UNDERSTANDING DEATH, GOOD SAMARITAN CPR, AND AARs - 034
TRANSCRIPT:
This week on the Writer's Detective Bureau, understanding death, good Samaritan CPR, and after-action reports. I'm Adam Richardson, and this is the Writer's Detective Bureau. This is episode number 34 of the Writer's Detective Bureau, the podcast dedicated to helping authors and screenwriters write professional quality crime-related fiction. I'd like to thank Gold Shield Patron Debra Dunbar from debradunbar.com and Coffee Club patrons Joan Raymond, Guy Alton, Natasha Bajema, Natalie Barelli, Joe Trent, Siobhan Pope, Leah Cutter, Ryan Kinmil, Richard Phillips, Robin Lyons, Gene Desrochers, Craig Kingsman, Kate Wagner, Marco Carocari, Victoria Kazarian, Rebecca Jackson, and Daniel Miller. Your support definitely keeps the lights on in the bureau.
Please support all of these awesome authors by visiting their author websites and buying their books. You can find the links to their websites in the show notes at writersdetective.com/34. And if you have your own author business, consider joining Patreon. It's free for you, and it allows your readers to support you financially through monthly micropayments. Give your fans a chance to show their support by creating your own Patreon account right now. To learn more, visit writersdetective.com/patreon, P-A-T-R-E-O-N.
Please support all of these awesome authors by visiting their author websites and buying their books. You can find the links to their websites in the show notes at writersdetective.com/34. And if you have your own author business, consider joining Patreon. It's free for you, and it allows your readers to support you financially through monthly micropayments. Give your fans a chance to show their support by creating your own Patreon account right now. To learn more, visit writersdetective.com/patreon, P-A-T-R-E-O-N.
Since you're listening to this, I'm going to make the big detective assumption that you're a fan of writing podcasts. I have a few to share with you, and I know I've already mentioned Natasha Bajema's Authors of Mass Destruction podcast, but next week, she will be releasing her interview with me, where we talk about all sorts of topics, like how local law enforcement responds to WMD events and even why getting my DNA analyzed probably wasn't the smartest idea. So again, check out Authors of Mass Destruction.
The next podcast I want to mention is the SPA Girls, S-P-A Girls podcast. S-P-A stands for self-publishing authors, and these lovely ladies live in New Zealand, but they write fiction based in the United States, and they were kind enough to invite me on as an upcoming guest on their podcast. We just recorded the episode, and I had an absolute blast speaking with them. It was a lot of fun. The episode we recorded won't be published for another month and a half or so, but I definitely want you to start listening to the SPA Girls podcast. It is a great one to subscribe to, especially if you are a self-published author.
And finally, I want to mention Gavin Reese's Authors on the Beat podcast. Gavin is a cop, an author, and the host of Authors on the Beat. Gavin and I do have a podcast interview date scheduled for the near future, but Authors on the Beat is another writing podcast worth checking out if you're writing crime fiction.
The next podcast I want to mention is the SPA Girls, S-P-A Girls podcast. S-P-A stands for self-publishing authors, and these lovely ladies live in New Zealand, but they write fiction based in the United States, and they were kind enough to invite me on as an upcoming guest on their podcast. We just recorded the episode, and I had an absolute blast speaking with them. It was a lot of fun. The episode we recorded won't be published for another month and a half or so, but I definitely want you to start listening to the SPA Girls podcast. It is a great one to subscribe to, especially if you are a self-published author.
And finally, I want to mention Gavin Reese's Authors on the Beat podcast. Gavin is a cop, an author, and the host of Authors on the Beat. Gavin and I do have a podcast interview date scheduled for the near future, but Authors on the Beat is another writing podcast worth checking out if you're writing crime fiction.
Let's have a quick little discussion, a different kind of discussion, about death. Now, death is inevitable, obviously, and we all have varying levels of seeing and experiencing death, and we all respond to it differently. When death is part of your daily life, like it is for any homicide detective, I don't want to say you get used to it, but the emotion attached to it can start to subside, sometimes, and other times not.
This relationship between a homicide detective protagonist and death is something that a lot of writers tend to struggle with. Now, the trope is that we are either immediately queasy if we're a rookie or we are completely indifferent to gore if we're a veteran. But the reality is that it lies somewhere in between, and at different levels for all of us.
