El Cajon shooting: How should we police people in emotional distress?

The mother of Alfred Olango, an unarmed black man shot Tuesday, has said that her son was in emotional distress. For police, making these split-second decisions presents a challenge. A program at the Los Angeles Police Department offers a possible solution.

Don Boomer/AP
Pamela Benge (c.) spoke of her son, Alfred Olango, at a press conference on Thursday Sept. 29, 2016, in San Diego, Calif.

The mother of an unarmed black man has said that her son needed help during a mental breakdown when he was shot dead in Southern California on Tuesday.

Pamela Benge said that her son, Alfred Olango, was grieving for a dear friend, and “needed someone who was going to calm him down and then take care of the situation.” Instead, he was shot within minutes of police arriving at the scene. 

Authorities said the officers felt that their own lives were in danger: A still from a bystander’s video showed Mr. Olango pointing an object at an officer. That object was, it turned out, an electronic cigarette – but El Cajon Police Chief Jeff Davis described Olango as having adopted a “shooting stance” that may have threatened the officers.

The contrasting perspectives in this case provide a window into the complex issue of policing people in emotional distress or with mental illness. In the moment, it can be difficult for police, who must make split-second decisions, to strike the right balance between providing assistance and avoiding risking their own lives.

In a similar case in Charlotte, N.C., last week, police shot and killed Keith Lamont Scott, a man diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury whom police said pointed a gun at them.

Police reform advocates suggest that one approach that can help is crisis intervention training. About 12 percent of law enforcement agencies nationwide currently use these programs to teach police officers to treat individuals experiencing mental distress with care and compassion. Recognizing mental distress and knowing how to address it may help allay officers’ fears and prevent unnecessary shootings, advocates say.

A similar strategy could have helped save a life in this case, critics of the department say. Dan Gilleon, an attorney for the Olango family, told Reuters in a phone interview that officers should have taken cover and talked to Olango from a distance.

One law enforcement agency – the Los Angeles Police Department – takes this approach further, teaming police officers with trained counselors while on patrol. The effects of this program have been pronounced, as The Christian Science Monitor’s Noelle Swan reported in 2015.

By partnering beat cops with mental health clinicians, the MEU reined in costs associated with frivolous 911 calls. It also connected thousands of individuals with counseling and support, reducing incidences of force used on individuals with mental illness and alleviating the burden on overcrowded emergency rooms and the criminal justice system.

The program – which has seen doctors, nurses and social workers working with the LAPD – has saved taxpayers money and helped police safely address the needs of individuals. There have still been some issues: Deadly force was used against Ezell Ford, a man with mental illness, and Samuel Arrington, a mentally ill homeless man, brought a lawsuit against the LAPD for excessive force.

The model has since been expanded to other cities, including Boston. 

The El Cajon shooting is currently under review. The police department drew fire from protesters over the image of Olango pointing the e-cigarette, which they said was an unfair representation of the situation. As in the case of Keith Scott, protesters have called for the full video to be released. Police say this recording will be made available after the District Attorney’s investigation.

This report includes material from Reuters and the Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.