Ep 81: Contact Team Negotiator
Episode 81
Published May 20, 2024
Last updated Feb 18, 2026
Duration: 25:19
Episode Summary
The initial response to an active shooter event typically involves a blend of patrol officers present at the scene. If the situation stabilizes and the threat diminishes, a contact team member may need to take the role of negotiator.
Episode Notes
During an active shooter event, our primary focus is to stop the killing, but when the suspect is no longer actively killing people or preventing you from treating the wounded, sometimes negotiations need to begin – and that job may fall to the contact team. In today’s episode, the panel discusses safety priorities, situational awareness, best practices and more.
View this episode on YouTube at https://youtu.be/OuamJyvctek
Transcript
Adam Pendley:So we're responding to an active shooter event. And that first contact team, they get in quick, they're moving towards the active threat, but then they get to a point where things stop and they potentially have to negotiate, and someone on that contact team is gonna have to suddenly become a negotiator. What do you do next? We'll talk about it now.
All right, welcome to the National Center for Integrated Emergency Response. We're back in the studio for our next podcast. Across from me is Kami Maertz.
Kami Maertz:
Hi.
Adam Pendley:
Has a law enforcement background. And you are currently on the negotiator team, is that correct?
Kami Maertz:
Yes, I'm a negotiation commander.
Adam Pendley:
Perfect, so we're gonna have some, a good discussion, I think.
Kami Maertz:
Hopefully.
Adam Pendley:
To my right is Bruce Scott joining us from the fire background. Bruce, welcome.
Bruce Scott:
Hey, thank you Adam.
Adam Pendley:
Yeah.
Bruce Scott:
Glad to be here.
Adam Pendley:
And again, my name's Adam Pendley. I also have a law enforcement background. So this is a topic that has a very narrow focus that we're gonna talk about, but we're gonna talk about how we might get to the point where someone on that contact team has to become a negotiator for all intents and purposes.
So in association with a National Tactical Officers Association, let's first talk about the safety priorities. Understanding that when the decisions we make when we're responding kind of has a priorities that we have to go through, and we know that the life of the hostages or the innocence come first. And when we make a tactical decision, we have to decide whether our actions are gonna benefit or harm that first group.
Then we talk about the other bystander, the other innocence at the scene. Again, all of those others that are potentially impacted by this event, are our actions gonna benefit our harm? Then we talk about the responders. We always put hostages and those that are directly impacted or injured and the innocents above responders. But then we have to decide, is this action going to potentially benefit or harm responders? And then finally we actually think about the suspect. You know, that's the last priority is what are our actions gonna do to benefit or harm this coming to a safe conclusion, right
So if you understand that safety priority and we're pushing towards a potential active threat, that contact team may get to a point where the suspect has outlasted their own plan. And now they're gonna barricade somewhere or they're going to try to slow the action down a little bit. And the first priority we have to understand is that if there are injured that are being, that we can't get to because of that suspect, that is still an active threat.
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely.
Adam Pendley:
And we have to push.
Kami Maertz:
Yeah, there are two important things. Once those contact teams make contact with somebody and believe they possibly have a barricaded or hostage situation is first, like you said, that's an active threat. So that person is still actively killing the people in that room by preventing law enforcement and fire rescue from getting in there and treating them. So it is no different than them shooting them. They're actively bleeding, they are killing them by preventing law enforcement from getting in there. Another thing that that first contact team needs to do and has to step back and look at the situation totality of the circumstances, to try to determine what type of incident are you dealing with, what type of suspect motivation are you dealing with.
So there are two different types of negotiations that are instrumental. And then there are emotional, expressive negotiations. So that instrumental is gonna be based on like terrorists, people with terroristic ideations and things like that. Those are gonna be in a situation where they have people in there with them are gonna be limited negotiations. Those are very, very hard negotiate. And a time when you have people actively in the room. Those are things that you are waiting maybe for additional resources to make entry, depending on if people are, obviously people are injured in there, that's a no go. You have to push. If people are uninjured or you have great good intelligence, solid intelligence that people are uninjured. But you do have somebody with terroristic ideations that might be that situation where you have somebody on the phone and you're dealing with them and they're active in negotiations. But that is gonna be a limited negotiation.
