Law Enforcement Specialties >> Military Law Enforcement >> Army & AF 0083s and Posse Comitatus

+2

Army & AF 0083s and Posse Comitatus

5,363 Views
37 Replies Flag as inappropriate
Me_max50

17 posts

back to top

Posted almost 4 years ago

 

 


I have a question that i haven't found a decent answer too. The Dept of the Army states their Civilan Police Officers are apart of the Army and thus are subject to Posse Comitatus. Aren't civilian OSI and CID Special Agents, apart of their respective branches and thus,..subject to the same law?  Some JAGS have told me that since they are 1811s they have been given an exemption from the law based on their OPM series.  As far as I know, OPM Series has nothing to do with statutory arrest authority, as Capital Police, Park Police,..etc are also 0083 with arrest authority.  Besides funding,..which is always a consideration, the Army's stand point just doesn't fit in the common sense Block to me.  Comments?

Tahoes_max50

217 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

 I'm Asst Ops At McPherson and Gillem.  I have posed the same question to our SJA and noone can really pull anything out in black and white that states Army or Air Force civilians are members of the Army or Air Force.  The law says Soldires and Airmen.  We are still restricted from assisting locals outside the confines or other federal agencies here in Atlanta. 


We are on BRAC and getting ready to shut down soon, so I can assure you nothing will change here.....  Most are just looking for other jobs. 


If I have offended anyone, so be it.

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

 @ Navyfiveo:  Either or.  I haven't found anyone to give me a good answer.  Army CID and AF OSI civilians were given statutory authority several year back.  The Army has always that stated the reason their Civilian Police Force hasn't been granted the same authority is because we are a part of the Army thus subject to Posse Comitatus.  So my question was,..why doesn't it apply to them?  I am a former OSI agent (active duty only) and current DACP Police Chief in Maryland so I have been on both sides of the fence (Investigations and Uniform).  This rational just has never made any sense to me and I can't get a good legal opine. I can understand being "apart of the Army" excuse,..but it doesn't seem to apply to everyone in the Army.  

Evil_shinanigans_max600_max50

127 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

Ther problem with my GS0083 positions within DoD is their legal authority.  For the most part, most of you are civilianized MPs.  Your authority to detain comes from the authority given (by direction) to the Base Commanding Officer.  The Base Commander is subject to the Posse Comitatus, therefor, your actions under his authority are likewise subject to the Posse Comitatus act.


GS1811's such as civilian OSI/CID/NCIS types gain their authority directly through federal statute.  1811's are also not under the direct chain of command of the base commander.  Thus, they are not subject to Posse Cumitatus.  Should congress decide to give Civilian Military Police their own authoritative statute, then they would no longer fall under Posse Cumitatus, the presumption also that they are not acting under the orders of military influence.

8494_bozo_pd_max600_max50

608 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

challedog says ...



Ther problem with my GS0083 positions within DoD is their legal authority.  For the most part, most of you are civilianized MPs.  Your authority to detain comes from the authority given (by direction) to the Base Commanding Officer.  The Base Commander is subject to the Posse Comitatus, therefor, your actions under his authority are likewise subject to the Posse Comitatus act.


GS1811's such as civilian OSI/CID/NCIS types gain their authority directly through federal statute.  1811's are also not under the direct chain of command of the base commander.  Thus, they are not subject to Posse Cumitatus.  Should congress decide to give Civilian Military Police their own authoritative statute, then they would no longer fall under Posse Cumitatus, the presumption also that they are not acting under the orders of military influence.



Well said challedog.  That is exacty what my research has shown and what the courts have ruled.  I believe it was Wagner (been awhile since I've done anything with PCA). 


PSD, I think that the idea isn't to work off a military post as a norm, its to actually be allowed to work on the post.  There are many instances where there is a catch and release philosophy by the military.  If a "bad guy" is caught and is not subject to the UCMJ then they are removed from the installation with an ineffective 72 hour bar letter in hand. "Bad guy" goes free without any ramifications for their actions.  Local authorities can be called to assist and make the arrest, but all too often they are busy and not able to respond. Not to mention the embarasment the DoD officers feel when they, being perfectly capable to do it themselves, have to rely on others to do their jobs for them.  Its really about the numbers. NJP and bar letters don't show up on crime reports. Military areas are virtually crime free because of this (which is all smoke and mirrors). 


