Traditionally, when we consider the role of the crisis negotiator, we often think of a licensed forensic psychologist or a seasoned SWAT officer using tactical communication techniques to mitigate existing or potential violent encounters. We tend to forget that the majority of hostage and barricade calls are first answered and responded to by uniformed officers. First responders must realize that the first few minutes of contact with the suspect will have bearing on the outcome’s success. This article will address how the first responding officers can leverage those first few minutes to gain the advantage, and discuss some of the facts and myths surrounding Crisis Negotiation Team (CNT) situations. Crisis situations are very dynamic and their elements quite diverse, therefore this article will address the initial response without delving into motives. All you can count on is that a trained and experienced hostage negotiator may take several hours at best to respond—especially in a rural area—and that’s even “if” they decide to respond at all! You may be “it” until they arrive and possibly take over the negotiation. By then, the situation may be resolved—hopefully safely for all involved.
We find that the majority of crisis negotiation incidents have an onset of high emotions, with very little elements of rational thinking. Therefore, when the first responders open a line of communication with the subject, it provides an opportunity for the subject to focus on law enforcement and not on harming themselves or any hostages that may be present. Statistics show that on average, better than 90% of all hostage and barricade situations are successfully resolved through communications.
I have had my fair share of crisis negotiation incidents, sometimes as the actual negotiator and others as the secondary negotiator-advisor, and I can tell you this much: all police officers, regardless of tenure, experience or rank, inherently have good communication skills. While it does take a special person to become a dedicated crisis negotiator that can leverage their training and experience to defuse some of the more complex situations, even the greenest rookie can be a successful negotiator.
Conventional Hostage Incidents
A national review of hostage and barricade situations has shown that there are generally three types of hostage situations: criminal, mental illness/domestic and terrorism.
Criminal situations can include violent crimes gone wrong—where we have seen fleeing suspects take proximity hostages for cover. These types of hostage-takers participate in either a well-planned or spontaneous reaction to a life-preservation situation. An experienced criminal may end up taking a hostage accidentally or as a consequence of flight, thus the hostages are then used as barter for escape because the criminal is trapped.
Mental illness or domestic situations can arise from a dispute into a hostage/barricade situation with little or no warning. Domestic barricade situations have the potential to escalate and spiral out of control due to the potential for previous interpersonal violence issues to rise to the surface. The mentally ill subject often has the ability to exercise considerable power over the police by threatening suicide.
Like most crisis incidents, mental illness/domestic barricades are emotionally charged incidents that combine dysfunctional thinking and faulty problem solving. It should be noted that these types of incidents are challenging to negotiate due to the unreasonable actions of the subject.
While less frequent, terrorist incidents have the potential to show resurgence domestically and may provide for the most difficult of negotiations as the terrorist may engage in disingenuous dialogue in order to draw in law enforcement or ensure media coverage, therefore these incidents may last several days. The operation will likely be well thought out and rehearsed. These cases may be carefully planned with specific targets selected, which include clandestine targets yet to be revealed to the responding officers. It is unlikely the first responder will continue the communication from initial contact to the incident’s resolve, so don’t take it personally if you’re “shoulder tapped” and relieved of your duties.
Initial Response to the Crisis Incident
Upon arrival, the first responder should utilize the 3 Cs protocols: Contain, Control and Communicate. First responders are trained to operate at the core of chaos, but a chaotic scene can be detrimental to resolving a crisis incident. Non-sworn personnel, including the hostages and the hostage taker, can be overwhelmed by the pure scope of the incident, causing panic and desperation to drive their response. Officers must contain the scene and keep non-essential personnel and onlookers outside of the immediate area. At the same time, we want to contain the hostage taker to the immediate area.
The first officers at the scene will be able to control the situation and evaluate the incident specifics from an on-scene perspective. Locking down a secure perimeter allows the lead officer a seamless transition into engaging the subject in dialogue, thus stabilizing the situation, even if only temporarily.
Negotiations: A Natural Part of the Job
Think about it for a moment. Whether it be the issuance of a traffic ticket, getting a person to comply to an arrest or simply asking someone to move along, all these acts are negotiations; although less complex than one involving an armed hostage-taker holding a score of frightened patrons at a pub, they are all negotiations. While the latter is a dynamic event that could result in the loss of life, as experience shows, so can a traffic stop. Outside the context of law enforcement work, we negotiate. Be it for a better deal on the price of a car, with our spouse/significant other or our children, we negotiate. The first step to a successful negotiation is communication.