Now, in looking at this and trying to explain it in a more relatable way, I came up with my own analogy that I think may help you understand it, especially if you are a parent. Now, if you aren't a parent, you may find this analogy as equally disgusting as the topic of death, so what is this analogy that I came up with? Well, death to a homicide detective is like poop to a parent. I myself do not have kids, but I have many friends who do, and I've seen the stages that new parents go through in the never-ending battle with baby poop. I know it sounds ridiculous, but it starts with that natural reaction, right? Of, "Ew, that is disgusting. The smell, it's so gross. I don't want to even look at it. There is no way I am touching that or letting it get on me."
But then, after a few months, you start to get a little battle hardened, right? "That's not the smelliest diaper he's ever had. As long as it doesn't get on my clothes this time, I'll be happy," and eventually, you get wise, and hardened to the whole concept. "That wasn't just a toot. Look at that face. What's your bet, honey? Half full or up to the belt line? Let's do a quick little dipstick check. Yep, crapper's full. Pass the wet wipes."
When one becomes particularly messy, like when it does get outside of the diaper, it isn't so much that appalled, "Oh my god, it's everywhere" response as it is one of, I don't know, amused curiosity. "How the heck did it get from down there all the way up here?" It kind of reminds me of this discussion between anchorman Ron Burgundy and his dog, Baxter.
Come again? You know I don't speak Spanish. In English, please. Huh? You pooped in the refrigerator? And you ate the whole wheel of cheese? How'd you do that? I'm not even mad. That's amazing.
I know it sounds ridiculous, but just like a parent's evolution through dealing with poop on a regular basis, the rookie to veteran detective process is very similar. No one looks forward to the next one, but it is a reality that is sure to come. Gone are the involuntary grimaces and waves of nausea you experienced the first few times. You've inoculated yourself to the sights and smells, and it no longer makes you lose your appetite. You become indifferent to the process when you're in the moment. It doesn't really seem to affect you.
That's because your brain has created a psychological disconnect between what you're experiencing right now and your emotions, and you may not even realize it. You just do what needs to be done and you don't overthink it. So whether it's your kid's poop or the gore of a homicide scene, the way you handle it, the mental trick your brain develops to not react viscerally, doesn't mean you stop caring or become a psychopath devoid of emotion. It just gets bottled up for another day, and you probably never even realize it. And sometimes, the more spectacular ones leave you scratching your head as to how the goopy mess you're looking at started off as a perfectly clean and normal human being.
This relationship between a homicide detective protagonist and death is something that a lot of writers tend to struggle with. Now, the trope is that we are either immediately queasy if we're a rookie or we are completely indifferent to gore if we're a veteran. But the reality is that it lies somewhere in between, and at different levels for all of us.
Now, in looking at this and trying to explain it in a more relatable way, I came up with my own analogy that I think may help you understand it, especially if you are a parent. Now, if you aren't a parent, you may find this analogy as equally disgusting as the topic of death, so what is this analogy that I came up with? Well, death to a homicide detective is like poop to a parent. I myself do not have kids, but I have many friends who do, and I've seen the stages that new parents go through in the never-ending battle with baby poop. I know it sounds ridiculous, but it starts with that natural reaction, right? Of, "Ew, that is disgusting. The smell, it's so gross. I don't want to even look at it. There is no way I am touching that or letting it get on me."
But then, after a few months, you start to get a little battle hardened, right? "That's not the smelliest diaper he's ever had. As long as it doesn't get on my clothes this time, I'll be happy," and eventually, you get wise, and hardened to the whole concept. "That wasn't just a toot. Look at that face. What's your bet, honey? Half full or up to the belt line? Let's do a quick little dipstick check. Yep, crapper's full. Pass the wet wipes."
When one becomes particularly messy, like when it does get outside of the diaper, it isn't so much that appalled, "Oh my god, it's everywhere" response as it is one of, I don't know, amused curiosity. "How the heck did it get from down there all the way up here?" It kind of reminds me of this discussion between anchorman Ron Burgundy and his dog, Baxter.
Come again? You know I don't speak Spanish. In English, please. Huh? You pooped in the refrigerator? And you ate the whole wheel of cheese? How'd you do that? I'm not even mad. That's amazing.