If you have somebody on expressionism where it's an emotional, they've had a mental breakdown, they've had some type of mental crisis that has got them to that situation, you are going to have a lot more potential for negotiating them safely and keeping that risk minimal to hostages and minimal to victims, minimal to first responders, because there actually is going to be a possibility of negotiations, right?
So when that contact team is showing up, they're gonna wanna be looking at those circumstances. Did somebody come in and they start randomly shooting and they have no connections to that place, which is going to kind of give you that idea that maybe this is a terrorist event, they don't really have any connections, they start from the outside and come shooting in. Versus somebody who came there with a idea, with a thought that when you're getting to witnesses, they're telling you that is Joe and I know Joe and Joe is back there because his wife Sarah works here. Those are kind of maybe more emotional breaks where you might have a possibility of negotiations.
Adam Pendley:
Sure and there may be those circumstances where we have just pushed the suspect into a tactical disadvantage and we're gonna hold them there, there are no innocence at risk.
Kami Maertz:
Yes.
Adam Pendley:
We're just gonna hold them there because Bruce, let's talk about the, and again, this narrow circumstance where it is right to slow the action down and potentially negotiate with a bad actor. That, and again, it can be a narrow subject.
Kami Maertz:
Very, very narrow, yes.
Adam Pendley:
Subject that we're talking about. Because again, it's a 100% worth emphasizing that if there are still people injured that we're trying to get to, we have to push forward and get to those injured people. But Bruce, if we have slowed the action down and we have a situation where we potentially have someone isolated, but it's potentially still a hot zone where that suspect is at.
Bruce Scott:
Right.
Adam Pendley:
What is fire rescue's view on this?
Bruce Scott:
You know what, it's a really good question. I mean, it depends policy to policy. I believe 100% that if law enforcement, you guys got 'em pinned down in a bathroom or a corner somewhere and say there's injured in a lobby, if you will, or a cafeteria, if they're pinned down, we still have a job to do, right? There's enough of you there. We can get in there and begin treating those patients and getting 'em out. Or I have to look to my tactical group supervisor said, you need to get 'em to me. One of those things has to happen. You can't have people laying there bleeding, dying while you negotiate.
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely.
Adam Pendley:
Right.
Bruce Scott:
So that's that. I think that's what we're trying to get to.
Adam Pendley:
Yeah and I think, I know I've said this before, kind of as a turn of phrase, at some point you either have to get the medical to the people or the people to the medical, right?
Bruce Scott:
A hundred percent.
Adam Pendley:
And but the division or the understanding that there might be more than one thing going on, a parallel response, I think is really worth emphasizing. And we were talking earlier about again, why it's so important for tactical triage and transport to be working together. Because if you're that triage group supervisor, I know that fire EMS agencies across the country are eager to get into help. I mean, we've seen that change. But if you really put your real world hat on for a second, what kind of assurances do you need to really send those teams into?
Bruce Scott:
Me.
Adam Pendley:
Yes.
Bruce Scott:
I mean, there's no guarantees anywhere. We're in the business of saving lives. I think we need to push, as long as law enforcement can minimize the risk to our personnel, we need to get in there and begin doing our treatments and then worry about getting 'em out to a hospital. If you look through your priority of life, the innocence come before us, right?
Adam Pendley:
Right.
Bruce Scott:
In the whole priority of life. So I think that's really important to remember. But you know what, it's an increased level of difficulty when you get in these situations.
Adam Pendley:
Sure.
Bruce Scott:
And again, let's talk about it beforehand. Let's have a conversation with our law enforcement partners. What do we need to do if, and this is what we're trying to do if and what are your thoughts on that? And maybe come up together with some agreed upon policy.
Adam Pendley:
Absolutely. So...
Kami Maertz:
One of the big things, just real quick, Adam, is that for negotiations is for a negotiation to happen, you have to have a hard containment on an area. So we've actually created a likely safer zone than we normally would in a situation where we just have a casualty collection point because we've created a hard containment area around that suspect that really opens up the rest of the scene that does make it safer for you and gives you kind of a more, a liability or reliable source saying, hey, this area is good and this area safer. We've actually created a much tighter hot zone at that point.