The desire to operate as an LE outside their jurisdiction pretty much only applies to intervention in situations near post where they are witness to agregious crimes taking place.  They want to be able to stop the crime without fear of losing their job. 


Local and County officials already have concurrent jurisdiction on many military installations.  This is how they are able to come on post and serve warrants, OOP's etc.  It is also how they are able to come on post and make the arrest of the non-military persons caught committing crimes.


The only way to get the legal authority to truely enforce laws is to get legislation passed that will make DoD offcers part of statute.  HR 675 is that legislation. Unfortunately it is not moving at all in congress. 



PL Mentoring Team Member

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

PSD_Team_Leader says ...



wouldnt that take authority out of the hands of the provost marshall and the post commander though? Isnt that traditionally where the MP corps derives its powers to apprehend from? If that would pass and federal statute defines the DoA (and other branches) police, wouldnt you then have to restructure the authority of the PM?



Yes it would and that has already been brought up by congress in a report from the DoD to Congress on the Feasibility of a DoD Civilian Law Enforcement Force dated March 2009 which I have a copy of.  There were pros and cons to this issue but bottom line something has to happen.  my guess that it will eventually. What Tjlglpd pointed out is absolutely true with the cons of not having statutory authority.  The only positive thing I see is that the Installation Commander has his own private Police force but that's a double edge sword as we all have at some point, experience, command influence on investigations and/or adjudications. On another note,..The Army "REQUIRES" that we hire police officers according to the Office of Personnel Management 0083 series standards. What that means is that,..you already have to have been a cop (be it Military or civilian) prior to coming on board as a DACP officer. Higher Head quarters (IMCOM) now require that the applicant have to have been ACTIVELY working as a cop within the last 3 years of the hiring date. Which is a very good thing in my opinion. The point being, DACP officers on average, are not your 17, 18, 19, 20 year old kid coming off the streets trying to learn how to be a cop.  We've already been there and done that. But not to get off track,....what prompted this in the first place was about Posse comitatus and how it should apply across the board to both DACP as well as CID.  But it doesn't and there isn't a sensible answer as to why CID / OSI is exempt from it.  It's an old antiquated law but until it's revoked,..it should still apply across the board.

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

PSD_Team_Leader says ...



by the way, good topic...very good topic. Thanks for posting.



Thanks brother.  Stay safe

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

 


challedog says ...



Ther problem with my GS0083 positions within DoD is their legal authority.  For the most part, most of you are civilianized MPs.  Your authority to detain comes from the authority given (by direction) to the Base Commanding Officer.  The Base Commander is subject to the Posse Comitatus, therefor, your actions under his authority are likewise subject to the Posse Comitatus act.


GS1811's such as civilian OSI/CID/NCIS types gain their authority directly through federal statute.  1811's are also not under the direct chain of command of the base commander.  Thus, they are not subject to Posse Cumitatus.  Should congress decide to give Civilian Military Police their own authoritative statute, then they would no longer fall under Posse Cumitatus, the presumption also that they are not acting under the orders of military influence.



I beg to differ on the civilianized MP comment but although i would say that within our hiring pool, most have at some point or other served inthe military.  I would also agree that we are treated as such by command officials too but to say we are civilianized MPs,..no I diffenently have to disagree with that. After all,...we do have Union issues to contend with and call outs because someone's cat is about to have kittens (wink-wink). Besides bro,.. you're missing the point to the question.  Posse comitatus was around way before "CIVILIAN"   OSI / CID gained statutory authority.   If they are apart of the "Army and Air Force" as are the "CIVILIAN" DACP Officers, then it should still apply universaly or revocation of the law should have taken place. OPM 1811 series is not a factor when it comes to Statuatory Authority as OPM series 1801, 1812, 0083 etc also have that authority. It's dependant upon the organization. In this case, the ARMY tells us that Posse Comitatus prohibits their civilians (the Navy is exempt BTW) from acting in civilian LE capacity. So, I'm wondering what makes  CID and OSI different to where PC doesn't apply?  I'm a former OSI agent so believe me, I'm not hating. This just never passed the common sense level for me. That's all. So although i hear what you are saying in your reply,...it really doesn't answer the question but then again maybe it does but not in the way you meant.  It's all about control and leadership don't want to lose control of their base cops,...thus I think they allowed only a portion of their departments to gain the authority,..is this what you are saying,..if I'm reading you correctly? Maybe the Army should come up with another answer and tell us something different then according to them,.."everyone", civilians and military personnel alike fall under PC and that's what doesn't make sense.  Oh,..BTW,..OSI and CID regardless of authority, still fall under military influence just not directly under the installation commander but he sure can cause problems for them. 

