In an op-ed published Wednesday in the New York Times, Burlington Police Chief Brandon del Pozo calls on law enforcement officers to “fundamentally” change the way they use their guns and deal with people in crisis — especially when they are wielding knives.
Describing a hypothetical situation, del Pozo writes that officers almost always point a gun at a knife-wielding person and shout commands. If the person advances, the officers shoot, and everyone loses, he writes.
“Each year, American police officers shoot and kill well over 125 people armed with knives, many of them in this manner,” del Pozo writes. “The public has grown impatient with seeing the same approach produce a predictably tragic result.”
The chief urges his counterparts around the nation to start training officers as if their weapons were “insurance policies” rather than “persuasive devices,” and suggests that American police take lessons from their unarmed colleagues across the pond.
“Barking orders as you stand there empty-handed would not only seem unnatural but also absurd,” the chief writes. “Your instincts would tell you to stay a safe distance away, try to contain the person, and calm the situation.”
The op-ed and its focus on deescalation exhibits the type of professional introspection that Burlingtonians have come to expect from the Ivy League-educated leader of their police force.
What the essay does not mention is the strikingly similar real-life scenario that unfolded under his watch three years ago, one that ended tragically.
In 2016, del Pozo was supervising the handling of a standoff in which an officer shot and killed Ralph “Phil” Grenon, 76, who was suffering from a psychotic episode in his downtown apartment.
Police were summoned because Grenon was ranting, and a standoff lasted several hours. Concerned Grenon might hurt himself, del Pozo sent in officers with tactical shields. They found Grenon in his shower clutching two knives. Officers fired chemical irritants into the room before attempting to use a Taser. But Grenon continued walking toward them and an officer opened fire.
Frustrated disability advocates decried the shooting, and del Pozo, just a year into his gig, was put on the defensive. He argued that his officers did everything they could to deescalate the situation. Reviews by authorities said it was legally justified.
Three years later, del Pozo said that if he could do it over, he would not let his decision to try to disarm Grenon be influenced by how long the incident was dragging on. Nor would he rely on Tasers, which proved ineffective.
Why not mention Grenon in the Times piece? Del Pozo said he didn’t believe it would be “topical” to a national audience. “Everywhere in America, people can think of incidents close to home that they feel would fall into this category,” he said.
Still, he does touch upon one local issue in the Times, referencing Burlington City Councilor Perri Freeman’s (P-Central District) suggestion to disarm the city’s police force. He calls the idea a “nonstarter” in America, where police officers are forced to respond to mass shootings and other types of gun violence.
But he writes that the police profession must take it upon itself to correct course if it doesn’t want politicians offering such ideas.
“We owe the public a commitment to doing everything we can to respect the sanctity of life,” he writes.
Freeman wasn’t aware of the op-ed when contacted Thursday. After she read it, she said she saw “a lot of positives” in his message, especially the part about guns. The nationwide debate over policing has been polarizing, she noted: “So I think this is actually a really good sign to hear so much critical thought behind some of these key issues.”
“One of the problems is that we teach our police officers to lead with the gun,” del Pozo writes in the Times. “We tell our officers that a knife or a shard of glass is always a lethal threat and that they should aggressively meet it with a lethal threat in return.
“But doing so forecloses all of the better ways to communicate with a person in crisis,” he continues. “There are alternatives.”
Dan Gilligan, the Burlington Police Officers’ Association president, had his own thoughts about the issue. Say you don’t have a gun, and a person with a knife advances on you, he said. Then what?
“I’ll tell you what you’re going to do: You’re going to get stabbed,” Gilligan said. “I don’t care what anybody says. That’s absolutely not our job.”
Gilligan agrees with some of del Pozo’s points. The union president has been a negotiator for 12 years and said it is undoubtedly easier to talk people down when they are not looking at the barrel of a gun.
But Gilligan said del Pozo provides an oversimplified view of these situations. Facing potentially dangerous people safely, without a weapon, requires backup officers positioned to cover the negotiator. That takes time, Gilligan said — a rare luxury in crisis situations.
“Everything we do — from words to lethal force — is to stop a behavior,” Gilligan said. “Unless you have somebody else there to provide that lethal cover for you, where you can be in a safe place to talk to somebody with a knife, then the gun has to be out.”