Bruce Scott:
So, I'm sorry, Adam, but if I could mention that's why you're a medical branch director, it's why you're triage group supervisor, they all need to be co-located with law enforcement.
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely.
Bruce Scott:
And having those conversations, and be honest with you I say it all the time, that's a big hat decision, right? How you're gonna put people in harm's way? Is something, that decision may have to be made on the fly based on the conditions that you're presented with. But if I can sit there and talk to my law enforcement partners at the same time, and they can assure me that we're doing the best we can to minimize the risk, I'm a lot more comfortable making that decision.
Adam Pendley:
Absolutely, and again, there's other tools in the toolbox as well. I mean, you can secure specific corridors, specific routes for the medical responders to get in and out. Obviously you're securing the casualty collection point at the same time that you're providing that extra security on the barricade situation.
But let's roll back just a little bit and I'm gonna look at this from another perspective. So we train a lot with our SWAT and negotiator teams across the country and they do fantastic, but oftentimes, it's a call out basis, right? So it's gonna be a little bit of time before they get there. So we talk a lot about the initial response to the active threat is gonna be that combination of patrol officers who are on duty right now. So that contact team one and contact team two is gonna be some ad hoc combination of available patrol officers, most likely, in most circumstances. Well, that also means that you're gonna have to have a contact team negotiator and they may not have the same level of training as some of your team members might otherwise have.
So what are some, again, not to try to get into the realm of people's policies or training across the country, but just in general, what do you think are some best practices for that patrol officer who just happens to be the one that has to talk to this person?
Kami Maertz:
So the best thing for them to do is to start building rapport, right? Is that you're not going to change somebody's decision. They're going to have to make it for themselves. So all you can do is get them to a point of reasonable thought. And the way we can do that is by having a conversation with them. But it's vital to get outta cop mode. You cannot direct them to do things. They're not gonna listen. They are beyond emotional capability of making rational thought. So until they can get themselves down to that rational thought perspective, you're not going to be able to discuss things with them.
So that's important to start talking to them about rapport. How did you get here, what's going on? Normal things like you would talk to your friend about, those kind of conversations you have to have and you have to be able to relax yourself enough to say, I am speaking to a suspect. He just did all these horrible things, but for me to save additional lives, I'm going to have to treat that person with the respect of deciding I need to have a conversation with them
I think the biggest thing that most responders do, and the biggest is that they wanna just direct 'em. They wanna say, you're going to do what I want to do. And I always tell people in negotiations, we have control of the outside of that room, but that person in there controls the inside. They have complete control of that environment in there. And it is our response to their control that really decides if this is a success or a failure.
Adam Pendley:
Right, absolutely. And we may be down to our last priority.
Kami Maertz:
100%.
Adam Pendley:
I mean, it may just be the suspect now that we want to bring out and bring to justice.
Kami Maertz:
Yep.
Adam Pendley:
Safely. And that may require a little bit of negotiation until those follow on teams, the specialized teams, can get there and do what they do. Because if there's no innocent people at risk, if there's no innocent people at risk, it is certainly an okay, a narrow opportunity to slow the action down and maybe not have an ad hoc patrol team be the one that makes that final entry.
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely.
Adam Pendley:
You may have the time to wait on your specialized teams, but when you still have innocence at risk, or obviously if there's still, the active threat or active killing going on...
Kami Maertz:
Yes. That's a negotiation.
Adam Pendley:
You're gonna have to push and depend on your training and your team and work, and work it. So I know that when our contact teams, we train to the idea that if they do make contact with suspect and they take the suspect down, there's the SIM, the Security, Immediate Action Plan and Medical. That's what you're supposed to do because somebody keeps security on the suspect. We talk about immediate action plan. If we hear additional shots, you know, these two are gonna go do that.
Kami Maertz:
Yes.
Adam Pendley:
And we begin medical. So let's talk a little bit about what are some of the things the contact team is doing as far as building a plan when they are talking to a suspect, what are some of the things they're thinking about?