8494_bozo_pd_max600_max50

608 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

Chief, The Navy and its DoD components are bound by the PCA. DODI 5525.5 specifically adds Navy and Marine Corps to the mix.   I'd have to agree that it doesn't make sense, but lets face facts Chief, the people who create these policies have never had to operate as a Law Enforcement Officer in their life.  The ideas they get as to how LE should work comes from reruns of COPS with a mix of Dirty Harry thrown in.  This has recently become apparent (outside of LE with the military policies) with the allowing of females on submarines.  Remember the movie "Down Periscope" from 1996? Those now in command had probably watched that movie when they were just joining the military, now its policy. Other shining examples would be AR 190-56 and OPNAV 5530.14E which do have to do with LE.


Not sure about the Army, but the Navy's NCIS was just NIS back in the mid 90's. They didn't have authority to do anything. We, as DoD officers had to make their arrests for them.  We had authority to charge under state statute and local ordinance back then through DODI 5525.13 where we didn't have a magistrate and the locals were always too busy to assist us. Mid 90's when NIS got statutory authority it changed their ballfield.  They are, according to local field agents, restricted to investigating only felonies that deal with military members and their dependants and/or high value assets. 


We, as DoD officers, still have the magistrate in place to enforce certain misdemeanor offenses (at least at most installations).  The thought process of the military is that we are directly controlled by a military member at each installation and NCIS, OSI, etc are not.  The theory is, in my opinion, misinterpreted...be it intentionally or accidentally.   Installation Commanders having control over a police force is a dangerous thing.  They create mini fifedoms with a force to do their bidding.  They are also easily influenced by their career ambitions.  Eg: Regional Admiral's son arrested for DUI Drugs after nearly taking out a police car...Base CO (a Navy Captain) raised Holy Hell and reduced the authority of the DOD police to a near non-existent state. 


I don't know how much of the PCA thing you have gone through, but I found the below link to be a thought provoking article.  I've read it many times over the years and think that if the courts and congress members were to look at it and research it the whole PCA thing would disappear. http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal/articles/brinkerhoffpossecomitatus.htm


Ultimately the application of the PCA to Civilian DoD Officers boils down to ignorance on the part of the military and SecDef, and a control issue with each of the Base Commanders.


PSD, we are getting close to clarification on HR218 (18 USC 926).  S1132 has passed with comment that DOD was never intended to be left out. Once it gets through the House and the President signs off we are golden...No more question. 


PL Mentoring Team Member

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted almost 4 years ago

 

tjlglpd02 says ...



Chief, The Navy and its DoD components are bound by the PCA. DODI 5525.5 specifically adds Navy and Marine Corps to the mix.   I'd have to agree that it doesn't make sense, but lets face facts Chief, the people who create these policies have never had to operate as a Law Enforcement Officer in their life.  The ideas they get as to how LE should work comes from reruns of COPS with a mix of Dirty Harry thrown in.  This has recently become apparent (outside of LE with the military policies) with the allowing of females on submarines.  Remember the movie "Down Periscope" from 1996? Those now in command had probably watched that movie when they were just joining the military, now its policy. Other shining examples would be AR 190-56 and OPNAV 5530.14E which do have to do with LE.


Not sure about the Army, but the Navy's NCIS was just NIS back in the mid 90's. They didn't have authority to do anything. We, as DoD officers had to make their arrests for them.  We had authority to charge under state statute and local ordinance back then through DODI 5525.13 where we didn't have a magistrate and the locals were always too busy to assist us. Mid 90's when NIS got statutory authority it changed their ballfield.  They are, according to local field agents, restricted to investigating only felonies that deal with military members and their dependants and/or high value assets. 


