The Missing Words in the Use-of-Force Report
A use-of-force report has three words missing due to a coffee spill. The surviving text reads: 'The officer observed the subject [1] a glass bottle at the window. The subject then [2] toward the officer with clenched fists. The officer discharged his Taser, and the subject fell to the ground [3].' You have the following evidence: a witness states the subject threw the bottle; a video shows the subject moving quickly toward the officer with fists raised; and the video shows the subject collapsing immediately after the Taser discharge. You must reconstruct the missing words using only this evidence. The report will be reviewed by Internal Affairs, so each word choice must be defensible.
1. Select the best word for each blank from these options: [1] throw / threw / throwing; [2] advanced / ran / stumbled; [3] immediately / eventually / violently. For each, explain why your choice is the most accurate and defensible.
Read the worked answer
- [1] 'threw': The sentence is in past tense and describes a completed action. 'Throw' is present tense; 'throwing' would require a helping verb. The witness confirms the bottle was thrown.
- [2] 'advanced': The video shows the subject moving quickly toward the officer with fists raised. 'Advanced' captures forward movement without overstating speed. 'Ran' may overstate the speed and is not supported by the video; 'stumbled' contradicts the video.
- [3] 'immediately': The video shows the subject collapsing right after the Taser discharge. 'Eventually' contradicts the video. 'Violently' adds an evaluative judgment about how the fall occurred, which is not necessary and could be challenged.
2. If the video showed the subject stumbling rather than moving quickly, how would that change your choice for blank [2], and why would that matter for the report's accuracy?
Read the worked answer
If the video showed stumbling, the accurate word would be 'stumbled' rather than 'advanced.' This matters because 'advanced' implies purposeful, controlled forward movement, which supports a perception of aggression and threat. 'Stumbled' suggests loss of balance or involuntary movement, which could change how a reviewer assesses the immediacy of the threat and the justification for the Taser. The report must reflect what the video actually shows, not what makes the force appear more justified.
3. What is the risk of choosing a word that overstates the subject's action (e.g., 'ran' instead of 'advanced') in a use-of-force report?
Read the worked answer
Overstating the subject's action creates several risks:
- It undermines the officer's credibility if the video or witnesses contradict the report.
- It can be used by a plaintiff or defense attorney to argue that the officer exaggerated the threat.
- It may make the force appear more justified than the evidence supports, which can lead to discipline or legal liability.
- It weakens the report's usefulness in internal review and court proceedings.
Accurate, defensible language protects both the officer and the department.