witness testify, because demeanor, conduct and other factors are not fully reflected in the cold, printed record. Burton v. Mottolese, 267 Conn. 1, 40 (2003).

Reginald F. Allard2.gif (2102 bytes), Jr.
13th Juror, LLC
P.O. Box 1013
Southington, Connecticut 06489-5013
 
FedEx/UPS Shipping
13thjuror, LLC
350 Rockwood Drive
Southington, Connecticut 06489-4659

Voice: (860)-621-1013 ( Police Assistance - Code 1013 )

Fax: (860)-621-1013