We, as DoD officers, still have the magistrate in place to enforce certain misdemeanor offenses (at least at most installations).  The thought process of the military is that we are directly controlled by a military member at each installation and NCIS, OSI, etc are not.  The theory is, in my opinion, misinterpreted...be it intentionally or accidentally.   Installation Commanders having control over a police force is a dangerous thing.  They create mini fifedoms with a force to do their bidding.  They are also easily influenced by their career ambitions.  Eg: Regional Admiral's son arrested for DUI Drugs after nearly taking out a police car...Base CO (a Navy Captain) raised Holy Hell and reduced the authority of the DOD police to a near non-existent state. 


I don't know how much of the PCA thing you have gone through, but I found the below link to be a thought provoking article.  I've read it many times over the years and think that if the courts and congress members were to look at it and research it the whole PCA thing would disappear. http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal/articles/brinkerhoffpossecomitatus.htm


Ultimately the application of the PCA to Civilian DoD Officers boils down to ignorance on the part of the military and SecDef, and a control issue with each of the Base Commanders.


PSD, we are getting close to clarification on HR218 (18 USC 926).  S1132 has passed with comment that DOD was never intended to be left out. Once it gets through the House and the President signs off we are golden...No more question. 



Thanks for your input brother.  Even as a OSI agent, I had understood that NIS (NCIS) was not subject to PCA (or so I was told) because the law explictedly pin points the Army.  You are the first to tell me that the Navy falls under it too. Very interesting.  I did a little more reseach on the statutory authority: 10 USC 4027, which states:


(a) Authority.— The Secretary of the Army may authorize any Department of the Army civilian employee described in subsection (b) to have the same authority to execute and serve warrants and other processes issued under the authority of the United States and to make arrests without a warrant as may be authorized under section 1585a of this title for special agents of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

(b) Agents To Have Authority.— Subsection (a) applies to any employee of the Department of the Army who is a special agent of the Army Criminal Investigation Command (or a successor to that command) whose duties include conducting, supervising, or coordinating investigations of criminal activity in programs and operations of the Department of the Army.

(c) Guidelines for Exercise of Authority.— The authority provided under subsection (a) shall be exercised in accordance with guidelines prescribed by the Secretary of the Army and approved by the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General and any other applicable guidelines prescribed by the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of Defense, or the Attorney General.


I point this out because it makes my point.  Somehow this statute superseded PCA for the civilian members of the military branches.  So I believe the Army, inparticular, needs to stop telling us that even though we are civilians, we are apart of the DA and thus subject to PCA when this statute clarily states other wise.  Thanks for all your help.  With what I found out and your input, I have more than enough ammunition to beat up our JAGS with.  LoL  (I love sticking it to attorneys!!)   

Tahoes_max50

217 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

PSD_Team_Leader says ...



Im curious exactly how that would go if it did. Many 0083s seem to want the jurisdictional ability to enforce laws off federal military premises...but why? Why exactly is that desired? Are we talking the immediate area around an installation or are 0083s wanting to patrol the same areas where state peace officers patrol? Unless I miss my guess, even Federal Protective Service and VA Police are restricted to to government property and the area around it.


I guess I am just wondering what exactly would be the end game. It would seem that it would be up to the individual states to decide this rather than a federal statute. Even for Texas, federal "special investigators" are limited only to felony arrests unless called to aid local law enforcement. Would then local law enforcement have a mandate to joint jurisdiction on military installations?



In my eyes, the purpose for 0083 having powers outside the post are pretty simple.  We shuold have the ability to investigate anything happening right outside out gates, especially if it could carry over or the effects of the offense would carry over to Federal property.  Additionally, in the case where I work, our two bases are 10 miles apart.  On a routine run between the two, according to the SJA, should I witness a traffic crash, I really can't do anything more than render medical aid.  In other words, I am not supposed to turn on my emergency lights or direct traffic away from the scene.  These are looked upon as law enforcement duties.  Suppose I stop to get gas between the bases and the gas station gets robbed.  Honestly, do you expect me to continue pumping gas and hang out for the locals or should I do the duty that the public expects when it sees a police uniform?  Keep that in mind....  the public sees a police uniform and expects you to act, they don't care what agency you are from. 


