Missouri Bill Would Allow Deadly Force Against Demonstrators

​​A Missouri senator on Monday, January 25,  pitched a bill that would allow the use of deadly force against protesters on private property and give immunity to people who run over demonstrators blocking traffic.

The proposal is one of several that follow sometimes violent protests in Missouri last summer over the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody, including demonstrations that blocked traffic on busy roads in the St. Louis area.

“To think that your right to protest enables you the right to stop traffic and literally stop people’s ability to move about freely in this nation is a gross misunderstanding of our constitutional rights,” bill sponsor Sen. Rick Brattin said during the Monday hearing.

The Harrisonville Republican said blocking traffic can be dangerous if it stops ambulances or police from responding to emergencies.

Missouri civil rights leader the Rev. Darryl Gray told committee members that people also disagreed with how the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. protested, but “those same methods that you seek to criminalize are the same methods that helped to destroy Jim Crow laws, segregation and destroyed centuries of hatred and bigotry.”

He asked lawmakers not to expand the use of deadly force to those outside of law enforcement.

“If this bill is enacted it would vilify non-violent protesters,” Gray said. “I don’t believe that any members of this august body would deliberately seek to shield drivers who willfully choose to run over protesters.”

Brattin’s bill targets unlawful assemblies on a number of fronts, including making it a felony crime to block traffic as part of a protest. It also would expand misdemeanor harassment laws to include causing emotional distress during protests.

“People can’t even go have a nice meal without being harassed, run out,” Brattin said. “I wanted to ensure that people are able to go and enjoy their freedoms and liberties just like anyone else should be able to.”

Government employees convicted of participating in unlawful assemblies could no longer be paid and would be stripped of all other employment benefits. Cities and counties would be cut off from any state funding if local officials make cuts to police budgets that are significantly deeper than cuts to other services, an effort to stymie activists’ calls to defund the police.

Anyone charged with assaulting a law enforcement official or first responder also no longer would be eligible for bond, probation or parole under the legislation.

The Kansas City police union supports the bill.

The Senate committee hasn’t yet scheduled a vote on the bill.


Associated Press | molawyersmedia.com

Fourth Circuit Decision on the Constitutional Requirements for a Lawful Entry

Case reviews nonconsensual police entry into a private residence to arrest an occupant

Kendrick Brinkley was the subject of an arrest warrant for the unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. ATF Special Agent Jason Murphy was in charge of a federal-state task force in Charlotte, North Carolina that was responsible for locating and arresting Brinkley. Murphy received information in February 2017 that Brinkley may be located at either of two local addresses.

Murphy obtained a water bill for one of the addresses that had Brinkley’s name on it. The other address was an apartment located on Stoney Trace Drive, Mint Hill, North Carolina. Detective Robert Stark, a task force member, checked a North Carolina statewide law enforcement database that showed Brinkley received a traffic citation on January 2, 2017, that displayed the Stoney Trace Drive address. Stark also checked a North Carolina Department of Corrections database that showed Brinkley to be connected to the Stoney Trace Drive address “at some point in January” 2017. The law enforcement database contained several other different addresses for Brinkley in 2016, one added in late December 2016.

Detective Stark located Brinkley’s Facebook page and observed some photos that led him to believe that Brinkley was dating Brittany Chisholm. He checked the law enforcement database and found that she was also connected to the Stoney Trace Drive address. Stark and Murphy decided that they would attempt to arrest Brinkley at the Stoney Trace Drive address the next morning. Stark, Murphy and three other officers arrived at the suspected location the next day and Stark knocked at the front door.

The court stated that in its view, “the home takes pride of place in our constitutional jurisprudence.”

The officers heard movement inside the residence and after about a minute a female asked who was there and Stark answered, “It’s the police.” Officers heard additional movement inside for another minute and then Brittany Chisholm opened the door.

Stark told her they were looking for Brinkley and requested permission to enter. Chisholm did not respond but instead became very nervous. She looked back over her shoulder and officers observed an unknown female inside the apartment. They also heard a noise coming from a back bedroom. Both women were observed looking backward toward that bedroom.

Stark asked Chisholm again if the officers could enter to look for Brinkley. Chisholm denied entry and asked if the officers had a search warrant. The officers decided to enter without Chisholm’s permission based upon the information they had accumulated at the point of entry and arrested Brinkley in the back bedroom.

The officers executed a protective sweep of the premises. During the sweep, they observed digital scales, a plastic bag containing cocaine base and a bullet. They obtained a search warrant for the residence and located three firearms and firearm magazines. Brinkley was later indicted for possession of cocaine base with intent to distribute and possession of a firearm. Brinkley moved to suppress the evidence gleaned from the search warrant. Brinkley argued that (1) police lacked probable cause to believe that he resided in the Stoney Trace Drive residence and (2) the officers did not possess probable cause to believe that he was present inside when they entered.

The Federal District Court Judge denied the motion to suppress and after entering a conditional guilty plea, Brinkley filed an appeal with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.


The Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the lower federal court. [1] The court first noted that according to the Supreme Court of the United States in Payton v. New York, [2] an arrest warrant and a reasonable belief that the subject of the warrant is present in his/her own residence is sufficient legal authority for police to enter the subject’s own residence to arrest him/her. The Fourth Circuit further observed that the Supreme Court ruled one year later in Steagald v. United States, [3] that absent emergency circumstance or consent, police are required to obtain a search warrant to enter third party private premises to arrest the subject of an arrest warrant who does not reside in that location.