I know it sounds ridiculous, but just like a parent's evolution through dealing with poop on a regular basis, the rookie to veteran detective process is very similar. No one looks forward to the next one, but it is a reality that is sure to come. Gone are the involuntary grimaces and waves of nausea you experienced the first few times. You've inoculated yourself to the sights and smells, and it no longer makes you lose your appetite. You become indifferent to the process when you're in the moment. It doesn't really seem to affect you.
That's because your brain has created a psychological disconnect between what you're experiencing right now and your emotions, and you may not even realize it. You just do what needs to be done and you don't overthink it. So whether it's your kid's poop or the gore of a homicide scene, the way you handle it, the mental trick your brain develops to not react viscerally, doesn't mean you stop caring or become a psychopath devoid of emotion. It just gets bottled up for another day, and you probably never even realize it. And sometimes, the more spectacular ones leave you scratching your head as to how the goopy mess you're looking at started off as a perfectly clean and normal human being.
Alice Lam from alicelambooks.com writes, "Hi, Adam. Your podcast is fantastic. My question is, if a good Samaritan tries to resuscitate a victim of crime, could he be implicated by transferring his DNA, et cetera? Thank you, Alice." First of all, thank you for the kind words and the question, Alice. I suppose it is possible that DNA transferred by a good Samaritan during resuscitation efforts could lead to an implication, but there would have to be more to it than that. Rendering aid to a victim in distress is a pretty good alibi and source of that reasonable doubt that a jury would be looking for, so the way this plays out in the story would be key to how or why the police would consider this person a suspect.
You have to remember that DNA is circumstantial evidence. Sometimes, we call it indirect evidence when we think it's important, and then when we try to downplay the importance of something, we'll refer to it as circumstantial evidence, as if it means nothing, but they're the same thing. Circumstantial evidence means that it's only evidence if an inference can be made from its meaning. I'm sure I have my wife's DNA and my cat's DNA on me right now, so what about that DNA would lead a detective to believe my wife, or much more likely Paul, our cat, was a suspect in my death, right? If there's a reason to infer that the DNA from a good Samaritan played a role or is an unexpected or unexplained anomaly in the crime scene, then that is a possibility, I guess, that it could be considered that. But that will be up to you as the author to plausibly explain why that DNA does or doesn't mean that the person may be considered a suspect.
Normally, a good Samaritan stays with the victim. You know, I'm envisioning like giving CPR for this scenario, until a higher level of care medical care arrives, whether that's paramedics, or the fire department, or even the police. I doubt they're going to question the presence of a good Samaritan's DNA on the body if the first responders know that this person was there to try to help, to try to render aid. Now, unless there is something else about the scene, you know? The body, the DNA that leads them to question whether it was the body, the DNA that leads them to question whether it was as simple as a good Samaritan trying to help, then that may be where things change. But just on the face of it though, I don't think a good Samaritan's DNA transfer onto a body during resuscitation efforts would automatically make them a suspect. But that's your job as the author, to twist what we assume into that compelling story, and you can certainly make that happen either way, Alice, with this scenario. So thank you for the great question, and you can find Alice's work at alicelambooks.com.
You have to remember that DNA is circumstantial evidence. Sometimes, we call it indirect evidence when we think it's important, and then when we try to downplay the importance of something, we'll refer to it as circumstantial evidence, as if it means nothing, but they're the same thing. Circumstantial evidence means that it's only evidence if an inference can be made from its meaning. I'm sure I have my wife's DNA and my cat's DNA on me right now, so what about that DNA would lead a detective to believe my wife, or much more likely Paul, our cat, was a suspect in my death, right? If there's a reason to infer that the DNA from a good Samaritan played a role or is an unexpected or unexplained anomaly in the crime scene, then that is a possibility, I guess, that it could be considered that. But that will be up to you as the author to plausibly explain why that DNA does or doesn't mean that the person may be considered a suspect.