Kami Maertz:
So they have to consider is if the scene goes active, so right. So they're paying attention to what they're hearing, what they're seeing, what intel that they're getting to decide if they're changed. They may think nobody's injured in there and this is a viable negotiation. And they get intel saying that somebody's bleeding in there, that there is an active threat, or they hear something inside that they believe the scene is gone active. And they have to have that immediate action plan says, we're gonna breach this door and this is who's gonna go in, this is what we're gonna do. And also where are you going to take them?
So it's important to have those conversations beforehand and everybody understand because if you make entry into a room and you get a hostage out or you get survivors out, right? You don't wanna all be standing them in the hallway saying, who's taking them and where are we going? You wanna have that pre-planned out of you're taking them and you're taking them to the CCP, wherever you're taking them. Those conversations need to happen ahead of time before that door is ever breached, before the scene ever turns active.
Adam Pendley:
Yeah, and you don't, and it's not like you have to have little secret plans. He knows you're there, right?
Kami Maertz:
Exactly.
Adam Pendley:
So you can talk to each other and say, we're gonna do this and you're gonna do that. Bruce, if you, in the other part, the parallel response, if we've gotten all of our other patients transported, I know typically we would start to demobilize the rescue task forces. Do you have any other thoughts in this type of situation?
Bruce Scott:
Absolutely, I do. Number one Kami, you mentioned, what are we gonna do if the scene goes active? We need to have a plan as well, right? You know, law enforcement, can you tell how many, potentially tell me how many hostages are in that room because that's potentially how many survivors that we're gonna have people that are wounded.
And have enough rescue task forces sitting there ready to react to that once whatever decisions made by law enforcement, whether it's push or give up, we still gotta get in there. And I think having an immediate action plan for ourselves on the fire side is just as important if to a certain extent, if not more.
Adam Pendley:
Right.
Bruce Scott:
'Cause now we want to get in there and take care of those wounded, right? We wanna make sure we get 'em out into the medical facility.
Adam Pendley:
And again, even if we're down to that situation where it's just the suspect by themselves, I mean, we may have to engage the suspect, and again, we're gonna need fire EMS there to provide care for the suspect. You know, I mean, we have to take 'em into custody and then they become our responsibility. So, and again, following the safety priority, understanding that the hostages and those that are injured, that is still an active threat.
Kami Maertz:
Exactly
Adam Pendley:
If we can't get to the injured, that is still an active threat, then other innocence, then protecting our responders, does it benefit or harm the responders? And now we're down to the suspect as well.
Kami Maertz:
And even with that, so when we're talking about the priority where we have hostages and victims or the innocent, I'm sorry. And then responders, the two that are tied very closely are gonna be responders and your suspect, really. Those two are tied very much together based on if we push, we're creating risk to our first responders.
And so sometimes that is the hardest part because he's in there by himself. And so the decision constantly comes up, let's just go in and get him. However, you have to, as the person making the decisions, have to realize that you pushing that creates harm to your responders. And that those two areso intricately tied together that you have to be really careful in that decision making.
Adam Pendley:
Absolutely and I think you mentioned it earlier when we were first talking, but you know, we talk about during the initial response, the motive of the suspect is not what we're focused on. We're gonna get in there and stop the killing, that's our main focus. But there does become a point fairly early on where the intelligence understanding is, is this a one-off domestic-
Kami Maertz:
100%.
Adam Pendley:
Situation or is it a, like you said, a random act. So who's gathering that information and how does it get back to the team that's talking to this suspect?
Kami Maertz:
So that really needs to be your intel component that hopefully that command has set up early. And especially in a situation like this, when you have come to any type of roadblock like that, you wanna definitely get that intel build up. If you have a negotiation team, that negotiation team should already be working on that intel.
Most people think about negotiations and really think about the person on the phone and that person talking. The other side of that coin though, is that person who's developing the intel, right? That's where you're building that rapport, is through that intel. And so it's very important though, if you have a situation for that command to say, we need intel, we need to know who the suspect is, where he came from, what are his motivations, what does he like, what do we stay away from?
Adam Pendley:
Right.
Kami Maertz:
And push that down to that contact team person who's speaking on the phone.
Adam Pendley:
Absolutely, speaking of the phone, we've seen a few different incidents across the country where the suspect ends up calling 911 and now they're talking to your dispatcher. So getting our dispatchers involved in this conversation as well, I think is really important.