The "what if's" could go on for hours.  The FPS and the VA have a different set of rules.  An FPS officer can act on an offense taking place in his presence whereas a VA officer cannot.  There would have to be some regulation.  I can see it now, the power is granted and someone runs outside the gate trying to bust some speeding granny, but there are way too many situations where the DOD, Federal, State and Local governments would benefit from granting police powers to POLICE officers. 


If I have offended anyone, so be it.

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (today the Army, Navy, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order" on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.



Sec. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress ; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section and any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment[3]

The text of the relevant legislation is as follows:


18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Also notable is the following provision within Title 10 of the United States Code (which concerns generally the organization and regulation of the armed forces and Department of Defense):


10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.

  • National Guard units while under the authority of the governor of a state;

  • Troops used under the order of the President of the United States pursuant to the Insurrection Act, as was the case during the 1992 Los Angeles Riots.

  • Under 18 U.S.C. § 831, the Attorney General may request that the Secretary of Defense provide emergency assistance if civilian law enforcement is inadequate to address certain types of threats involving the release of nuclear materials, such as potential use of a nuclear or radiological weapon. Such assistance may be by any personnel under the authority of the Department of Defense, provided such assistance does not adversely affect U.S. military preparedness.

  • Support roles under the Joint Special Operations Command

 

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

AF Police, DA Police CID, OSI, NCIS, CGIS are FEDERAL Law Enforcement


At many installations, Department of Army Civilian Police officers augment military police personnel. Both military and civilian police personnel work side by side and share all duties and responsibilities. The officer can expect to perform a variety of security and law enforcement roles.


One major function of both a Department of the Army Civilian Police officer is to conduct force protection duties. This often takes the form of ensuring that only authorized personnel access the installation by performing identification checks at fixed entry control points (gates). Department of Army Civilian Police officers may also stand fixed posts at higher security areas within the confines of the installation, such as buildings containing classified material or around parked aircraft. Officers at fixed posts ensure that all entry requirements have been met before allowing an individual to proceed.


Department of the Army Civilian Police officers also conduct security and law enforcement patrols within the installation. Officers patrol the installation and check that physical security measures such as fences and lighting are in good working order. An officer can conduct traffic stops for motor vehicle violations. Each base adopts the surrounding state's motor vehicle laws under the Assimilative Crimes Act (see Federal Jurisdiction). There are two types of citations that may be issued: the DD Form 1408 Armed Forces Traffic Ticket, and the DD Form 1805 Violation Notice. The type of citation issued often depends upon what the local command decides may be written. The DD Form 1408 does not have any monetary fines associated with it. Rather, it is a point system. When a violator exceeds a certain number of points, that individual's driving privileges may be revoked. The DD Form 1805 Violation Notice does, however, carry a monetary fine. Violators may be required to appear before a magistrate. Both civilian Department of Army Civilian Police officers and military police officers may issue a traffic citation.


Department of the Army Civilian Police officers and military police personnel respond to all calls for law enforcement assistance that take place within the installation. If the crime is found to be a major felony, then the matter is generally referred to the special agents of the applicable military investigative agency (NCIS, CID, OSI, FBI, etc.).


There are increasing opportunities for participation in specialized roles. Department of the Army Civilian Police officers may serve as K-9 officers or members of a special response team (SRT).


Department of the Army Civilian Police Officers must attend a (resident) police academy approved by the Office of the Provost Marshal General (OPMG). The U.S. Army sends their civilian officers to a police academy that is a minimum of nine weeks long. A waver of training may be given if the candidate meets the standards of the OPMG.


There is usually one academy per region of the country. They give an overview of topics such as IED detection, basic patrolling techniques, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, physical security concepts, and other police skills. These academies are designed around the specific needs of the US Army, and do not resemble a state or FLETC run academy. The curriculum in these academies is based upon the same topics that a military member would learn in their advanced individual training schools after basic training. Annual in-service training for the DACP (sometimes called "annual sustainment training") normally totals about two hundred and forty hours a year. This refresher training is conducted in conjunction with the officer's military member counterparts.


