The San Francisco Police Department’s Police Chief William Scott recently published within his department a directive instructing his officers to “avoid . .” sitting detained subjects (handcuffed or not) on the ground or sidewalk. Chief Scott is of the opinion that leaving detainees standing is necessary, “in order to carry out (an officer’s) duties respectfully and professionally, . . .” Per the Chief’s directive, “sitting a subject on the ground or sidewalk should be done only as a last resort and only when necessary.” Exceptions are allowed in “(e)ceptional circumstances” such as (but presumably not limited to) when necessary to take a resisting subject to the ground. And even then, the subject is to be taken off the ground and put into a police car as soon as practical to do so. Instances where a detainee is seated on the ground or a sidewalk must be documented, presumably for later Monday-morning quarterbacking and critiquing of the officer’s actions. One can only guess what prompted such a directive. But its apparent intent is to minimize whatever embarrassment to the detainee might result from being forced to sit on the ground or sidewalk while exposed to public view. What this directive ignores is the need (if not the right) of an officer who detains a suspect to do what he or she feels is necessary for his or her own safety, the safety of anyone else in the immediate vicinity, as well as the safety of the detainee himself. The directive also ignores case law that clearly provides that the greater the obtrusiveness of the contact, the more likely the contact will be considered an arrest with its concurrent probable cause requirement. Sitting a detainee on the ground is generally considered to be a lot less intrusive than handcuffing him. And then isolating him in a police car only adds to that intrusiveness. If the circumstances don’t justify a finding of probable cause, the use of handcuffs and/or the backseat of a police car, as opposed to merely directing the person to temporarily sit on the ground, may very well convert what was only intended to be a lawful detention into an unlawful arrest. I don’t usually comment on an agency’s internal policies, necessarily assuming that a police department’s administration knows what’s best for its own agency. But when those policies so obviously compromise officer safety, not to mention the potential legality of an officer’s actions in the field, I have to think it’s time to reconsider the often delicate balance between the forced imposition of politics and political correctness on an officer’s discretionary decisions in the field, with the officer’s safety and the legality of his or her actions. SFPD’s ill-advised policy of not allowing its officers to require detainees to briefly take a seat on the ground clearly imposes the former on its officers while totally ignoring the latter.