Judgment
Judgment is scored on decisions made with incomplete information and a clock running: what to prioritize, which lawful tool to use, when to escalate, and when to walk away. The exam favors the applicant who can separate what is permitted from what is wise and who can explain the reasoning in plain language.
Rules that drive the scoring
- Objective reasonableness. Force is evaluated on the totality of circumstances from the officer's perspective at the moment, under Graham v. Connor, not on hindsight. The item tests whether you can articulate specific facts, not recite a formula.
- Least intrusive effective option. Choose the lawful step that accomplishes the objective with the least risk, then document why the alternatives were rejected.
- Authority versus wisdom. A legal power you hold may still be the wrong call if it burns a source, exposes the case to suppression, or creates danger.
- Entrapment risk. A source may present an opportunity but must not create the criminal design in a person not predisposed. Reluctance is a signal to slow down, not to push harder.
- Prioritization order. Imminent danger, then preservation of evidence, then apprehension, then administration. Say the order out loud in your reasoning.
Worked example
A source eager for money proposes to keep calling a target who has twice declined to buy, and suggests offering to front the drugs. The defensible decision is to instruct the source to present the opportunity once, neutrally, with recordings, and to document the target's own statements about supply and distribution. The reasoning: fronting product and repeated pressure shift the conduct from government opportunity to government creation, which supports an entrapment defense and taints every later transaction.
Traps that cost marks
- Confusing activity with progress and escalating because the investigation feels stalled.
- Letting the source set the pace or the terms of contact.
- Boilerplate fear language in reports that does not match the recorded facts.
- Hindsight framing that describes what you knew later as if you knew it then.