Officers selected for a position on an installation's special reaction team (SRT) must attend the same training as their military counterparts. Training is held at Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri.


Department of the Army Civilian Police Officers are highly trained and skilled professionals, many whom have prior law enforcement and military experience. Post 9-11 Police Departments have tightened their professional standards. Both classroom training and physical training have been intensified in response to real world terrorist threats.

8494_bozo_pd_max600_max50

608 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

Goodfella11 says ...



... Post 9-11 Police Departments have tightened their professional standards. Both classroom training and physical training have been intensified in response to real world terrorist threats.



At our installation we have been in full out retreat since 9/11. The standards of training have been reduced to that consistant with the 1960's theories of LE and the tactics and policies are changing to mirror the pilot episode of "COPS".  Hate to say it, but most of the jurisdictions surrounding our installation had openly said they would love to work for us if there wasn't such a pay disparity simply to get the training we got.  Just sayin'


DODI allows state interaction in the absense of a local majistrate.


PL Mentoring Team Member

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

Goodfella11 says ...



AF Police, DA Police CID, OSI, NCIS, CGIS are FEDERAL Law Enforcement


At many installations, Department of Army Civilian Police officers augment military police personnel. Both military and civilian police personnel work side by side and share all duties and responsibilities. The officer can expect to perform a variety of security and law enforcement roles.


One major function of both a Department of the Army Civilian Police officer is to conduct force protection duties. This often takes the form of ensuring that only authorized personnel access the installation by performing identification checks at fixed entry control points (gates). Department of Army Civilian Police officers may also stand fixed posts at higher security areas within the confines of the installation, such as buildings containing classified material or around parked aircraft. Officers at fixed posts ensure that all entry requirements have been met before allowing an individual to proceed.


Department of the Army Civilian Police officers also conduct security and law enforcement patrols within the installation. Officers patrol the installation and check that physical security measures such as fences and lighting are in good working order. An officer can conduct traffic stops for motor vehicle violations. Each base adopts the surrounding state's motor vehicle laws under the Assimilative Crimes Act (see Federal Jurisdiction). There are two types of citations that may be issued: the DD Form 1408 Armed Forces Traffic Ticket, and the DD Form 1805 Violation Notice. The type of citation issued often depends upon what the local command decides may be written. The DD Form 1408 does not have any monetary fines associated with it. Rather, it is a point system. When a violator exceeds a certain number of points, that individual's driving privileges may be revoked. The DD Form 1805 Violation Notice does, however, carry a monetary fine. Violators may be required to appear before a magistrate. Both civilian Department of Army Civilian Police officers and military police officers may issue a traffic citation.


Department of the Army Civilian Police officers and military police personnel respond to all calls for law enforcement assistance that take place within the installation. If the crime is found to be a major felony, then the matter is generally referred to the special agents of the applicable military investigative agency (NCIS, CID, OSI, FBI, etc.).


There are increasing opportunities for participation in specialized roles. Department of the Army Civilian Police officers may serve as K-9 officers or members of a special response team (SRT).


Department of the Army Civilian Police Officers must attend a (resident) police academy approved by the Office of the Provost Marshal General (OPMG). The U.S. Army sends their civilian officers to a police academy that is a minimum of nine weeks long. A waver of training may be given if the candidate meets the standards of the OPMG.


There is usually one academy per region of the country. They give an overview of topics such as IED detection, basic patrolling techniques, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, physical security concepts, and other police skills. These academies are designed around the specific needs of the US Army, and do not resemble a state or FLETC run academy. The curriculum in these academies is based upon the same topics that a military member would learn in their advanced individual training schools after basic training. Annual in-service training for the DACP (sometimes called "annual sustainment training") normally totals about two hundred and forty hours a year. This refresher training is conducted in conjunction with the officer's military member counterparts.


Officers selected for a position on an installation's special reaction team (SRT) must attend the same training as their military counterparts. Training is held at Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri.


Department of the Army Civilian Police Officers are highly trained and skilled professionals, many whom have prior law enforcement and military experience. Post 9-11 Police Departments have tightened their professional standards. Both classroom training and physical training have been intensified in response to real world terrorist threats.



