Originally Published in 2010
Almost every trained crisis negotiator remembers the first time they were introduced to the “Hostage phone” or the “Throw phone” during basic negotiation training. That complicated contraption of buttons and wires connecting to all sorts of recorders, speakers and headphones neatly contained in a stainless steel brief case would allow you do everything from recording your negotiation to allowing your coach or anyone else on the scene to hear every word being said. Most importantly, you could call them on their home phone, plug into their home phone jack, or deliver a dedicated phone (throw phone) to them. The most intimidating component of the system was the negotiators headset. Not because of any menacing physical construction associated with it, but the thought that the person wearing it is responsible for the direction of the communication, the thoughts about liability discussed earlier in the class and the real fear that you have no real clue what to say to the person on the other end of the call. After “your time in the barrel”, everyone is eager to relinquish that responsibility to the next student for their indoctrination as the primary negotiator. That may truly be the first real appreciation that many negotiators feel for your coach as well as that disconcerted feeling the negotiator realizes throughout a real crisis intervention.
As technology has progressed at an exponential rate within the mobile telephone industry, the problems and dilemmas associated with negotiations have increased as quickly. More often than not, negotiators find that the person in crisis, the negotiator, or both, are relying on their mobile phone to accomplish the communication. With this in mind, the potential for certain problems to arise must be considered and addressed by the negotiator.
When the person in crisis is utilizing a mobile phone:
One of the first issues to be addressed is attempting to confirm the location of the person in crisis. One phenomena of any R/F transmission such as that used by mobile telephones, whether they are using an analog or digital signal, is that it can reflect off of the terrain or atmosphere for long distances where it may be received by a tower many miles from the original transmission location. This will give a false coordinate to the receiving tower and may divert a call for assistance to the wrong emergency communications center. Such was a case where a person in crisis called 911 to report that he was driving on a major interstate with his two small children in the vehicle and was threatening to kill himself and the children. Local officers in the area of the interstate were notified to be on the lookout for the caller. After notifying crisis negotiators, they were able to make contact with the caller and after some time, were able to determine that the caller was in fact, eighty miles away. Law enforcement officers in that jurisdiction were notified and were able to locate the caller and to safely resolve the situation. On a smaller scale, locating a person in crisis inside a residence or business is made more difficult because of the mobility associated with the technology. Old school negotiators might have marked the phone line on the throw phone in 10 foot increments to get an estimate of how far the caller was inside the building. This helped SWAT members develop and, if necessary, execute a planed entry or delivery of a negotiated item. This lack of physical information makes it more difficult for other components of the crisis team.
Another problem that may occur is the inability to limit features on mobile phones that were either not present on traditional land-line phones or features that could be controlled or disabled by the service provider. Features such as call waiting and caller ID allow the person in crisis to put the negotiator on hold and take a call from a third party. In most cases, the third party may honestly be attempting to help the situation but the potential for harm is ever present with every uncontrolled communication with the person in crisis. As trust and empathy are earned and built between the negotiator and the person in crisis, learning who those third parties are may be accomplished through eliciting information about them from the person in crisis. Utilization of our effective listening skills may allow us to identify who the calling party is based on the changes of the person’s attitude and emotional state after talking with that person. While we are attempting to identify the third party, assuring the person in crisis that they have the choice of answering the phone or not when that person calls will provide them with a sense of control that they may be lacking as a result of the crisis. By assuring them that if they chose to answer the other caller, you will still be there when they get back as well as encouraging them to promise that they will talk to you afterwards works to build trust and reassures them that you do care about them and that you are there for them.
Once that person is identified, another negotiator or one of the team members assigned intelligence gathering can attempt to contact that person. During the communication with them, that negotiator should attempt to determine if it is possible to 1. Elicit their assistance and employ them as a true third party intermediary; 2. Encourage that person to cooperate with your efforts to resolve the situation by discontinuing their attempts to communicate with the person in crisis; or 3. Simply occupying them while the negotiation continues. Gaining the trust of those third parties who are wishing to help or even those who are knowingly or not, part of the problem, is as important as gaining the trust and rapport of the person in crisis. This often results in simultaneous negotiations being conducted by the same team.
A technique that has been tried and successfully completed is for one negotiator to call the person in crisis and then a second negotiator call the same number. Most phones will allow only two simultaneous calls thus keeping other callers from accessing the line. Remember, most of those with whom we are dealing are not dumb, but generally just the opposite and have an above average intelligence. They are simply in a state of crisis with which they are unable to cope. When you apply the two negotiators tying up the phone lines technique, you may run the risk of the person in crisis playing one negotiator against the other and creating a competitive state between the negotiators resulting in one or both negotiators loosing the trust and rapport earned to that point.
A relatively new technology that blocks or jams cell service availability in a designated area can help control the person in crisis’ ability to make or receive calls during periods that the negotiator is not on the phone with them. This technique is similar to the previously available ability of a service provider, technically savvy SWAT member or technical support personnel to disconnect land line phone service from a structure. This could create an opportunity to introduce a throw phone to the person in crisis. These “cellular signal disrupters” or “jammers” are presently being utilized in areas where heightened security measures are in place and even in gaming casinos to prevent cellular transmissions for obvious reasons. These “disrupters or jammers” are not target specific or directional in nature. They generally work in a fashion similar to a radio transmission tower by sending a signal in a 365 degree radius that disrupts the other R/F signals with in the area. This will have a direct affect on the responding officers through disruption of the police radio transmissions, mobile data card transmissions as well as the officer’s mobile phones thus virtually terminating the Crisis Teams ability to communicate with each other. The Federal Communications Commission regulates the use of mobile phone jammers and signal blockers for this very reason. Every agency considering the use of this technology needs to understand the legality and ramifications of using it before deploying such.
