De-escalation Technique #4

Procedural Explanation

Reducing uncertainty by explaining what will happen, why you're taking certain actions, and what the subject can expect next.

✅

3 Best Practice Examples

⚠

3 Improvement Examples

📜

NYPD Patrol Guide Reference

De-escalation Definition (PG 221-01)

"De-escalation is taking action to stabilize the situation and reduce the immediacy of the threat so that more time, options, and/or resources become available (e.g., tactical communication, requesting a supervisor, additional members of service and/or resources). The goal is to gain the voluntary compliance of the subject, when appropriate and consistent with personal safety, to reduce or eliminate the necessity to use force."

Source: NYPD Patrol Guide, Force Guidelines

✓

Tactical Communication: Use verbal techniques to explain actions and gain voluntary compliance before resorting to force.

✓

Time Investment: Creating time through explanation allows more options and reduces the need for force.

✓

Voluntary Compliance: The explicit goal is gaining subject cooperation through understanding, not command-only approaches.

✅

Best Practice Examples

These clips demonstrate officers effectively explaining procedures, reducing subject anxiety through transparency.

Best Practice

Explaining Equipment Use

58 sec

Transcript

"The only reason why we have to use this robot is because you won't come to the hallway with your hands in front of you. It's just a robot."

✓ Explains WHY they're using specific equipment

✓ Connects their action to subject's behavior (cause & effect)

✓ Demystifies the equipment ("It's just a robot")

✓ Implies subject can change the outcome by complying

kent_edwards__officer_brower.mp4 | 0:10 - 1:08

Best Practice

Explaining Surveillance Purpose

19 sec

Transcript

"Remember that? So this allows us to be able to see you to make sure that you're okay. You're telling us the truth that you don't have a gun. That's all. Ishmael, why don't you want to come with us after you ask for help?"

✓ Explains the purpose of their surveillance ("to make sure you're okay")

✓ Frames it as verification, not accusation

✓ Uses subject's name (personalization)

✓ Asks open-ended question to understand subject's perspective

kent_edwards__officer_librizzi.mp4 | 0:28 - 0:47

Best Practice

Extended Explanation Over Time

87 sec

Transcript

"We've been talking for how long? I explained everything to you earlier. There's paramedics that have been waiting for two hours to help you. For two hours. All you need to do is stand right there. I'll walk you... Nobody's gonna kill you. I'm not going to kill you. I've explained to you earlier..."

✓ References prior explanations (consistent messaging)

✓ Explains who else is involved (paramedics) and why

✓ Gives specific, simple next step ("All you need to do...")

✓ Combines explanation with reassurance

kent_edwards__officer_brower.mp4 | 1:08 - 2:35

⚠

Opportunities for Improvement

These clips show situations where adding procedural explanation could have reduced escalation. Note: These are high-stress armed encounters where some urgency is justified, but communication could still be improved.

Needs Improvement

Repeated Commands Without Context

47 sec

Transcript

"Put the knife down! Put the knife down! Put the knife down! Put the knife down, sir! Sir, put the fucking knife down! Put the fucking knife down! Get on the ground! Get on the fucking ground!"

✗ Same command repeated 10+ times without variation

✗ No explanation of what happens if they comply

✗ No explanation of why compliance is needed

✗ Escalating profanity may increase subject's fear

king_wong__officer_acosta.mp4 | 1:06 - 1:53

Needs Improvement

Urgent Commands Without Alternatives

39 sec

Transcript

"Get on the fucking ground right now! Get on the fucking ground! Yo! Get on the fucking ground right now! Get on the ground! Put the fucking knife down! Shots fired! Shots fired!"

✗ No time given for subject to process commands

✗ Commands overlap and contradict (knife vs. ground)

✗ No explanation of consequences or next steps

✗ Situation escalates to shots fired

king_wong__officer_lamonica.mp4 | 1:46 - 2:25

Needs Improvement

High Intensity Without De-escalation Attempt

19 sec

Transcript

"Sir! Put down the gun right now! Put down the fucking gun! Are you kidding me? Are you kidding me? Put down the gun!"

✗ "Are you kidding me?" expresses frustration, not instruction

✗ No explanation of what will happen if subject complies

✗ No reassurance that compliance leads to safety

emil_williams__officer_wright.mp4 | 1:03 - 1:22

💡

How These Situations Could Be Improved

Transforming Commands into Procedural Explanations

Instead of Saying...

"Put the knife down! Put the knife down!"

"Get on the fucking ground right now!"

"Put down the gun! Are you kidding me?"

"Don't move! Don't fucking move!"

Try Adding Context...

"Put the knife down so we can talk safely. I want to help you, but I need you to put it down first."

"Get on the ground so I can make sure you're safe. Once you're down, we can figure this out together."

"Sir, put the gun down. If you put it down, no one gets hurt. We can work this out."

"Stay still for me. I need to see your hands so I know you're safe. Then we'll talk."

🎯

Key Takeaways

💬 Explain the "Why"

Subjects comply faster when they understand the reason for commands. "Put the knife down so we can talk" is more effective than "Put the knife down" alone.

🕑 Paint the Future

Tell subjects what happens AFTER compliance. "Once you put that down, we can get you the help you asked for" gives them hope and a clear path forward.

🔄 Vary Your Approach

If the same command isn't working after 3-4 repetitions, add explanation. Repetition without variation rarely changes behavior.

🤝 Connect Actions to Help

Frame compliance as the path to help: "Paramedics are here to help you, but I need you to put that down first so they can."

⏱ Create Time

Procedural explanation naturally slows down encounters. Per NYPD policy, creating time means more options and less force needed.

👥 Acknowledge Their State

"I know you're scared" or "I understand this is confusing" validates the subject's experience before giving instructions.

Discussion Questions for Training Sessions

In the "best practice" clips, how did explaining the robot's purpose change the dynamic of the encounter?

When an armed subject isn't responding to repeated commands, what procedural explanations could you add?

How do you balance the urgency of a dangerous situation with taking time to explain?

In the "needs improvement" clips, at what point could an officer have added explanation to potentially change the outcome?

How does the NYPD's definition of de-escalation ("gain voluntary compliance") relate to procedural explanation?

What's the difference between explaining and negotiating? When does one become the other?