The Supreme Court made clear in the Steagald situation, that the third-party owner of a particular residence has specific Fourth Amendment rights in the sanctity of the premises that can only be overcome with a search warrant. In that situation, absent consent or exigent circumstances, the arrest warrant for the person believed present at the location is not sufficient to protect the rights of the third-party owner of the residence.


The Fourth Circuit noted that there is a disagreement among the majority of federal courts of appeal concerning whether police need probable cause to believe that the subject of an arrest warrant is an actual resident of a private residence and is present at the time of entry before entering the premises to arrest that person. [4]

After taking careful note of the split between the federal circuits on this issue, the Fourth Circuit decided that probable cause is necessary to believe that the subject of an arrest warrant resides at a particular location and is present at the time of entry. [5]

The court explained that “requiring that law enforcement officers have probable cause to believe their suspect resides at and is present within a dwelling before making a forced entry is the only conclusion commensurate with the constitutional protections the Supreme Court has accorded to the home.” The court stated that in its view, “the home takes pride of place in our constitutional jurisprudence.”


The Fourth Circuit examined the information officers had concerning whether Brinkley actually resided at the Stony Trace Drive residence.

The court observed that while the law enforcement database relied upon by officers disclosed the two most recent January 2017 entries that linked Brinkley to the Stony Trace Drive address, it also displayed “many others – including the two immediately preceding entries, one added just five days earlier [that] linked Brinkley to other addresses.” Further, the police had obtained a utility bill in Brinkley’s name for a different address. The court stated that utility bills typically constitute strong evidence of a person’s residence but added that the “officers did not look into this residence” or any of the other addresses found in the database although listed multiple times.

The court observed that the police review of Facebook showed that Brinkley may be dating Brittany Chisholm and that she was connected to the Stoney Trace Drive address. This provided officers with an additional reason to conclude that he “might well have stayed at Chisholm’s home, but did not speak to whether he did so as a resident or [an] overnight guest.” The court concluded that further investigation was necessary to establish probable cause that Brinkley was a resident of the premises.

The court suggested that police surveillance of the suspected location and possible inquiries with trusted sources like an apartment manager would likely provide officers with the probable cause required to establish that Brinkley was a resident of the premises.


The court determined that the officers did not have probable cause to believe that Brinkley was inside the apartment at the time of entry. The prosecution argued that the information police had that Brinkley may reside in the apartment; the time of entry (8:30 am); Chisholm’s delay in opening the door; Chisholm’s nervous demeanor; the sounds of movement from the rear of the apartment; and Chisholm and her guest looking backward when taken together established probable cause that Brinkley was present. The court disagreed.

The court rejected the information police had that suggested Brinkley possibly resided at the apartment because it did not rise to the probable cause level. The court explained, “When police know a suspect lives somewhere, generic indicia of presence may suggest that he is there, but when police are uncertain about where he lives, the same signs suggest only that someone is there – not necessarily the suspect.” The court was not persuaded by the other points argued by the prosecution and stated, “When police have limited reason to believe a suspect resides in a home, generic signs of life inside and understandably nervous reactions from residents, without more, do not amount to probable cause that the suspect is present within.”


This case presents law enforcement officers with an instructional reminder of several key Fourth Amendment constitutional requirements before attempting to arrest a person located in a residence.

These requirements include:

  • An arrest warrant is required, absent consent or exigent circumstances, before officers can enter a person’s own residence to apprehend him/her.
  • A search warrant is necessary, absent consent or emergency circumstances before officers can enter a third-party residence to arrest a subject located inside that residence. The existence of an arrest warrant for the subject inside the residence is not sufficient to overcome the Fourth Amendment rights of the third-party owner.
  • When officers seek to enter a subject’s own residence to arrest him/her, several Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal (see footnote 4) require officers to possess, in addition to an arrest warrant for the subject, probable cause to believe the subject actually resides in the premises and probable cause that he/she is present inside at the time of entry.
  • A smaller number of federal circuits (see footnote 4) take the position that when officers have an arrest warrant for a subject and seek entry to the subject’s own residence to arrest him/her, they need less than probable cause to believe the subject resides there and is present at the time of entry. Facts amounting to the lesser standard of a “reasonable belief” would suffice.


1. United States v. Brinkley, (No. 18-4455) (4th Cir. 2020).

2. See, Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980). The Supreme Court ruled “for Fourth Amendment purposes, an arrest warrant founded on probable cause implicitly carries with it the limited authority to enter a dwelling in which the suspect lives when there is reason to believe the suspect is within.” (Id. at 603).

3. 451 U.S. 204 (1981).

4. Some federal circuits including the First, Second, Tenth, and the D.C. Circuit require less than probable cause (i.e., a “reasonable belief”) that the subject of an arrest warrant is an actual resident of a residence and is present at the time of entry before police can enter to arrest him. See e.g., U.S. v. Werra, 638 F.3d 326, 337 (1st Cir. 2011); U.S. v. Lauter, 57 F.3d 212, 215 (2nd Cir. 1995); Valdez v. McPheters, 172 F.3d 1220, 1224 (10th Cir. 1999); U.S. v. Thomas, 429 F.3d 282, 286 (D.C. Cir. 2005). In Thomas, the D.C. Circuit explained that the standard was a “reasonable belief” that the suspect resided in the premises and was present at the time of entry. However, the court made clear that this standard was less than probable cause.