You know, I know of at least one agency that when they activate the negotiation team, they actually send a negotiator to the communication center. Is that a practice that you've seen or do you?
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely. And it's really important. If nothing else, then if you have a dispatcher who gets on the phone, is talking to the suspect and is doing good that in, or that a negotiator can show up and be what we call a secondary. They're just kind of helping and pushing through the information and stuff, but allowing that dispatcher to do the job that they're already doing, the rapport they're already building, and to give that direction. So no matter if your negotiator's necessarily gonna get on the phone or not, they still have a role down there. And they also have so much information and intel that's coming through there that it's vital for that negotiator to be going through that intel and deciding what is gonna be useful for that negotiation.
Adam Pendley:
Right. I mean, again, I had the opportunity to supervise a 911 center for a few years and it was, it's amazing what they can do already. They do negotiations every day.
Kami Maertz:
Yes.
Adam Pendley:
And we were talking earlier about whether people have negotiator training or not. And and I know in class sometimes we say, are you married or do you have a significant other.
Kami Maertz:
Yes.
Adam Pendley:
Or do you have teenagers?
Bruce Scott:
Kids?
Adam Pendley:
Well then you're a qualified negotiator, right? So all of that fits in there.
Kami Maertz:
And that's the main thing is taking yourself down though is as a negotiator, is taking yourself down to the role of somebody that you care about. And that you're talking to somebody that you care about and to getting out of the cop role and saying, I'm gonna make you do something to, if you are talking to your wife or your child, what would you say? Have a conversation.
Adam Pendley:
And I think I've heard also, and this may just be from a lay person perspective, but I've heard them say before that if you keep the suspect focused on you, then it keeps 'em from formulating at any other plan.
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely, and that's, and if they're on the phone with you and they're actively talking, it's one of the things that about nature is that if they're talking and they're engaged with you, they're not hurting anybody else.
Adam Pendley:
Right.
Kami Maertz:
Their focus is on you and going through their emotional overload and drop. And while they're going through that process, at least you have their attention and you can have time to formulate plans. You're working that time back on your side.
Adam Pendley:
Absolutely. So again, I think we need to remember that this is going to be a patrolman's problem.
Kami Maertz:
Yes.
Adam Pendley:
Probably early and then more help is coming. And I think that is really important. And understanding that anybody might be end up talking to this person, the dispatcher, the first contact team on the scene, and just kind of following your priorities.
So I think this is a great discussion. And again, it's a 100% worth emphasizing that we're not talking about, the suspect may not get to make the decision that they're gonna stop the action. If they're preventing us from getting to those that are still hurt, then that is still very much an active threat. But before we started talking and we'll probably wrap up with this, I think even before we were talking earlier, and I think it, I know it was news to me, but you said something I thought was really interesting. You said the whole negotiation, the whole conversation is always thinking about a go or no go. So expand on that a little bit.
Kami Maertz:
So that's, so you're going through threat priorities. So are we safer to push? Are we safer to go or are we safer to hold? And so that's something as a negotiating commander, is that you're considering, you're taking in all the totality of the circumstances, right? And deciding if we push, who are we putting at risk? Versus us staying. If we're in an active negotiation and somebody's actively speaking to us, they're cooperating. Even if they're angry, if they're actively cooperating, are we safer to hold?
Adam Pendley:
Right.
Kami Maertz:
Now and that's based intel, right? Because again, we have to go back to if there's injured and they're dying in the room, it is a no negotiation. So that's completely off the table. We're not negotiating with somebody while somebody's dying. Because if we get back to some of the terrorists and things like that, they're gonna wanna hold us to allow as many people to die. So that may be one of their things that they've thought through. This is one of their planned events versus somebody who is more an emotional and they just kind of got caught up in this and here's where we're at. But that has to be a decision made really quickly. Just determine if there's injured or not.
Adam Pendley:
Yeah, I think in some of the material we've used before, there's a good image of like a, a typical hostage situation where they're trying to slow the action down because they want to resolve the situation.
Kami Maertz:
Yes.
