We use both our own and third-party cookies for statistical purposes and to improve our services. If you continue to browse, we consider that you accept the use of these.
  • Celebrating 20 Years of Training Excellence 2004-2024

Officer Safety is Not a “THING”

Officer safety is not a “thing.” Officer safety is everything for you as an officer and is the justification for almost all of your actions in the field. It is not a legal justification by itself, to do anything in the field. If you want to bullet proof your stops and searches remember to document and testify to ARTICULABLE FACTS. If you write in your report that you stopped or pat searched someone for “officer safety,” welcome to a motion to suppress.


Remember, reasonable suspicion is lower than probable cause-the information can be less reliable and more than that needed for probable cause. Bottom line, reasonable suspicion will exist if you can articulate one or more circumstances that based on your training and experience and based on common sense that criminal activity is afoot. It has to be more than a hunch but it can be otherwise innocent behavior that can lead you to reasonable suspicion.


The United States Supreme Court has held that officer-safety concerns are legitimate and weighty due to officer’s vulnerability. Some circumstances that the Court has upheld detentions:

• Suspect may have committed a violent felony;
• Matches description
• Running and hiding;
• Conduct-refusal to follow commands
o Jittery
o Nervous
o Won’t show hands
• Prior contact
o Prior contact where suspect was armed
o Prior contact where suspect resisted
o Prior contact where suspect fled
• Location plus something else
o Multiple individuals
o Night time with no back-up close

Handcuff During a Detention does not constitute arrest.

Again, you need a reason because handcuffing during a detention is not standard operating procedure. Must be brief and reasonably necessary. TELL the suspect s/he is not under arrest but merely detained.

Some examples of articulable facts to justify handcuffs during a detention:

• Suspect was verbally abusive to officer;
• Suspect refused to remove hands;
• Suspected of violent crime;
• Intoxicated and would not follow direction;
• Officer alone, late at night;
• Officer alone, outnumbered by suspects;
• Reasonable belief that suspect is armed;
• Suspect keeps reaching inside clothing;
• Appears ready to flee;
• Tenses up when touching suspect;
• Suspect transported to another location ie a show up

When you detain a suspect, ARTICULATE why. If you pat search a suspect, ARTICULATE why. If you handcuff a suspect during a detention, ARTICULATE why. If you fail to do so, welcome to a motion to suppress, where hopefully you will remember the facts that led you to take the steps you did. Be safe.






  • Incredible training with amazing real world instruction. I have been taking law enforcement classes for over 30 years and by far this is the best presented and most useful.

    —Det. Brian Dale, Portland Police Bureau
  • This was, by far, one of the most useful training classes I've attended since becoming an investigator.

    —Steven Aiello, Antioch Police Department
  • It not often that you go to a training that you really, really want to pay attention to. Because of the high quality information and style of presentation, I knew that if I looked away I was going to miss out.

    —Quinten Graves, Oregon State Police
  • Your training gave me the confidence and tools to interview the suspect for over 5 hours and to bring a closure to the case.

    —Daniel Phelan, San Jose Police Department
  • This training provided the useful tools necessary for assessing the veracity of a suspected child abuser, which goes a long way in helping to protect children.

    —Sunny Burgan, MSSW, LCSW, Social Work Supervisor, Santa Clara County DFCS
  • This was, by far and away the best training I have received in 15 plus years of Law Enforcement. The instructors are experienced, engaging, articulate, and very entertaining. I will be recommending this training to multiple agencies.

    —Mark Paynter, Oregon DOC
  • The information presented was highly relevant to my job and was presented in a manner that was organized and very easy to digest.

    —Michael McGarvey, California State Prison, San Quentin
  • Your training has made the greatest and most direct impact on my assignment of any training class that I've taken.

    —Ken Gelskey, National City Police Department
  • This training by far has been the most informative and most effective I've attended. The instructors engaged the students in a manner that made me want to speak my opinion, ask questions, and participate.

    —Julio Ibarra, Merced County Sheriff’s Office
  • I highly recommend this training for any Probation staff who have the necessity to interview/interrogate individuals for investigation purposes.

    —R. Bret Fidler, Santa Clara County Probation Department
  • I will continue to use and pass on this information because I really believe in the instructors and their approach.

    —Kimberly Meyer, Washoe County Sheriff's Department
  • Instructional style is engaging and highly effective.

    —George Laing, Fire Prevention Captain, Investigator
  • Effective teaching teams! The presentation of the material was consistently interesting, and intelligent without being too intellectualized.

    —Michele Keller, Deputy Probation Officer, County of Alameda