Several other federal appellate courts have required, in addition to an arrest warrant, that law enforcement officers possess probable cause to believe the subject of the arrest warrant actually resides in the premises to be searched and probable cause to believe he/she is present at the time of entry. See, U.S. v. Vasquez-Algarin, 821 F.3d 467, 477 (3d Cir. 2016); U.S. v. Barrera, 464 F.3d 496, 500 (5th Cir. 2006); U.S. v. Hardin,539 F.3d 404, 415 (6th Cir. 2008); U.S. v. Jackson, 576 F.3d 465, 469 (7th Cir. 2009); U.S. v. Gorman, 314 F.3d 1105, 1114 (9th Cir. 2002). It should be noted that the Seventh Circuit has indicated an inclination to rule this way.

5. The Fourth Circuit covers the states of Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia. The Third Circuit covers Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey, and the Virgin Islands. The Fifth Circuit covers Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. The Sixth Circuit covers Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee. The Seventh Circuit covers Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. The Ninth Circuit covers Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam and the Mariana Islands.

The First Circuit covers, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island and Puerto Rico. The Second Circuit covers New York, Connecticut and Vermont. The Tenth Circuit covers Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming. The Washington D.C. Circuit covers the District of Columbia.

About the author

John Michael Callahan served in law enforcement for 44 years. His career began as a special agent with NCIS. He became an FBI agent and served in the FBI for 30 years, retiring in the position of supervisory special agent/chief division counsel. He taught criminal law/procedure at the FBI Academy. After the FBI, he served as a Massachusetts Deputy Inspector General and is currently a deputy sheriff for Plymouth County, Massachusetts. He is the author of two published books on deadly force and an upcoming book on supervisory and municipal liability in law enforcement.

Two Christian County Lawmakers Introduce Firearms Bills in the Legislature

​​Two bills in the Missouri legislature would further ease restrictions for gun owners. Representative Jered Taylor and Senator Eric Burlison, who both represent Christian County, introduced the bills.

One of those bills, House Bill 85 and Senate Bill 39 is the Second Amendment Preservation Act. Representative Jered Taylor says this will prevent police and deputies in Missouri from enforcing any federal gun laws– even if the federal laws become stricter than what they are now.

“We’ve been told numerous times that Joe Biden is in favor of making changes to the second amendment rights,” Representative Jered Taylor says. “With those concerns and concerns that we’ve had in the past with other presidents, we want to make sure that as Missourians we’re protecting that second amendment right.”

Owner of Cherokee Firearms Nick Newman says he appreciates what Taylor is trying to do but doesn’t know if it’ll be able to happen.

“In our industry the federal government has the final say about what’s allowed and what isn’t allowed,” Newman says.

While he supports the right to own a gun, Christian County Sheriff Brad Cole worries this legislation could prevent him from working with federal law enforcement to hold people accountable.

”We see a lot of offenders that are charged with violent crimes in the state, under state charges, that go to prison and spend a very, very short amount of time in prison before they’re released back out into the population,” Sheriff Cole says. “Those are the people we’re worried about.”

The second bill relates to carrying concealed firearms. House Bill 86 and Senate Bill 117 says the of unlawful use of a weapon is committed if someone knowingly carries a concealed firearm into places where signs are posted stating that concealed firearm carrying is off limits and refuses to leave, they can be charged with trespassing.

Newman says some of these “gun free zones” can be problematic.

“People go to the mall or they go to their doctors office, they can’t carry a gun with them,” Newman says. “If you’re a CCW holder what do you do? You leave them in your car. So as a criminal then what do you do. That’s a great shopping area to go to the hospital parking lots and start breaking into cars because there’s a higher profitability of finding something there.”

The bill plans to repeal certain statutes of Missouri’s concealed carry law that stop a valid permit holder from carrying concealed weapons into any privately owned or some public places.

“It should be up to the private property owner what they allow on their private property,” Taylor says. “Any of the private property locations in statute I’m removing so casinos, bars, amusement parks, churches, if it’s a private school.”

Taylor says any public higher education institution can make their own policies about concealed carry weapons on campus, as long as the policies don’t generally restrict the ability to carry a concealed weapon.

“Maybe there’s a lab that if something were to happen and a gun were to go off then there would be an explosion,” Taylor says. “Of course we want them to have that ability to say no we don’t want you to be able to carry into those locations. We do give a little bit of authority back to the university to figure out some of those more sensitive locations.”

The bill would also prohibit city and county government from creating laws restricting an employee with a valid permit from carrying a concealed weapon.

By Shoshana Stahl | KY3

Why We Cannot Leave Our Safety to Luck

In late 1992 I was a young E-3 deployed to Mogadishu, Somalia, as part of the U.S. led Unified Task Force (UNITAF), in support of Operation Restore Hope. One day, I was searching for an access point to the roof of what remained of our embassy. I was in a hurry, frustrated, fatigued and focused on what was important to me at the moment.

After searching and not finding an access point for the roof of the embassy, I abruptly walked into the first office I saw, approached a group of men wearing brown T-shirts and asked: “Can you please tell me how to get to the roof.” It was the wrong decision.

The red flags were all there for me to process: the presence of distinguished-looking men who clearly held high rank, hanging maps and planning materials consistent with a command post, and the big one, a white paper affixed to the wall stating, “UNITAF/CC.”

In hindsight, it was likely my self-induced time pressure, frustration and myopic focus of attention that led to the words spoken to me by one of those men in brown t-shirts. That man, USMC Lt. General Robert B. Johnston, said, “Airman, let me educate you on situational awareness.”