Normally, a good Samaritan stays with the victim. You know, I'm envisioning like giving CPR for this scenario, until a higher level of care medical care arrives, whether that's paramedics, or the fire department, or even the police. I doubt they're going to question the presence of a good Samaritan's DNA on the body if the first responders know that this person was there to try to help, to try to render aid. Now, unless there is something else about the scene, you know? The body, the DNA that leads them to question whether it was the body, the DNA that leads them to question whether it was as simple as a good Samaritan trying to help, then that may be where things change. But just on the face of it though, I don't think a good Samaritan's DNA transfer onto a body during resuscitation efforts would automatically make them a suspect. But that's your job as the author, to twist what we assume into that compelling story, and you can certainly make that happen either way, Alice, with this scenario. So thank you for the great question, and you can find Alice's work at alicelambooks.com.
This week's next question comes from Kelly Garrett, and Kelly writes, "I've always been curious what the internal review process, and I assume there is one, is like after major incidents. I imagine someone within the department analyzes both what went well and what could be improved upon. I started thinking about this after an incident in my neighborhood which resulted in a 10-hour lockdown and a shot-up house, in which it seems to me the police involved didn't do anything wrong and did what they should, and didn't get the results they would have wanted. And thankfully, in the case, no one was injured, whether that's police, bystanders, or the suspect, although that was an element of luck that bystanders weren't hurt."
So, you bring up a really great point or question, Kelly. Most agencies will have some sort of an internal review process, but it can vary widely, from a formal debriefing and written report to a very informal, roundtable discussion. And we call it an after-action review, or more often, we just abbreviate it as AAR. AARs are done in the military. They're done in the fire service, EMS, and of course law enforcement, and the purpose of an AAR is to capture the successes, the failures, and the lessons learned from an event for everyone to benefit from. And I should mention that AARs are done as a group meeting with everyone involved in the incident present.
So, we not only do AARs after big incidents, like Kelly's talking about, but also after training evolutions. So, when a SWAT team practices building entries, an AAR is done after each building entry. Every single little training iteration, they walk through the whole process, so when the narcotics unit serves a search warrant on a drug house, an AAR is done after the bad guys have been booked in jail and the dope has been booked into evidence, and if it's a major incident that involved a large number of officers, or a shootout, or an officer being killed, it may happen a few days after the incident, and there may also be psychologists or counselors there to help talk through the emotional aspect of things.
So how do these AARs work? They will usually start with the group leader, which could be either the immediate supervisor of the unit or it could be the officer or detective in charge of the case that started this whole thing, essentially restating what the intended mission was. And it doesn't have to be the boss. It's just going to be the first one to talk will usually be the person that did the briefing and was the one putting this whole case together. So to use Kelly's example of the shot-up house, the AAR would start with the officer, or detective, or sergeant that was investigating whatever led to going to this house, and if this case was where a detective obtained a search warrant for the house and he got everyone together to serve this warrant, that's who would start the AAR, and explain everything from the very beginning, like, "We obtained information that such-and-such was going on at this location. I authored a search warrant for the house. We briefed that the plan would be to," you know, blah blah blah. "At such-and-such time, we made our approach to the house. I was number two in the entry team, and as we made our way to the door, I saw ..." blah blah blah.
Now, everyone in the AAR, starting with that first person to talk, gives their first-person account of their experience. Now this is important, because it will reveal things that someone else working this exact same event did or didn't know, they didn't see, hear, experience, perceive, or whatever, and that's where the learning comes from. It's common to learn major elements of the incident for the first time during that debrief or AAR, like, "I didn't know you saw someone on the second floor," or, you know, "From my perspective, all I knew was detective one went down, so I bumped up to this corner and covered down this hallway." By going around the room and hearing the first-person's perspective of everyone there, you end up capturing the overall story of what actually happened from all angles, and that's where these lessons learned come from, that discussion that will improve how they deal with things the next time.
It's important to have ground rules for these discussions, like you have to leave your ego at the door. Everyone gets a chance to talk without being interrupted. It's not the time to blame others, and you have to own your mistakes and state them for the group, because it's about learning how to do things safer for the next time. So, the kinds of lessons that will be learned can be tactical ones, like if you're assigned to clear or cover this portion of a room, you have to trust your partner to do his job on his portion. So, keep your attention on your area. The perspective could be, "I was assigned to cover the left side of the room, but I kept feeling like I needed to look to the right, so that's something I need to work on, is maintaining my focus on the area that I'm responsible for and trusting that my partner is going to cover their side." That would be an example of a first-person perspective, where they're owning their mistake.