Crisis Communications
We all understand that communication is a two-part process: talking and listening. When dealing with a subject in a crisis-state, it behooves you to take the role of the listener, and I mean active listening. Pay attention to not just what is being said but how it’s said. Though you’re entrenched as the negotiator, you’re still investigating what has occurred and what is occurring. Eventually, you will be called to answer for everything that you advised the subject on during negotiations. Be mindful of what you say and how you speak to the subject.
Crisis communications is simply using the art of persuasion to encourage the subject into mitigating their own behavior, so that the subject can be safely detained without harming themselves or those in proximity. Crisis communications is a process, in which time can help solve the problem. Rushing this process could result in a cascading failure, which will make it difficult for those involved to recover or regain control. Now is not the time to resolve the situation, therefore it’s time to develop a rapport with the subject.
Some negotiators make the mistake of transitioning into making demands at this point, but contemporary crisis negotiation principles show that the subject just wants immediate freedom from police intervention. You may not have the time or the capability to delve into the depths of the subject’s life and their trigger event, but you may have the opportunity to obtain small bits of information about them. Said information will help develop a general profile and picture of who they are and what’s going on in their life that led to the nucleolus of the current incident.
We all remember the KISS method (Keep It Simple Stupid) from our academy days, and in a crisis-hostage situation, you will want to take the opportunity to implement such sound advice. The onset of the negotiation should be kept simple. I would suggest something along the lines of identifying who you are and what your goal is—perhaps saying “My name is … and I am here to help.”
Make it known that you are there to help, but that you have limited authority. This is a critical aspect of any negotiation and needs to be part of your initial contact with the subject. The first responder should indicate that he/she can talk about things (demands and deadlines) but will have to defer any decisions on these matters to the incident commander.
At this point of the negotiation, we want the subject to reach their own stage of rational thinking, and nothing encourages this process more than the negotiator interjecting open-ended questions. These types of questions should stimulate the subject to talk or vent their frustrations. When the subject speaks, negotiators gain greater insight into the subject’s intent.
An effective negotiation will tend to focus on learning what the subject thinks and feels. If negotiators do most of the talking, they decrease the opportunities to learn about the subject.
Examples of effective open-ended questions include, “Can you tell me more about that?” “I didn’t understand what you just said. Could you help me better understand by explaining that further?” and “Could you tell me more about what happened to you today?”
Negotiators should provide minimal encouragement to the subject by giving occasional, brief and well-timed vocal replies. This demonstrates that negotiators are following what the subject says. Even relatively simple phrases–such as “yes,” “OK” or “I see” effectively convey that a negotiator is paying attention to the subject. These responses will encourage the subject to continue talking and gradually relinquish more control of the situation to the negotiator. Ultimately, some subjects may fail to respond. If this occurs, it’s best to implement a steady and persistent approach at establishing a line of dialogue and communication. Depending on the dynamics of the scene, a repeat announcement every five to 10 minutes should be suitable.
Accepting Surrender
Be prepared to accept a subject’s surrender as soon as you make the initial contact (believe it or not, it does happen). There is nothing wrong with accepting surrender, even if SWAT is still en route. Surrender must be carefully coordinated with other officers at the scene and a clear plan agreed to by all parties.
The negotiator should paint a clear picture of what will happen when the subject emerges from cover or concealment. You don’t want any surprises during surrender or to have the subject turn back inside because they saw something they didn’t expect. The first responder has to provide encouragement that the person will be handled with dignity and not mistreated if they comply.
Conclusion
Law enforcement professionals should appreciate their inherent negotiating skills and recognize the need to quickly contain a crisis situation upon arrival. While it may be likely that designated negotiators and tactical operators will assume the lead role in an enduring situation, it is important for first responders to attempt to initiate at least a basic dialogue with the subject, especially if hostages are present. Initial communications can provide a significant benefit to the peaceful resolve of the incident.
Regardless, these same crisis/hostage communication skills will assist you in many other ways within your career. They will help you get more criminal confessions, safely resolve domestic disputes and other tension-prone encounters and even help with traffic stops.
This article includes information from Hostage Negotiations for the First Responder, an article published in the FBI LEO Forum July 14, 2011.