What followed was a memorable one-way conversation that I remember with clarity almost 30 years later. I was informed that situational awareness is a person’s perception and understanding of the environment. I was also informed that a failure to maintain situational awareness leads to adverse outcomes. Lesson learned, sir.

A Georgia police officer responded to a burglary call. The officer’s body-worn camera records him locating the suspect as he walks on a set of railroad tracks. The officer is engaged in multi-tasking by simultaneously focusing his attention on the suspect, giving commands and talking to dispatch. In the same 20 seconds, the officer’s bodycam records the alarming sound of a rapidly approaching locomotive. The bodycam video appears to show the officer stepping just to the left side of the tracks before he is violently struck by the train.

The officer doesn’t remember much of the event, but after watching his BWC video stated, “I’m lucky to be alive.

How could he not realize what was about to occur? I turn back to what Lt. General Johnston taught me all those years ago. Maintaining situational awareness is key to better decision-making, which in turn leads to better outcomes. Like my incident, the Georgia officer likely had some excitement or frustration as a stressor. Also, his limited attentional focus was more on the suspect and talking to dispatch than the approaching train.

In hindsight, we could reasonably say that prioritizing his attention on the train, even for a moment, might have changed the outcome. For instance, he might have seen the oversized plow attached to the front of the train, as well as the train’s approach speed. The resulting increase in situational awareness might have affected his decision to step just off the tracks instead of quickly stepping several feet away.

The Georgia officer survived, thankfully, and I wish him a speedy recovery. What happened to him could happen to anyone of us under similar circumstances. It doesn’t matter if you wear an EMS, fire, corrections or police uniform – we are all human beings with a limited capacity to process information. That limited capacity is stretched to the maximum when we operate in fast-paced, ambiguous environments. For our safety and the safety of the public, we should recognize these limitations and work hard toward maintaining situational awareness.  


Situational awareness has a significant history of study and application to a multitude of fields. There are many influences on situational awareness that range from individual capabilities, organizational influences, training, experience and teamwork. However, there is a real need to focus on how first responders maintain situational awareness from the perspective of individual field personnel, teams and organizations. Here are important considerations for each.

1. Situational awareness for the individual

Realize your limitations. Recognize when the incident or situation is moving too rapidly for you to perceive the changes. When faced with situations that are or becoming unmanageable: back out, ask for resources and re-engage when appropriate.

Do not become overly fixated upon one aspect of the environment. Attempt to keep up a degree of global awareness. If unavoidable, ensure you have adequate resources to watch for changes you may not perceive.
Use caution when engaging. Be mentally primed to look for changes in the environment. Seek out new information, assess that information, look for potential contradictory evidence and then act according to protocol.

2. Situational awareness for the team

Communicate, coordinate and confirm. The recommendations for individuals remain active for teamwork but require significant coordination and communication between team members. Confirmation of group understanding is vital when moving forward in more ambiguous and time-compressed environments.

Leadership is critical in a group environment. A single point of command and control helps to ensure vital oversight to ensure the team is functioning within the vision and mission of the organization.

3. Situational awareness for the organization

Clear direction. Establish a vision and mission that guides individual, team and organizational priorities. This will aid teams and individuals during in-the-field decision-making.

Real-world training. Provide adequate training for real-world situations that operationalize situational awareness at both the individual and team levels.
Culture guides decisions and actions. Create a culture that guides field decision making and ensure accountability. The culture includes proper risk assessment and prioritization of objectives.

By David Blake | Police1

About the author

David Blake, Ph.D., is a retired California peace officer and a court-certified expert on human factors psychology and the use of force. He has significant experience teaching use of force and human factors psychology to law enforcement officers in several states. David has undergraduate and graduate degrees in criminal justice and psychology. He has authored over 30 professional and peer-reviewed journal articles on the application of human factors psychology to first responders and their operational environments. David continues to conduct research on police deadly force and human factors psychology. He is the lead consultant at Blake Consulting and Training.

Digital Edition: What law enforcement wants in 2021

4,000 officers speak up about police reform, recruitment and more in Police1’s State of the Industry survey

2020 was a year of unprecedented change and uncertainty for law enforcement agencies. Calls for police reform and defunding dominated headlines in the mainstream media, but the future of the criminal justice system is being dictated and decided by everyone except law enforcement officers.

To provide officers a voice in setting the future of policing, Police1 conducted our first State of the Industry survey to understand how the law enforcement profession wants to evolve. Mo​​re than 4,300 LEOs responded from agencies large and small serving urban, suburban and rural areas. Just over half of the respondents have more than two decades in law enforcement, 30% have 10-20 years under their duty belt and 17% have fewer than 10 years.

Included in this digital edition, sponsored by Getac, are answers to key questions we asked respondents, as well as expert analysis on the path forward.

“By leveraging the data from this survey to target public information outlets, the truth about who the police are, what they believe, what they are doing and what they hope for the future can serve as a means to advocate for the profession while producing one of many positive, intended consequences: successful recruitment and retention of quality police officers,” observes criminal justice professor and former police officer Janay Casparini, Ph.D.

