“The Preliminary Law Enforcement Incident Report should be designed so that it can be completed by police officers quickly and with minimal effort. To the greatest extent feasible, the electronic form should feature “check-off ‘ boxes to allow an officer quickly to indicate that, in this particular case, the officer has reason to believe the existence of certain commonly-occurring facts and circumstances. By way of illustration, the facts/circumstances documented by check-off boxes might include, but need not be limited to:
whether the offense involves domestic violence, and if so, whether the Domestic Violence Central Registry was checked (see subsection 4.2.3), and whether that query reveals any relevant information concerning past domestic violence episodes or restraining orders;
whether the offense involves a sexual crime, and if so, whether the Sexual Assault Survivor Act central registry was checked (see subsection 4.2.4), and whether that query reveals any information relevant to the pretrial release decision;
whether a law enforcement officer personally observed the offense conduct; whether the arrest was based on observations/statements made by eyewitnesses;
whether a victim and/or eyewitness has given a statement, and whether such statement was in writing or electronically recorded (specifying the type of recording, e.g., dash camera, body worn camera, stationhouse interview room camera, etc.);
whether the defendant made an admission/confession ;
whether any admission/statement by the defendant was electronically recorded (specifying the type of recording, e.g., dash camera, body worn camera, stationhouse interview room camera, etc.);
whether the offense conduct was captured on an electronic recording (specifying the type of recording, e.g., dash camera, body worn camera, surveillance camera, witness’s cell phone camera, etc.);
whether identification procedures were used (specifying the type of procedure , e.g., show up, photo array, line-up, etc.);
whether the suspect is a stranger or acquaintance of the victim/witness;
whether a victim was injured, the extent of the injury when known, and whether the victim was taken to the hospital or declined medical services;
the type of weapon involved, if any;
whether any physical evidence was seized or recovered (specifying type of evidence, e.g., drugs, paraphernalia, other contraband, weapons, cash, stolen merchandise, burglars tool or other implements or instrumentalities);
type of controlled dangerous substance (e.g., heroin, cocaine, crack, marijuana , prescription opiate, etc.);
whether physical evidence was recovered from the scene, or was seized from the person or control of the defendant, or from the defendant’s vehicle;
whether the defendant attempted to conceal, discard, or destroy evidence (specifying method, e.g., hiding under furniture or car seat, dropping or throwing, flushing down sink/toilet);
whether the defendant attempted to flee or otherwise resist arrest (specifying type of flight, e.g., foot chase, motor vehicle pursuit)
whether flight or attempted flight resulted in injury or threat of injury to any person (e.g., whether a vehicle was operated in a manner that endangered public safety, whether police drew or fired weapons), and the extent of any resulting injury to any person; ,
whether an officer was assaulted and, if so, the extent of injury and whether taken to hospital; whether children were present or otherwise placed at risk by the offense;
whether the defendant appeared to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs;
whether the defendant admitted to using drugs, and/or whether the officer or agency has reason to believe that the defendant is drug-dependent;
a general description of the type of merchandise or service stolen; whether a burglary involved a residence (i.e., a home invasion), and whether any victims were present at the time of the burglary;
whether a stolen vehicle was operated in a manner that endangered public safety;
whether relevant information about the offense had been communicated to the officer(s) by a dispatcher (to alert the prosecutor of the need to preserve and obtain a recording of radio communications) and whether information had been provided to the agency by a 9-1-1 call (to alert the prosecutor of the need to preserve and obtain a recording of the 9-1-1 call).”
The use of “check-off” boxes instead of a narrative allows for subsequent claims of mistakenly checking the wrong box, whereas it would be much less credible to allege the officers’ own words were mistakenly sworn to be true.