Hey partna,..I appreciate the input but you've copied and paste stuff we already knew,...except one thing,..the orginal question,.,.how did the civilian agents from the MCIO's get past Posse comitatus?  Good try though. Stay safe

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

Posse comitatus ONLY applies to FEDERAL ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY AND DOES NOT APPLY TO FEDERAL AGENTS OR ANY POLICE POSITION WITH IN THE CIVILIAN SIDE OF THE GOVERNMENT ONLY APPLIES TO THE ACTIVE DUTY COMPONET OF THE MILITARY. And national guard when on Title 10 orders not title 32 which is state active duty. posse comitatus was meant for and only for the us military on federal orders unless marital law is delcared by the president. PLEASE REFER TO THE LAW BELOW


The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (today the Army, Navy, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order" on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States. with that being said DOD Police (Civilian) ARE NOT military police they are just that Civilian Police they work and are hired via USAJOBS.GOV and CPOL.ARMY.MIL they police a military installation and all federal property they have powers to arrest based on the PROVOST MARSHALs OFFICE (PMO) not the Base Commander.

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

Goodfella11 says ...



Posse comitatus ONLY applies to FEDERAL ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY AND DOES NOT APPLY TO FEDERAL AGENTS OR ANY POLICE POSITION WITH IN THE CIVILIAN SIDE OF THE GOVERNMENT ONLY APPLIES TO THE ACTIVE DUTY COMPONET OF THE MILITARY. And national guard when on Title 10 orders not title 32 which is state active duty. posse comitatus was meant for and only for the us military on federal orders unless marital law is delcared by the president. PLEASE REFER TO THE LAW BELOW


The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (today the Army, Navy, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order" on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States. with that being said DOD Police (Civilian) ARE NOT military police they are just that Civilian Police they work and are hired via USAJOBS.GOV and CPOL.ARMY.MIL they police a military installation and all federal property they have powers to arrest based on the PROVOST MARSHALs OFFICE (PMO) not the Base Commander.



Dude,...what GS grade are you?  Are you a DACP officer?  If so,..you need to do more research and contact me when you get to a grade past GS 12.   I'm a DACP Police Chief!!!  We don't have ANY powers of arrest. We have apprehansion authority over active duty personnel.  We "detain" civilians. What authority we have comes from the Senior Commander (formaly known as the Installation Commander) whose authority comes from federal statute to protect his/hers installation.  Not the PMO!!!   Do me a favor,...like it or not,..you need to read up on the regulation the governs your job,.. Army Regulation190-56. If you're not DACP but a member of one of our sister services,..same thing applies. Until you do that,..no need to blog. You just lost all credibility. 

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

challedog says ...



Ther problem with my GS0083 positions within DoD is their legal authority.  For the most part, most of you are civilianized MPs.  Your authority to detain comes from the authority given (by direction) to the Base Commanding Officer.  The Base Commander is subject to the Posse Comitatus, therefor, your actions under his authority are likewise subject to the Posse Comitatus act.


GS1811's such as civilian OSI/CID/NCIS types gain their authority directly through federal statute.  1811's are also not under the direct chain of command of the base commander.  Thus, they are not subject to Posse Cumitatus.  Should congress decide to give Civilian Military Police their own authoritative statute, then they would no longer fall under Posse Cumitatus, the presumption also that they are not acting under the orders of military influence.



Not a bad answer but not exactly accurate though. The law does not specify the position of a person within the DA falling under Posse Comitatus (referring to your answer on the base commander). It  just names the DA in general. OSI (which I'm a former member of), NCIS and CID are still members of the respective branches. The law states "ANY" part of the Army.

Terry00007_max50

81 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

1st of all... the Posse Commitatus Act ONLY APPLIES TO ACTIVE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES!!! It does NOT apply to Civilian 0083 series Police Officers employed by any military branch.


Here is the "poop and the scoop" on DOD Police.