A more realistic approach is to ensure that police officers have access to nonlethal tools, Gilligan said. He commended del Pozo for working to obtain those tools and to get officers trained to use them.
The chief writes in his op-ed that police academies should train recruits on a “wide range of skills, drills and responses” before they ever handle a firearm.
“Training should start by sending officers into scenarios where they have to solve problems without recourse to lethal force,” he writes. He goes on to say that the American public would be made safer by officers whose “first instinct” is to communicate with people they encounter.
The chief’s recommendations to the nation do not seem to have yet infiltrated his own department’s psyche, however, as illustrated by several high-profile incidents.
In March, a Burlington man with health problems died days after an officer punched him three times. Last Friday, Vermont Attorney General T.J. Donovan declined to prosecute the case, deciding that the officer, Cory Campbell, was acting in self-defense after Douglas Kilburn swung at him first.
Donovan did call the case “troubling,” however, and faulted the cop for “antagonistic” actions that provoked Kilburn to lash out.
“Every officer that I know has watched this body camera footage and discussed this and is very reflective about what he or she can do to avoid agitating people,” del Pozo told Seven Days on the day of Donovan’s announcement.
And two black men have sued the department alleging excessive use of force for separate downtown incidents last year. Bodycam footage shows cops knocking the men unconscious without warning.
Correction, November 15, 2019: A previous version of this story contained “communication” in a quote from the op-ed when the word used was actually “communicate.”
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
VtSavage; Spare me your ingrained misandry, you assume men can’t get the vapors? To be clear, men also get the vapors. Witness that Petrarca character, or Bernie. Perhaps Ms. Freeman can lift herself up off her fainting couch long enough to go on some ride-alongs, and she could explain to the officers why she is so eager to put them at risk for her political beliefs.
Come on, the cops in full gear and with shields are afraid of a 76 year old man with a knife? They didn’t have to shoot to kill! But they didn’t use any common sense and Del Pozo is trying to make himself look good!
If this was in any way genuine and not just a publicity stunt, it might be a step in the right direction. But it’s like trying to dampen down the fire after you’ve already thrown on a ton of wood and a gallon of gasoline.
Maybe they should try starting this way;
1)Don’t hire two digit IQ Sociopaths for police work & make the minimum starting age 30+.
2)Make the start, middle & end of their training as well as the beginning of every shift a stone cold reminder that they police any community, only with that community’s permission.
3)Impose severe penalties for any violation of the peoples rights and include training of the inviolate nature of the rights of the people over their government and government agencies. Which also makes people responsible for their own conduct.
4)Remove any and all profit incentives from policing including the use of municipal courts & prisons as revenue extortion mills.
5)Do away with the BAR Asssociation. Victimless crimes are not crimes at all.
What is the harm in having a thoughtful discussion about the use of weapons by law enforcement officers? Is it just possible that people from all sides of the issue might come out from behind their circled wagoms and actually learn something from it?
“A case of the vapors”?? Can’t leave your (totally ingrained) misogyny out of it, huh? And written on a platform founded by two successful and creative women. That IS hysterical.
“Fingernail clippers? Shoot! A cell phone? Shoot! A stick from a tree?”
Hey, Mr. or Ms. Exaggerate/Hysteria, can you please cite one single example in Vermont of a cop shooting someone with fingernail clippers or a stick from a tree?
Thanks.
URGES??????? how about demands? This force has sadly become a ghost of what it used to be and it falls right on the shoulders of the Chief and the Mayor.
The alleged top cop in the most socialistic USA city is actually a sociologist in disguise.
He suddenly is preaching restraint after a 30-year career as a real cop – in NYC.
It’s a fine time for him to decide cops shouldn’t use guns – now that he’s off the street and out of danger holed up in his ivory tower.
Shoot shoot shoot, no matter the situation. Treat everything in a suspect’s hand as a life threatening instrument. Fingernail clippers? Shoot! A cell phone? Shoot! A stick from a tree? Shoot! There’s only one way to handle every situation and that’s BANG! Who cares what happens next? Or could have been done differently? BANG BANG BANG. Problem solved.
A private citizen confronted by a violent individual armed with a knife has absolutely every right to shoot and kill that assailant. As do cops. They don’t surrender their rights to defend themselves just because Ms. Freeman has a case of the vapors.