# quick question



## SJR87 (Dec 23, 2004)

Is there a law in MA that requires police officers to act off duty? This came up today in a conversation and I have always thought a police officer was required to act whether on or off duty if it was safe to do so, but no one knew if there was a law on the books or if this would be in dept. policy. Thanks


----------



## K9Vinny (Sep 25, 2005)

No.


----------



## bluesamurai22 (Nov 20, 2004)

I answered this once here:

http://www.masscops.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6149

It's hard to locate all of the duty to act laws in one place but off of the top of my head I know that you can lose your EMT or First Responder certification for violating the CMR's related to those duties.

This is from 2000 but it covers a lot of legal medical issues: http://www.umass.edu/ems/Module1/Minors.htm

Check out 105 CMR 170 and 171 if you can find them and also look at MGL C. 111 and 111c for all of the EMS laws.

The laws for police officers don't say anything about off-duty conduct although there are two general laws that I know of that punish people for failing to protect children under their care and for failing to report certain violent felonies. The first law is fairly new and the second was enacted in response to the Big-Dans incident. I don't think the second law has ever been used and we will have to see if the SJC upholds the newer law. I do think a department could really hammer an employee if they violated one of these statutes.

Off the top of my head: On duty you are required to arrest for violation of an RO, you are required to prosecute for cruelty to animals, you are required to serve arrest warrants, you are a mandated reporter for abuse or neglect against children, elders and the disabled. You might have a hard time justifying not reporting abuse that you see off-duty because the law does not differentiate between on or off-duty personnel. You would also look like a real POS if you stood by and did absolutely nothing in any of these other situations. Just imagine the potential headlines: "Child murdered and neighbor cop knew of abuse"

Department policies and procedures will ultimately determine what you are required to do as an off-duty police officer more than any statute and the MGL's and CMR's spell out your medical responsibilities and protect you from liability. Your department will punish you for the police stuff and the medical omissions will result in you losing your medical certification. (You can't be a police officer without being a first responder or EMT)

You could also find yourself being sued for either type of omission (law enforcement or medical). If you do the right thing on medicals you are immune but if you fail to act you are wide open. Failing to act as an off-duty LEO is a little more ambiguous. Again, check your departments policies because these are what will protect you or sink you.

Personally I try to help on anything medical and I only try to be the perfect witness if it's something criminal. I would only intervene as a last resort on the criminal stuff for tactical and practical reasons - lack of equipment, jurisdiction issues, friendly fire, etc...


----------



## Guest (Dec 7, 2005)

I would only take action off-duty to help another cop, if someone is being seriously hurt (two drunk idiots punching each other out in a barroom doesn't count), or to protect myself/my family.

As bluesamurai mentioned, it's usually not good, tactically, to act off-duty. I almost always have a gun, but not my radio, cuffs, or vest, and even if you've successfully disarmed the bad guy, there's always the chance of being shot by one of the responding good guys that doesn't know you.


----------



## bluesamurai22 (Nov 20, 2004)

Delta784 said:


> I would only take action off-duty to help another cop, if someone is being seriously hurt (two drunk idiots punching each other out in a barroom doesn't count), or to protect myself/my family.
> 
> Asbluesamuraimentioned, it's usually not good, tactically, to act off-duty. I almost always have a gun, but not my radio, cuffs, or vest, and even if you've successfully disarmed the bad guy, there's always the chance of being shot by one of the responding good guys that doesn't know you.


Very smart way to be. I'm actually a lot more worried about getting killed by another officer than by a bad guy!

 I think Calibre Press suggests carrying cuffs, flexcuffs or flexties any time you carry off duty.

The logic behind this is that a lawyer could insinuate that you had no intention of ever arresting anyone - that you instead decided to shoot (execute) anyone you encounter off-duty. The other accusation would be that you could have controlled the person but that failing to properly equip yourself forced the situation into a shooting. Just having any type of restraint with you kills this line of questioning; even if you didn't use them.


----------



## Guest (Dec 7, 2005)

bluesamurai22 said:


> I think Calibre Press suggests carrying cuffs, flexcuffs or flexties any time you carry off duty.


I used to have a pair of ultra-light aluminum cuffs (Hiatts maybe?) that I would carry off-duty, but I lost them in a move some years ago, and haven't been able to find a replacement pair.


----------



## chief801 (Dec 8, 2004)

Call 911 and stand back...that's all you any of us should be doing off duty. Cemetery is full of heroes. If you are on duty all of the time, put in an O.T. slip and see what happens 

Bottom line is if you screw up (or it is perceived that you screwed up) you are not going to be covered by any type of protection for "acting under color of law" by your town because you were off duty. You will be dropped like a hot potatoe.


----------



## CJIS (Mar 12, 2005)

Delta784 said:


> I would only take action off-duty to help another cop, if someone is being seriously hurt (two drunk idiots punching each other out in a barroom doesn't count), or to protect myself/my family.
> 
> As bluesamurai mentioned, it's usually not good, tactically, to act off-duty. I almost always have a gun, but not my radio, cuffs, or vest, and even if you've successfully disarmed the bad guy, there's always the chance of being shot by one of the responding good guys that doesn't know you.


I agree with Delta. Its not really smart to get involved in something off duty unless its an absolute must. If I was to act, I would be sure to call the local PD before I did anything.


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

chief801 said:


> Call 911 and stand back...that's all you any of us should be doing off duty. Cemetery is full of heroes. If you are on duty all of the time, put in an O.T. slip and see what happens
> 
> Bottom line is if you screw up (or it is perceived that you screwed up) you are not going to be covered by any type of protection for "acting under color of law" by your town because you were off duty. You will be dropped like a hot potatoe.


Chief,

You're confident, concise and 99.125% correct as usual. Unfortunately it's p-o-t-a-t-o without the "e" on the end
[-X


----------



## kokid (Oct 24, 2005)

Stay away from acting off-duty with certain exceptions of course (elderly woman getting mugged, medical emerg's and the like). That's the quickest way to get jammed up and be labeled a 'cowboy'. Like the chief says, call 911 and then actually be a 'good eye witness!' I've seen some really good police work (unavoidable) done off duty but it's a game of russian roulette.


----------



## JoninNH (Jan 29, 2004)

Hey!! I'm glad to see I'm not the only Dan Quayle fan on the site... 












mpd61 said:


> Chief,
> 
> You're confident, concise and 99.125% correct as usual. Unfortunately it's p-o-t-a-t-o without the "e" on the end
> [-X


----------



## MVS (Jul 2, 2003)

Just call 911, Let the drunks pound each other, stand back and wait for the on duty popo's to arrive. And if you really wanna screw someone over after they arrive, just step forward, ID yourself and point out the shitbirds. Otherwise unless if its a matter of life safety, fah'getta 'bout it.


----------