Adam Pendley:
And then there's this terroristic off ramp where they're really trying to extend the terror. They're trying to become a martyr. And that's the reason they're trying to.
Kami Maertz:
Yeah, and well they're holding, and when they hold, 'cause they're trying to make a decision. So I always explain it like it's a trapped animal. And so that trapped animal is holding, trying to think, how am I gonna get outta here. How am I getting out of this spot now you trap me? And so really they're kind of a tool that they're using as their hostages just to give themselves time. And so we use that time that they're holding for themselves. We use that to formulate plans as well.
Adam Pendley:
Yeah, so I think I'm probably gonna steal some of Bruce's thunder here, but I was gonna add, 'cause you said it right at the beginning, is, this is, we do a lot of active shooter training across the country and a lot of times it focuses on the same thing. You know, we get to the call, we flow through the hallways and we enter the rooms and we start discerning, potential suspects versus those that are innocent. And there's a lot of tactical training, but it's worthwhile to potentially add some of these subjects.
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely.
Bruce Scott:
Sure.
Adam Pendley:
To the discussion. So with that, and like I said, I know I probably stole a little bit of Bruce's thunder there on.
Bruce Scott:
That's all right.
Adam Pendley:
That's on our final thoughts.
Bruce Scott:
But as long as the point's made.
Adam Pendley:
So what are your final thoughts, Bruce?
Bruce Scott:
Just one thing. Kami mentioned intel, right? And I think fire rescue has a potential to add to that intelligence, right? So we're treating a wounded and say, hey, that was Bill, he just got divorced.
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely.
Bruce Scott:
Or lost custody of his kid. And again, another reason we're so co-located, so we can share that information with law enforcement and you have that information as a negotiator, right? So I think we have a role in that.
Adam Pendley:
Absolutely.
Bruce Scott:
But to your point, Adam, it is an added degree of difficulty when you started adding these variables into, but talk about it, work through it, practice it, and do like you do everything else.
Kami Maertz:
Yep.
Adam Pendley:
Absolutely. Any other, what did we miss? Any other final thoughts?
Kami Maertz:
No, I think that's about it. I think the main, the top thing is to recognize if you have an active threat. If you have an active threat, then it is not a negotiation. Negotiations are not viable. They're not going to work and they're gonna cost people lives. And so once you determine though that nobody's injured inside there and depending on, that's when you start looking at the circumstances, that's when you start thinking about it. That's when you start trying to make contact. But it's first determining, do you have people who are actively dying?
Adam Pendley:
Absolutely, and on that note, that's a conversation that your agencies and your leadership need to have during training and with the entire department.
Kami Maertz:
Absolutely.
Adam Pendley:
Not just the specialized units. It has to be a conversation you have with all levels and your policies have to match, right? So if your local, maybe the county sheriff's office has a policy and the local police department has a policy, they probably need to like be side by side. And oh, by the way, fire department's policy needs to maybe be right side by side as well.
Kami Maertz:
Yes
Bruce Scott:
Exactly.
Adam Pendley:
And we actually, we've talked about a model policy before and there's one available in the NCIER website as well. But the idea that it has to be broad enough to allow some important safety priority of life type decisions to be made, to give those first responding teams the latitude to do what needs to get done in order to accomplish the mission, which is to save lives. And we talk about this all the time, when we're saving lives, we're battling two things, the criminal and the clock. And if the criminal tries to mess us up on the clock, we have a decision to make.
Kami Maertz:
Yeah.
Adam Pendley:
'Cause we have to get those patients out of there into the hospital. Well, thank you very much. That was-
Kami Maertz:
Thank you.
Adam Pendley:
A great discussion.
Bruce Scott:
Thank you Adam.
Adam Pendley:
If you don't already subscribe, please subscribe to the podcast. There's new content every week and plenty of topics out there to go back and listen to as well. And we thank you for joining us and-
Bruce Scott:
Yeah, thank you.
Adam Pendley:
And again, Kami and Bruce, thank you for being here.
Kami Maertz:
Thank you.
Bruce Scott:
Thanks for letting us be here.
Adam Pendley:
And as always, thank you to Karla, our producer, for getting this done. So until next time, thank you.