Some highlights from this issue include:

  • What LEOs want for the future of policing
  • How satisfied cops are with their careers
  • Duties that are of most importance to officers
  • Officer optimism about the future of law enforcement
  • Responsibilities officers think should be handled by other government agencies
  • Predictions on the future of police recruitment and retention

To download your free copy of the “What cops want in 2021” Digital Edition from Police1,​ visit https://www.police1.com/police-products/body-cameras/articles/digital-edition-what-cops-want-in-2021-BtmyyGkg84zplSlw/?utm_source=lytics&utm_medium=referral and​ fill out the f​orm at the bottom of the page.​

About the author
The Police1 Digital Edition brings a sharpened focus to some of the most challenging topics facing police officers and law enforcement leaders everywhere. Each Digital Edition features contributions from some of the top experts and most progressive thinkers in the field. Download to access thought leadership content and innovation in action that will help transform operations in any agency.

NIC’s Becoming Trauma Informed: An Essential Element for Justice Settings Now Available for Viewing

Experiencing or exposure to traumatic events during childhood and continuing into adulthood is all too common. Less known is that trauma is a dominant factor in the lives of individuals involved with the criminal justice system; in what occurs while in the system; and in how transitioning and living in the community is impacted.

With this increasing awareness, criminal justice professionals are considering what this means in their correctional settings, how to manage this population, and provide effective services. Often overlooked is the challenge of staff who are also affected by trauma in their personal and work lives, as organizational stress and trauma create additional challenges for the workplace.

In this Community Services Division-sponsored webinar series, NIC’s Maureen Buell facilitates a stimulating discussion featuring Stephanie Covington, PhD, of the Center for Gender and Justice and Nena Messina, PhD of Envisioning Justice Solutions. This dynamic three part webinar series focuses on the following topics:

1) The Association between ACEs and Criminal Justice Involvement;

2) Trauma Informed Treatment and Theory; and

3) Becoming Trauma Informed and Moving to Trauma Responsive.

As demand outpaced the limited number of registrations, the linked content is now streaming and shareable. The linked content includes the downloadable recorded sessions, a list of resources referenced during the presentations, and a Q&A document that memorializes questions brought up in the chat.

By accessing this robust series you will explore the issues, find helpful answers, and learn from subject matter experts. Below are testimonials from webinar participants. We think you will agree!

Thank you for a wonderful informative presentation.

Thank you, great information I can take to my job.

Thank you for this great webinar and resources. Looking forward to next week’s as well.

Here is the link to the webinar:

Running 4 Heroes Marches Forward

Running 4 Heroes started with a kid, an appreciation for our first responders, and a mission to raise awareness and funds for those fallen in the line of duty.  Zechariah’s first ever mile was for fallen City of Davis Police Department Officer Natalie Corona. He ran that mile back on 1/12/19 at just 10-years (and 3-months) of age. That run started what would become “Running 4 Heroes, Inc.”  

Zechariah Cartledge was born with the gift of running.  He was raised with an appreciation for first responders and all they do for the community.  As he grew older, Zechariah decided to help the families of our fallen first responders in a meaningful way.  Encouraged by the mission and vision of the Tunnel to Towers Foundation, Zechariah began his journey raising funds for those families by running.

Every run begins and ends with a prayer.

In 2019, Running 4 Heroes officially became a non-profit 501(c)(3).  Zechariah runs one mile for every First Responder who makes the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty.  He wants to honor those who gave up their life so we may live in a better world.

The Board of Directors was put in place in 2019 and has served this organization well. The following individuals comprise the Running 4 Heroes Board of Directors.

Zechariah Cartledge – Founder of Running 4 Heroes

Zechariah Cartledge has always had a deep respect for First Responders, and developed a passion for running when he was only 5 years old. At the age of 7, Zechariah began competing in various 5k events around the community. In October of 2017, Zechariah ran in the Tunnel to Towers 5k in Orlando, FL. This run proved to be a turning point for Zechariah and the spark that created Running 4 Heroes.

During this run, Zechariah had the opportunity to run with dozens of First Responders, many of whom ran the race in their full gear. From that point forward, Zechariah knew he wanted to keep running with and for our First Responders. Originally, his mission set out to honor a fallen 9/11 Police Officer named Walwyn Stuart, while raising money for the Tunnel to Towers Foundation. Zechariah spent all of 2018 honoring this fallen hero in his various races and ended up raising over $11,000 for the Tunnel to Towers Foundation.

It was at the end of 2018 when he heard about how many Police Officers lost their lives in the line of duty that year. Knowing that the number of miles he ran in 2018 was nearly the same amount of miles as Officers lost in 2018, Zechariah set out on a mission to run 1-mile in 2019 for every Officer lost in the line of duty from the prior year and to raise $100 for each Officer for the Tunnel to Towers Foundation.

However, just 2-weeks into 2019, Zechariah heard how more Officers had already lost their lives in the lines of duty in the current year, so he decided to add an additional mile for every Officer lost in 2019, but for them, he would run those miles carrying the Blue Line Flag in their honor.

Currently, Zechariah has run over 240 miles in 2019 and has raised over $51,000 for the Tunnel to Towers Foundation.

That decision to honor our fallen heroes has led to the creation of the Running 4 Heroes 501(c)(3), which sets out to honor every First Responder lost in the line of duty as well as support those injured First Responders whose injuries were duty-related.

Chad Cartledge – President & CEO of Running 4 Heroes

Chad Cartledge has helped create the mission of Running 4 Heroes as a way to show support for his son, Zechariah, and the efforts Zechariah puts in to honoring our fallen heroes. While Chad is not a runner himself, he has experience in Theater and a degree from the University of Central Florida in Radio/Television/Communication. Chad uses his experience in his day-to-day duties for the Foundation. Some of his tasks include maintaining the Running 4 Heroes social media channels, emceeing the 1-mile tribute runs that Zechariah puts on for the fallen, and maintaining the day-to-day budgeting of Running 4 Heroes, just to name a few.