Or the lessons could be ones that are more personal, like the new guy on the team is not sure if he should say something, because he doesn't want to be wrong or sound foolish, so the new guy may learn that he needs to communicate when he sees something, and not second-guess whether or not he's going to key the mic. It's like when you see it, you have to hit that button and let everybody know what you're seeing. So, whether the lesson learned stay within the room ... I should stop for a second. I keep saying room. Most of these AARs don't even happen in a room. I should be calling them like curbside critiques. So don't misconstrue all of this to mean that it has to be done in like a formal room setting, necessarily, but anyway. But whether the lessons stay within the group or whether it turns into a major briefing topic and pushed to other agencies will depend on the unit, or even on the level of severity of the safety issue they identify.
But sharing experiences is key to survival, and 90% of our training in law enforcement comes from cops either losing their lives or nearly doing so, so we tend to share anything we deem to be an officer safety issue. I remember reading one officer safety bulletin a few years ago from another agency, I think on the other side of the US, that had an issue with their handguns not firing. The range master for that agency had three different officers go through their quarterly shooting qualifications and those three different officers, their guns didn't fire, you know? They pulled the trigger, but the firing pin didn't actually move, so rather than say, "That's weird. Must be a defect with the gun," they went after this. They chased down what could have caused it.
Any guess as to what they figured out? The three officers worked on the same patrol squad, and a few weeks prior to range day, they'd gone on an alarm call with an open door at a medical building, a medical building with an MRI machine. So, the range master and the officers figured out and tested that apparently, the magnetic pull of an MRI machine was so strong that it magnetized the firing pin inside the slide of the handgun and rendered the pin immobile. So, not only did you make this gun no longer fire, you had three officers going about their daily work for several weeks before they went to shoot at the range, with guns that didn't work. I mean, they're really lucky that they didn't have a critical incident that required a handgun in between those two times. So I guess this technically isn't an AAR example, but it used the same concept of walking backward to find a commonality and addressing an officer safety issue.
Now, another thing that is kind of the other bookend to an AAR is the briefing. Obviously, if you're responding to a 911 call or something that is actively unfolding, you won't have a briefing on the incident, but if it's something that's preplanned, like the SWAT team serving a search warrant on a drug house, or a surveillance team going after a wanted subject, the briefing is vitally important, and it's going to include an ops plan, or an operational plan, for the incident. This will be a briefing sheet that includes the address and description of the place they're hitting for a warrant, the description and hopefully photos of the suspects, the suspects' vehicles, the house, a list of all of the cops taking part in the operation, including their radio call signs, each officer's role in the operation, their cell phone numbers, and where I work, if you don't attend the briefing, you are not going on the operation. And I'm sure that lesson came out of an AAR, something like, "I didn't know we had an undercover officer inside the house." Well, you would have if you had attended the briefing. That's a major safety issue, so for us, if you didn't attend the briefing, you aren't going on the operation.
Another thing about the briefing. Everyone at the briefing reads the search warrant. And that should be included with the ops plan. The search warrant is your legal authority to go into that place that you're headed to, so you damn well better know where it is you're going, who or what you're looking for, and what your legal limitations are. So in the ops plan, there should also be contingency plans for if there's a shooting, you know? Like, identified rally points for you to muster at if everything goes to shit, a plan to do a role call over the radio to determine if any of the cops have been shot after the shooting, the name, address, and route to the nearest hospital. All of those things go into an operations plan. And last but not least, those operations plans should reflect the lessons learned from previous AARs where applicable, so if your detective is heading out to arrest your bad guy, it's going to start with an operations plan and a briefing, and it's going to end with an after-action report. Thank you for t great question, Kelly.
So, you bring up a really great point or question, Kelly. Most agencies will have some sort of an internal review process, but it can vary widely, from a formal debriefing and written report to a very informal, roundtable discussion. And we call it an after-action review, or more often, we just abbreviate it as AAR. AARs are done in the military. They're done in the fire service, EMS, and of course law enforcement, and the purpose of an AAR is to capture the successes, the failures, and the lessons learned from an event for everyone to benefit from. And I should mention that AARs are done as a group meeting with everyone involved in the incident present.
