Questioning the Concept of Excessiveness with Respect to Alternative and New Age Methods and Uses of Force

• Date: 01 September 2001
• DOI: 10.1177/0887403401012003004
• Author: Robert Scott,Michael Copeland,Chris Crawford,Michael Jilka,Lawrence Gould
• Published date: 01 September 2001
• Subject Matter: Journal Article

CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY REVIEW / September 2001Jilka et al. / ALTERNATIVE METHODS AND USES OF FORCE

Questioning the Concept of

Excessiveness With Respect to

Alternative and New Age Methods

and Uses of Force

Michael Jilka

Law Firm of Shook, Hardy & Bacon

Robert Scott

Lawrence Gould

Chris Crawford

Michael Copeland

Fort Hays State University

The rise in the use by law enforcement officials of alternative instruments and meth-

ods of forceposes a daunting conundrum. On one hand, the obvious salutary effects of

decreased fatalities and serious injuries to human life cannot be denied. On the other

hand, the necessary consequence of increased litigation to delineate the legal con-

tours governingthe use of alternative means of force could and undoubtedly will exert

a profound societal cost.

This article explores the legal principles applicable to excessive force

claims against officials and governing bodies regarding the use of alterna-

tive means of force.1,2 Part 1 provides an overview of the governing princi-

ples and standards arising from relevant state law. Part 2 reviews general

principles applicable to federal civil rights claims for constitutional and fed-

eral statutory law violations and specifically discusses individualand muni-

cipal liability.

GOVERNING PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS:

STATE LAW

Legal claims initiated to impose liability on officers and governmental

bodies for the use of alternative instruments of force arise under the general

235

Criminal Justice Policy Review, Volume 12, Number 3, September 2001 235-248

© 2001 Sage Publications