When the negotiator is using a mobile phone;
One of the first concerns for the negotiator is how to allow your coach to be privy to both sides of the conversation. For many years this has been a dilemma without great resolve. A large number of negotiations have been accomplished through a negotiator holding the phone away from their ear in an effort to allow the coach to hear the person in crisis as well as the negotiator. This technique is very tiring and frustrating for both parties and is difficult to accomplish. Fortunately, the technology to allow negotiators to connect their mobile phones to existing “Crisis phone” systems is now available. There are presently several systems designed to allow for the digital mobile phones as well as utilizing wireless and hard-wired Voice-over-Internet Protocol (V.O.I.P.) phones to operate in the same manner as traditional crisis phone configurations. Many of these systems are add-ons to an existing system and are available through the various system providers.
As mentioned above, the technology associated with mobile phones allows for not only the person in crisis, but the negotiator to receive incoming calls through their call-waiting feature. It is imperative that the negotiator not put the person in crisis on hold to answer another incoming call. Many phones will give a signal to the person on the phone that they have another call incoming at the time. If the person in crisis hears this and becomes alarmed, the negotiator can reassure them that they are the most important person right now and they are not going to be put on hold while another phone call is answered. That is also a good time to negotiate an agreement with them that neither party will answer other incoming calls during the negotiation process. This agreement alleviates the issue of third party intermediaries and builds a great deal of trust and esteem for the person in crisis.
As many negotiations are mobile in nature and the command area is hastily contrived in a parking lot or an adjacent street within close proximity to the crisis site, negotiators often find themselves and their support team utilizing a vehicle as their Negotiation Operations Center (NOC). A larger Sport Utility Vehicle with a “hands free” component works well for that situation. It allows each of the team members to hear what is being said by both parties, allows close proximity to the negotiator by the coach(s), and offers a simi-private location from which to work.
Another issue that must be considered involves an ill-advised decision by the negotiator to attempt contact with the person in crisis while the negotiator is in route to the scene. As learned in basic negotiation training, negotiation is a team sport. It should be conducted with certain information available, assistance of a qualified coach and the support of a team leader and possibly a tactical team. Calling the person in crisis and initiating a negotiation alone, while driving at a high rate of speed, through various traffic conditions, with your police radio blaring and your emergency equipment on, is not the optimum circumstance to begin the trust building and empathetic understanding processes necessary to accomplish the objective.
One additional issue that cannot be overlooked involves that of officer safety. Many negotiations are attempted from locations that are not in the best interest of the negotiator and may involve a serious officer safety violation. When faced with the possibility of using the traditional “hostage phone” configuration, negotiators immediately search for a location that allows for the equipment and support personnel with which they are accustomed. The mobility of a mobile phone can lend to most police officers “control freak” personalities and offer the opportunity to move to a location that is closer to the situation and from where the negotiator can personally see things as they occur or to see the person with whom they are negotiating. This opportunity leads to many safety issues as the negotiator may not maintain the same level of officer safety as they normally ensure in any other situation. In addition, this may place their coach or other support members in danger as well. Remember, if you do not have your number blocked, the person with whom you are negotiating now has your phone number and you may hear from them again. Agencies may want to consider maintaining a specific mobile phone for negotiation situations to alleviate this problem.
When both of you are mobile;
There have been several reports and studies over the years that indicate that most crisis situations are typically initiated in the late evening and last for approximately six to eight hours. As many people charge their mobile phones at night, there is a chance that the phone battery may not be fully charged when the negotiation begins. Additionally, operating the phone in an area with limited service or “roaming” on a network other than that of the primary service provider will drain the mobile phone battery at a higher rate than usual. Remember, batteries run out of power at the most inopportune times. The person in crisis may be inside their own residence so they may have access to recharge their phone batteries where the responding officers may not. Ensure that there is access to phone chargers that plug into a 110 outlet as well as those that work in the 12 volt accessory plug in a vehicle. Having a second battery that can be changed during the negotiation is not a bad idea either.
While the advent of digital signal transmission from mobile phones is now the industry standard, always remember that it is just a radio transmitter and all conversations can potentially be monitored by the media or others. Like every piece of equipment in the negotiators arsenal, negotiating via a mobile telephone is a skill that must be practiced in training scenarios to ensure a comfort level for all persons associated with the negotiation. The early identification of potential problems and issues can be addressed in this low stress, training environment and resolutions discussed to develop an appropriate operational protocol for those situations.
Any technology the negotiator can use to assist in dealing with a crisis situation is certainly an asset but the most important part of any negotiation will always be the skilled negotiator, coach and support team utilizing the technology. Keeping an open mind and remaining flexible throughout the negotiation will assist greatly in resolving these crises’ peacefully and safely for all involved.