Tim Nazzaro – Secretary of Running 4 Heroes

Tim Nazzaro comes to the Board of Directors with 23 years of law enforcement experience in the Central Florida area.  His last 21 years have been with the Orange County Sheriff’s Office in Orlando. He currently holds the rank of Sergeant and  supervises the field training of newly hired deputies in the Patrol division. Tim is a graduate of the State University of New York at Delhi, where he earned a degree in Architectural Technologies.

Tim is also a bagpiper who plays with The Pipes and Drums of OCSO, and has routinely helped honor fallen heroes during Zechariah’s runs with his piping.

Chris Sileo – Director, Marketing for Running 4 Heroes

Chris Sileo has a long history of public service and a track record of appreciation for First Responders. His family holds many members who are current or former Sheriff Officers, Deputies, Military Veterans, Government Employees, and more. Chris has seen the daily deluge these First Responders go through and has made it a goal to give back in every way possible.

Chris owns Awake Marketing Agency, which does work for many non-profits, small businesses, and others. He is also a REALTOR® and gives back a portion of his commission directly to his First Responder clients.

Chris was an early supporter of Zechariah and his Tunnel to Towers mission, and is now honored and humbled to serve on the Board of Directors for the Running 4 Heroes organization.

Jason Stubler – Director of Running 4 Heroes

Jason Stubler is an Illinois native with a passion of Honoring fallen police officers. He is veteran police leader with nearly 20 years of law enforcement experience. He currently serves as a Police Commander for a large suburban Police Department outside of Chicago, Illinois. His responsibilities include the management of Patrol Division and oversees the department’s Honor Guard Unit. He holds a Master’s Degree in Organizational Leadership from Lewis University. He is also a bagpiper for the Bagpipes and Drums of the Emerald Society Chicago Police Department.

Charlene “Charlee” Jennings – Director of Running 4 Heroes

Charlene “Charlee” Jennings is a police officer in Texas. She has spent most of her life in the South Plains area of Texas. Charlee enlisted in the United States Marine Corps at the age of 18 and received an honorable discharge after a deployment to Iraq and Africa. She then went on to serve the public as a parking control officer, then a jailer in the city holding facility, and now as a police officer in the Texas panhandle. She is a 10 year veteran with the department serving as a property crimes detective.

Charlee has a passion for public service, and has been heavily involved with Toys for Tots while in the Marine Corps, and is currently involved with the Law Enforcement Torch Run (LETR) for the Special Olympics. She assisted in organizing the LETR along with other essential logistics for the organization. Charlee is also a loving mom and loving wife to her Police Officer husband.

Jeffrey Taylor – Director & Treasurer of Running 4 Heroes

Jeffrey Taylor is a native of the Ozark Mountain region and lives in Central Florida with his children. He is a licensed CPA in the State of FL, a Licensed CMA, and a member of the AICPA and IMA.

Prior to becoming a Communications Soldier in the US Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, Jeffrey worked as an HVAC technician in a family business, a firefighter, and a concrete finisher. The Army provided opportunities to cross function, where he rotated through roles in logistics, machine-gun paratrooper, and signal battalion medic.  Jeffrey also volunteered his time with local schools and helped soldiers prepare their taxes pro-bono.  After his honorable discharge from the Army, Jeffrey obtained a Bachelor’s degree in Business Management and a Master’s degree in Accountancy from Stetson University.

In early 2010, Jeffrey was appointed to the IRS Special Enforcement Unit in Maitland, Florida as a field agent.  Working with FICPA, Florida’s DBPR, and the FL Board of Accountancy, he was influential in driving change to the FL CPA requirements in 2012.  After approximately a decade of enforcement work, he transferred to DOD to audit defense contracts and start @CPA, LLC – an accounting firm that specializes in tax resolution and compliance engagements.

Jeffrey met Zechariah and Chad during a compliance engagement for the charitable organization and was impressed to see what a great job they were doing.  After realizing that Zechariah has a better patch and award collection than most children his age have baseball cards, Jeffrey gladly signed on to support the mission by providing treasury services and monitoring compliance with federal and state regulations.

Camrin Northrop – Director of Running 4 Heroes

Camrin Northrop comes from a small town in upstate New York and currently resides in South Carolina. He is a Captain for the Shaw Air Force Base Fire Department (USAF AD), a Lieutenant for the Sumter County SC Fire Department, and the director of safety for the Sumter Speedway. Camrin is certified to the Fire Officer 3 level and is always seeking avenues for further professional development.

He has been in the fire protection field for 10 years and has served overseas in an undisclosed location as a firefighter for 6 months with the USAF. He is an active member in the community and loves helping others in many different capacities, including as a mentor for local schools, which he has been doing since 2017. Camrin is honored to be part of the Running 4 Heroes mission!

Sadly, Zechariah has added 791 more miles since that very first tribute mile run just shy of two years ago. One thing remains true, Natalie’s story continues to inspire Zechariah to march forward with this mission in memory of Officer Corona and all others lost in the Line of Duty.

Today, we remember her on this two-year anniversary of her End of Watch (1/10/19).

Help us in honoring our fallen First Responders.

