Will Miller Green Mountain Veterans For Peace
from The Times Argus, August 22, 2014
Analysis | Show of force: How much?
by Eric Blaisdell
STAFF WRITER
BARRE — A mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle pulls up as state police put on bulletproof vests and break out their assault rifles. The whooshing of helicopter blades can be heard overhead. The road is crowded with state police vehicles, including a large truck that serves as a mobile command station. Everyone stands poised for the event to unfold.
This was the scene Monday evening in Duxbury when Vermont State Police were engaged in a standoff with a man who police say had already fired shots at the first trooper to arrive.
The scene was similar to an incident in Washington in 2012, when the state police Tactical Support Unit and another armored vehicle were summoned to a home to serve a search warrant on a man who had reportedly made threats to harm himself and police. That standoff ended peacefully with the man’s surrender.
The perceived militarization of police in this country has come under increased scrutiny lately after protesters and journalists in Ferguson, Missouri, have come face to face with officers who look strikingly similar to soldiers. In fact, in a news conference Monday, President Barack Obama said it might be a good idea to look into police departments’ budgets to see how they are spending federal grant money.
“There is a big difference between our military and our local law enforcement, and we don’t want those lines blurred,” Obama said. “That would be contrary to our traditions.”
Later that day, state police were called to a home in Duxbury to check on the well-being of Paul Sweetser, 58, because he had reportedly made comments about killing himself. When a trooper arrived, state police say, Sweetser shot through a door. He reportedly fired more rounds a few moments later.
This triggered the response that brought more than 30 law enforcement vehicles to the scene, including the armored vehicle the state acquired in February. Sweetser died later that night of what police said was a self-inflicted gunshot. State police said they did not fire any shots themselves.
When asked if the response may have been too heavy, considering it was a lone man holed up in his home, state police Capt. Paul White said Wednesday, “I think if you were the one on the other side of the door having rounds fired at you, you wouldn’t be asking that question.”
“When you have a person of unknown mental status, armed, and has already demonstrated that he’s willing to take that type of an action,” he said, “I guess I’m not sure what type of response you would recommend. Obviously, we are concerned with the safety of everybody involved, to include the responding officers, neighbors, whoever else might be within range of the home.”
White said he would have to review the president’s comments about police militarization before he could comment on them, but he said he’d heard the arguments before. White said the Vermont State Police is the only agency for law enforcement in many parts of the state. He said it needs to be prepared for anything. White said there is no other agency to turn to if state police need equipment for a particular kind of incident.
“If you were talking about Waterbury Police Department having that kind of equipment, where they only cover one square mile, that’s something different,” he said. “But when you’re talking about an agency that covers the entire state, there is no larger agency to turn to for assistance.”
When asked why the armored vehicle was needed in Duxbury, White reiterated that police were dealing with someone who was armed, had already fired a weapon and had an unknown mental status.
“I can’t think of a situation that would be more appropriate for that armored vehicle,” he said.
Allen Gilbert, the executive director of the Vermont branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said what appeared to be a military presence by police in this case is worrisome for multiple reasons.
“First of all, when you start acquiring a lot of military equipment, you begin to act and be perceived as though you are military rather than a community police force,” he said. “That’s not good.”
Gilbert wants the state to compile information about all the military surplus equipment it receives in one easily accessible location. He wants the same done in regard to how the department spends grant money it receives from the Department of Homeland Security.
“There’s no one place that I’m aware of that you can go and easily find, for example, how many armored personnel vehicles we have in the state now,” Gilbert said. “I know of two, and that’s only because press releases were issued when the vehicles came into the state.”
He said when the state receives a piece of equipment like the mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle, or MRAP, it’s touted as something Vermont gets for free. He said that’s not the case, because taxpayers paid for the vehicle when the military first purchased it. Often, Gilbert said, the state then has to make repairs and modifications to the vehicle for it to be used in the state. For the MRAP, Gilbert said, the state made around $50,000 in alterations.
“There’s $50,000 when, at the same time, we’re being told state police don’t have $10,000 to analyze (traffic) stop data that they’ve been collecting in the last couple of years to show whether there might be racial profiling in the state or not,” he said.
Gilbert called that use of resources unfortunate and agreed with Obama that a review of the surplus military goods program is in order.
The other major issue with an incident like the one in Duxbury and the police response, according to Gilbert, is how it affects a person suffering from a mental health crisis.
“For somebody who’s mentally disturbed or just having a mental health problem, sometimes the sight of police or police dressed up as military with military vehicles can really set somebody off,” he said. “It’s one of the things you hear about with incidents involving people who are disturbed. It’s often just seeing a police officer in a uniform that can set somebody off and they can do something that doesn’t seem rational.”
Mary Moulton, the executive director of Washington County Mental Health Services, said she doesn’t particularly agree with Gilbert about police exacerbating the situation. She said in her 20 years of dealing with situations like the one in Duxbury, she has seen police and mental health caregivers work together.
“What happens in these situations is if there’s an immediate situation presented, the police go because they are able to get there quickly. It sounds to me that’s what happened (in Duxbury) and then the situation unfolded.”
She said she would not have sent a mental health worker to Sweetser’s door, because he had reportedly already fired a shot before the second trooper arrived. A mental health worker was on the scene in Duxbury.
Moulton said it’s not the police presence that’s the most important factor, because they are there to protect the community; it’s the one-on-one conversations the person is having with the negotiator.
“The exchange with the person, in my experience, has been one person trying to reach out to talk to the person that’s inside,” she said. “Whether that be a mental health emergency worker or whether that be a police negotiator. There’s an attempt to connect with the person. That’s the most important experience.”
Moulton said she’s been to scenes with a heavy police presence — not on the scale of Duxbury — and those incidents have ended positively with the person coming out of the house and surrendering. Sometimes talking to the person just isn’t enough, she said. She noted police did not fire back at Sweetser after he had fired multiple shots.
“That tells me that they were trying to connect with the person and, unfortunately, people do reach levels of despair beyond what one person’s connection can change. You try very hard to make the connection, but it isn’t always successful,” she said.