So, we not only do AARs after big incidents, like Kelly's talking about, but also after training evolutions. So, when a SWAT team practices building entries, an AAR is done after each building entry. Every single little training iteration, they walk through the whole process, so when the narcotics unit serves a search warrant on a drug house, an AAR is done after the bad guys have been booked in jail and the dope has been booked into evidence, and if it's a major incident that involved a large number of officers, or a shootout, or an officer being killed, it may happen a few days after the incident, and there may also be psychologists or counselors there to help talk through the emotional aspect of things.
So how do these AARs work? They will usually start with the group leader, which could be either the immediate supervisor of the unit or it could be the officer or detective in charge of the case that started this whole thing, essentially restating what the intended mission was. And it doesn't have to be the boss. It's just going to be the first one to talk will usually be the person that did the briefing and was the one putting this whole case together. So to use Kelly's example of the shot-up house, the AAR would start with the officer, or detective, or sergeant that was investigating whatever led to going to this house, and if this case was where a detective obtained a search warrant for the house and he got everyone together to serve this warrant, that's who would start the AAR, and explain everything from the very beginning, like, "We obtained information that such-and-such was going on at this location. I authored a search warrant for the house. We briefed that the plan would be to," you know, blah blah blah. "At such-and-such time, we made our approach to the house. I was number two in the entry team, and as we made our way to the door, I saw ..." blah blah blah.
Now, everyone in the AAR, starting with that first person to talk, gives their first-person account of their experience. Now this is important, because it will reveal things that someone else working this exact same event did or didn't know, they didn't see, hear, experience, perceive, or whatever, and that's where the learning comes from. It's common to learn major elements of the incident for the first time during that debrief or AAR, like, "I didn't know you saw someone on the second floor," or, you know, "From my perspective, all I knew was detective one went down, so I bumped up to this corner and covered down this hallway." By going around the room and hearing the first-person's perspective of everyone there, you end up capturing the overall story of what actually happened from all angles, and that's where these lessons learned come from, that discussion that will improve how they deal with things the next time.
It's important to have ground rules for these discussions, like you have to leave your ego at the door. Everyone gets a chance to talk without being interrupted. It's not the time to blame others, and you have to own your mistakes and state them for the group, because it's about learning how to do things safer for the next time. So, the kinds of lessons that will be learned can be tactical ones, like if you're assigned to clear or cover this portion of a room, you have to trust your partner to do his job on his portion. So, keep your attention on your area. The perspective could be, "I was assigned to cover the left side of the room, but I kept feeling like I needed to look to the right, so that's something I need to work on, is maintaining my focus on the area that I'm responsible for and trusting that my partner is going to cover their side." That would be an example of a first-person perspective, where they're owning their mistake.
Or the lessons could be ones that are more personal, like the new guy on the team is not sure if he should say something, because he doesn't want to be wrong or sound foolish, so the new guy may learn that he needs to communicate when he sees something, and not second-guess whether or not he's going to key the mic. It's like when you see it, you have to hit that button and let everybody know what you're seeing. So, whether the lesson learned stay within the room ... I should stop for a second. I keep saying room. Most of these AARs don't even happen in a room. I should be calling them like curbside critiques. So don't misconstrue all of this to mean that it has to be done in like a formal room setting, necessarily, but anyway. But whether the lessons stay within the group or whether it turns into a major briefing topic and pushed to other agencies will depend on the unit, or even on the level of severity of the safety issue they identify.
But sharing experiences is key to survival, and 90% of our training in law enforcement comes from cops either losing their lives or nearly doing so, so we tend to share anything we deem to be an officer safety issue. I remember reading one officer safety bulletin a few years ago from another agency, I think on the other side of the US, that had an issue with their handguns not firing. The range master for that agency had three different officers go through their quarterly shooting qualifications and those three different officers, their guns didn't fire, you know? They pulled the trigger, but the firing pin didn't actually move, so rather than say, "That's weird. Must be a defect with the gun," they went after this. They chased down what could have caused it.
Any guess as to what they figured out? The three officers worked on the same patrol squad, and a few weeks prior to range day, they'd gone on an alarm call with an open door at a medical building, a medical building with an MRI machine. So, the range master and the officers figured out and tested that apparently, the magnetic pull of an MRI machine was so strong that it magnetized the firing pin inside the slide of the handgun and rendered the pin immobile. So, not only did you make this gun no longer fire, you had three officers going about their daily work for several weeks before they went to shoot at the range, with guns that didn't work. I mean, they're really lucky that they didn't have a critical incident that required a handgun in between those two times. So I guess this technically isn't an AAR example, but it used the same concept of walking backward to find a commonality and addressing an officer safety issue.