Running 4 Heroes is always looking for volunteers across America to help in our mission of bringing some joy to the families who have lost their loved one in the line of duty.  Please consider joining us in our mission. For more information on volunteering, visit https://running4heroes.org/volunteer/

Law Enforcement Appreciation Day: A Day to Say ‘Thanks’

Across the country on January 9th each year, citizens take the lead to show support on National Law Enforcement Appreciation Day.

Law Enforcement Officers of every rank and file have chosen a profession that puts their life on the line every day for their communities.  They’ve answered a call to public service that is demanding and often unappreciated.

From local, state, and federal, their duties command dedication. The jobs are often thankless and take them away from their families for long hours. Rarely do they know what their days have in store for them. Often law enforcement are the only paid emergency resource a community has. More often they work in coordination with other local, state, and federal organizations to make communities safer.

On National Law Enforcement Day, we have an opportunity to thank them for their service and offer a token of respect.

HOW TO OBSERVE #LawEnforcementAppreciationDay

There are several ways to show your support. Send a note of thanks to your local, county or state police agency. Wear blue, turn your social media channels blue or shine a blue porch light to show your support. Find more ideas at Concerns of Police Survivors and share your support using #NationalLawEnforcementAppreciationDay to share on social media.  


Several organizations came together to create National Law Enforcement Appreciation Day in 2015 to thank officers across the country for all the daily sacrifices they make for their communities. This holiday was triggered by the chain of events in 2014, when a police officer was involved in a crossfire shooting in Missouri. The backlash and violence that followed this event led Concerns of Police Survivors(C.O.P.S.) to take the initiative to change this negative portrayal of police officers in the news in recent years into a positive one.

Some of the organizations supporting the observance include:

  • FBI National Academy Associates
  • Fraternal Order of Police
  • International Association of Chief of Police
  • Officer Down Memorial Page
  • Law Enforcement United
  • National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund
  • International Conference of Police Chaplains
  • National Troopers Coalition

Since then the inaugural celebration, nationwide many more organizations have joined forces to support National Law Enforcement Appreciation Day (L.E.A.D.) to spread encouragement and respect to these dedicated men and women.


1636  – Policing in Colonial America had been very informal, based on a for-profit, privately funded system that employed people part-time. Towns also commonly relied on a “night watch” in which volunteers signed up for a certain day and time, mostly to look out for fellow colonists engaging in prostitution or gambling. (Boston started one in 1636, New York followed in 1658 and Philadelphia created one in 1700.)    

1838 – ​The first publicly funded, organized police force with officers on duty full-time was created in Boston.

1844 – New York City establishes a municipal police force.

1857 – New York leads the way with adopting the first detective unit.

1905 – Pennsylvania becomes the first state to establish a state police force, as recommended by Theodore Roosevelt to help control the numerous labor riots going on in the state’s hill country.

1920s – Berkeley, California’s police force gets ahead of the curve by adopting centralized and consistent training, communications, and order throughout its police force.

1933​ – T​he Bayonne​, New Jersey​ Police Department ​​initiated the first regular two-way police radio communication in patrol cars.


Around the world, police officers and rangers watch over and protect their communities. In return, this is how their hard work is celebrated!

  • Armenia Police Workers Day – A day to commemorate the Police of Armenia personnel. It’s celebrated on April 16.
  • Canada – Police and Peace Officers National Memorial DayMembers of the Canadian law enforcement are honored. It is observed on the last Sunday of September
  • China – The Day of the People’s Armed Police, created as a result of sharing of power between the Ministry of Public Security and the People’s Liberation Army, and is commemorated June 19
  • Egypt National Police Day – The lives of 50 police officers who were killed after refusing British demands on January 25, 1952 are paid tribute to each year on January 25.
  • Romania Police Day – The holiday celebrates the flag of the Romanian Police and everything it stands for on March 25 each year.


  • There are more than 800,000 sworn law enforcement officers now serving in the United States, which is the highest figure ever. About 12 percent of those are female.

  • Crime fighting has taken its toll. Since the first recorded police death in 1786, there have been more than 22,000 law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty. Currently, there are 22,217 names engraved on the walls of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial.

  • A total of 1,627 law enforcement officers died in the line of duty during the past 10 years, an average of one death every 54 hours or 163 per year. There were 135 law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty in 2019.

  • According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report 2018 LEOKA report:
    There have been 58,866 assaults against law enforcement officers in 2018, resulting in 18,005 injuries.

  • The 1920s were the deadliest decade in law enforcement history, when a total of 2,517 officers died, or an average of almost 252 each year. The deadliest year in law enforcement history was 1930, when 312 officers were killed. That figure dropped dramatically in the 1990s, to an average of 163 per year.

  • The deadliest day in law enforcement history was September 11, 2001, when 72 officers were killed while responding to the terrorist attacks on America.

  • The New York City Police Department has lost more officers in the line of duty than any other department, with 941 deaths. Texas has lost 1,772 officers, more than any other state. The state with the fewest deaths is Vermont, with 24.

  • There are 1,181 federal officers listed on the Memorial, as well as 720 correctional officers and 44 military law enforcement officers.
  • There are 365 female officers listed on the Memorial; 11 female officers were killed in 2019.


Information was pulled from several websites, including:

National Police Foundation https://www.policefoundation.org/

National Day Calendar https://nationaldaycalendar.com/

National Law Enforcement Officer Memorial Fund https://nleomf.org/

Officer Down https://officerdown.us/

United States Department of Justice https://www.justice.gov/

Time Magazine https://time.com/

Register for Promoting Wellness and Resiliency in Correctional Staff Webinar

Do you want to see what some of the latest data and promising practices are revealing about staff wellness for corrections officers and staff? Would you like to learn how to apply a holistic approach to your workplace along the continuum of preventive to reactive responses?

If you answered “Yes” to either of these questions, plan to participate in the one-hour-long Promoting Wellness and Resiliency in Correctional Staff Webinar, set for ​1 p.m. February 2.

Correctional staff face significant stress and challenges in maintaining wellness and resiliency in the workplace. There is emerging evidence that effective strategies and programs exist; however, they often occur in a piecemeal or sporadic fashion. This webinar provides academic insight into the current research on officer wellness and references emerging areas of innovative practices.

It includes practitioner expertise on valuable resources and support for correctional officers and staff. We will move from preventive to reactive strategies and build on new approaches to increase resiliency.

Participants will learn what research and practice tell us about the short and long-term effects that working in corrections can have and how to promote staff wellness and manage trauma in response to what they experience.

Learning Objectives : During this one-hour interactive webinar, participants will

1) develop an understanding of the current research on correctional staff wellness and resiliency,

2) learn how to apply a holistic approach to their workplace, and

3) gain knowledge on promising real-world practices that can assist and promote both wellness and resiliency.


Dr. Hayden Smith is an Associate Professor of Criminology & Criminal Justice at the University of South Carolina. His principal focus of study is the intersection of the criminal justice and public health systems. Core areas include self-injurious and suicidal behaviors in incarcerated populations, physical and mental health needs in correctional settings, jail diversion, reentry initiatives, and correctional staff well-being and safety. Dr. Smith has expertise in program evaluation and policy analysis and has worked with numerous correctional and health systems.

Ms. Karin Ho is the Director for Victim Services with the South Carolina Department of Corrections. She has more than 30 years of victim advocacy experience and over 25 years in corrections. Recognizing how correctional staff were affected by traumatic events, she implemented the Critical Incident Stress Management (CISM) Peer Team and Post Critical Incident Seminars for employees with ongoing trauma-related issues. As part of the CISM Team, Karin is the handler for a specially trained trauma dog who responds to correctional staff throughout the state.

The presenters have engaged in several academic-practitioner partnerships that address correctional officer and staff well-being.

Who Should Attend ?

Any employee of a state, federal or local correctional jurisdiction.

How Do I Register ?

Follow this link to register in NIC’s WebEx Event Center: 

For content and technical information, contact Scott W. Richards, Correctional Program Specialist, NIC Prison’s Division at s1richards@bop.gov

How Do I Participate Effectively In a WebEx Event Center Webinar? How Do I Get Ready ?

  • For the best experience in your next NIC WebEx Event Center webinar, you’ll need a hands-free telephone, headset or earbuds, and an internet-enabled computer.
  • For optimum learning, be in a quiet place, free from distractions/interruptions, sight-and-sound separated from others, where you can concentrate on what is happening during the webinar. A separate office space with a door to close is an ideal setting.
  • Connect to the webinar audio bridge via a hands-free telephone, using earbuds/headset connected to your phone/cell phone, so your hands are free to interact with your keyboard.
  • While tablets and smartphones are also compatible with WebEx Events Center, several of the features are limited, and most devices require the installation of the Cisco WebEx app.
  • Regardless of which device you plan to use, test its compatibility here. The link provides a quick test, and we strongly encourage you to do this before the webinar.
  • If your browser does not pass the test, contact Webex Technical Support at 1-877-669-1782 and tell them you will be attending an NIC webinar on NIC’s Webex site at http://nicmeetings.webex.com . They can help you troubleshoot connectivity issues.
  • NIC strongly recommends consulting with your agency/local IT , as you may encounter pop-up blocking and/or firewall issues that block the NIC Webex webinar url.

Click https://nicic.gov/webinar-vilt-readiness for further information on NIC’s live webinars, including (cost = free!), how to obtain training credit from your agency, and much more.

Blue Help to Honor All Emergency Responders

Over the years, we have had submissions from the families of all #firstresponders, not just law enforcement. In an effort to honor all first responders we have lost to suicide, Blue H.E.L.P. will now collect the information for all suicides, any duty status, any year. What does this mean?

It means that we will place the photo and memorial of any #firefighters, #policeofficers, #correctionsofficer, #emergencyservices personnel and #dispatchers on our memorial wall forever remembering their service.

It means that we will track any and all first responder suicides that are submitted to us, we will no longer restrict our honor wall to #lawenforcement.

All information will continue to remain confidential unless we have permission to share from the families. We believe it is important for you to see the number of verified suicides, whether you know their identities is up to the family; we only post personal information with their permission. We do not contact or “cold call” families, we wa​​it for them to reach out to us. Their privacy and ability to grieve properly is of the utmost importance to us, we are counting every death, but we are only sharing the personal details if the family’s request it, matter how public the death.

We encourage you to let us know what you know so we can continue to raise #suicideawareness

Our History

Blue H.E.L.P. began in 2015 after The Price They Pay was written by two of it’s founders; Karen Solomon and Jeffrey McGill. It became clear to Karen, Jeff and Steve Hough that suicide prevention and care for the families afterward was not offered in law enforcement; compassion and understanding took a backseat to stigma and shame. In 2017, they incorporated and received their 501(c)3 designation and are now the only organization in the country that collects law enforcement suicide data and regularly supports families in the aftermath.

To submit a name or for more information visit https://bluehelp.org/honor-wall/submit/