Now, another thing that is kind of the other bookend to an AAR is the briefing. Obviously, if you're responding to a 911 call or something that is actively unfolding, you won't have a briefing on the incident, but if it's something that's preplanned, like the SWAT team serving a search warrant on a drug house, or a surveillance team going after a wanted subject, the briefing is vitally important, and it's going to include an ops plan, or an operational plan, for the incident. This will be a briefing sheet that includes the address and description of the place they're hitting for a warrant, the description and hopefully photos of the suspects, the suspects' vehicles, the house, a list of all of the cops taking part in the operation, including their radio call signs, each officer's role in the operation, their cell phone numbers, and where I work, if you don't attend the briefing, you are not going on the operation. And I'm sure that lesson came out of an AAR, something like, "I didn't know we had an undercover officer inside the house." Well, you would have if you had attended the briefing. That's a major safety issue, so for us, if you didn't attend the briefing, you aren't going on the operation.
Another thing about the briefing. Everyone at the briefing reads the search warrant. And that should be included with the ops plan. The search warrant is your legal authority to go into that place that you're headed to, so you damn well better know where it is you're going, who or what you're looking for, and what your legal limitations are. So in the ops plan, there should also be contingency plans for if there's a shooting, you know? Like, identified rally points for you to muster at if everything goes to shit, a plan to do a role call over the radio to determine if any of the cops have been shot after the shooting, the name, address, and route to the nearest hospital. All of those things go into an operations plan. And last but not least, those operations plans should reflect the lessons learned from previous AARs where applicable, so if your detective is heading out to arrest your bad guy, it's going to start with an operations plan and a briefing, and it's going to end with an after-action report. Thank you for t great question, Kelly.
That's about all for this week. Thank you for listening to this episode of the Writer's Detective Bureau podcast. Hit the subscribe button in your app right now to make sure you never miss an episode, and if you've already subscribed, I'd love it if you shared this podcast with one writer you know right now. And remember, this podcast is created for you. Send me crime fiction questions by going to writersdetective.com/podcast. Thank you for listening. Carve out some time to write this week, and as always, write well.
PIA is the VPN service that I recommend for
encrypting your internet traffic and anonymizing your location.
- Adam
Writer's Detective Bureau
encrypting your internet traffic and anonymizing your location.
- Adam
Writer's Detective Bureau
EPISODE LINKS:
- Author: Alice Lam - alicelambooks.com
- Mailing List - WritersDetective.com/mailinglist
- Patreon* - Create your own Patreon page to let your supporters give you money for your creations.
- Support the Writer's Detective Bureau through Patreon for as little as $2/month.
- Writer's Detective Q&A Facebook Group - Join us!
- Purchase the Writer's Detective Coffee Mug - writersdetectivebureau.com/mug
- Private Internet Access VPN Service* - writersdetectivebureau.com/vpn (Affiliate link).
PATREON PATRONS THAT MADE THIS EPISODE POSSIBLE:
- Debra Dunbar - debradunbar.com
- Joan Raymond Writing and Design - joanraymondwriting.com
- Guy Alton
- Anonymous (you may not want your name shown, but I truly appreciate your support!)
- Natasha Bajema - natashabajema.com
- Natalie Barelli - nataliebarelli.com
- Joe Trent
- Siobhan Pope
- Leah Cutter - leahcutter.com
- Ryan Kinmil - @RKinmil
- Richard Phillips - beltsbatsandbeyond.com
- Robin Lyons - robinlyons.com
- Gene Desrochers - genedesrochers.com
- Craig Kingsman - craigkingsman.com
- Kate Wagner
- Marco Carocari - marcocarocari.com
- Victoria Kazarian - victoriakazarian.com
- Rebecca Jackson
Be sure to subscribe to the Writer's Detective Bureau podcast on your favorite listening app to get the next episode automatically.
[Links marked with an asterisk * are affiliate links. This means I make a commission if you click on the link and make a purchase.]