 


1. It is NOT the Posse Commitatus Act or the DOD that is prohibiting you from off duty carry or arrest authority, it is your subordiunate agency. Departments of the Army, Navy and Air Force are using military SOP's in definition as to your duties, authority and responsibilty. This and only this is what is prohibiting your arrest authority and off duty carry. Most local police will NOT even think twice about you carrying on your ID as long as your department says that you are authorized. I was a DOD officer with Naval Station New York in 1995. We had NO off duty carry and NO arrest authority. I however went to a gun store in NYC, bought a firearm on my department ID, and carried it off duty. If a NYC police officer would stop one of us off duty with a firearm and call the station to verify our off duty carry status, who ever was on dispatch would just tell them that we were authorized to carry off duty. THIS WAS DONE OVER THE PHONE! The NYC officer would then just radio into his command that our officer had proper ID for the firearm. (Referring to our DOD Police ID)

 


2. The NSA (National Security Agency), DLA (Defense Logistics Agency), NGA (National Geo-[something]-Intelligence Agency) and PFPA (Pentigon Force Protection Agency) are all DOD agncies with their own 0083 series DOD Police. The difference is that these are CIVILIAN DOD agencies with civilian ideas of what authority their DOD Officers have. We are authorized off duty carry and have full arrest authority (within Federal Jurisdiction). We carry on our Department ID just like local police officers and just like DOD Officers under the military departments, we are issued our duty firearms and turn them in after our tour. We then strap on our personal firearms and head home. Civilian DOD agencies do not treat their DOD officers like the military departments do. Under the civilian DOD agencies, DOD Police Officers are treated like Police Officers. We have civilians in charge who have a totally civilian aspect of what authority their police officers need.




3. I'm now with DLA (Defense Logistics Agency). We go to FLETC for the 11 week UPTP and have 3 weeks of DOD training after completion of FLETC. We are treated like Police Officers by our Agency, as well as the local police departments. As Federal Police Officers we have to however, understand our jurisdiction. We have NO JURISDICTION to enforce any State laws off of our federal property unless we are givien authority by that state or local police department to do so. We can enforce FEDERAL LAW ONLY, unless we are given authority by the state. Just because your department gives you full arrest authority, it does not mean that you can go about the population and start arresting offenders of state law. If the state that your Federal Installation is located in does not give you arrest authority, then you are restricted to arrest on FEDERAL PROPERTY, or for FEDERAL OFFENSES ONLY if you are off that property! If you act on a crime commited against the laws of the state, you must turn the offender over to the local authorities who have jurisdiction over the laws of the state. Even if HR675 passes, it will NOT give you arrest authority in any state unless that state extends it to federal officers. But at least we DOD Police Officers will be equal to any other Federal 0083 series Police Officer from any other Federal Agency.

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

Sarge is right the law only covers ACTIVE DUTY military not the civlian side of DA Police OSI CID,NCIS,CGIS. as they fall under different laws.

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 




Sarge15mp: Thank you for the reply but honestly,..you never answered the original question surrounding HOW,..did the civilian agents of the MCIOs (Army/Air Force) get around PC.  It is the official stance of the the Department of the Defense (as well as the Army, Air Force and even the Navy) that their civilians " DO" fall under PC.  This is because the agency itself does and thereby so do it's civilian police officers. Although the Navy technically does not, it is their stance that they remain uniform with the other branches of the service. Prohibition to assist local law enforcement because of PC is STATED in our regulations (Army) and is echoed in the "Official" DoD response to the President of the FOP Grand Lodge which I have a copy of.  Unlike you, this is not my opinion on the DoD's stance of their view on civilian police officers for the military.  THIS IS FACT!!!  Like you, however, I do agree that it shouldn't be the DoDs stance as I don't think it applies to us.  But I don't make that kind of money and neither do you to make OFFICIAL and LEGAL opines for the DoD.  Fortunately for you, other DoD organizations, such as yours, don't have to worry about this issue.


BTW,..no need to break down the who,what, when, and how about jurisdiction and authority.  I didn't get to where I'm at if i didn't know that stuff already. Been there done that on the federal side as well as local/state with 25 years law enforcement as an AFOSI special agent, Illinois State Trooper and a couple of other agencies I care not to bore you with. Most of us in Federal Law Enforcement have been to FLETC.  Although the Army doesn't send their people there anymore,..the academy isn't what gives a police officer the authority to do his job. It just prepares him.  Bottom line,..I'm just looking for the best answer to the question I originally asked.  Not a whole bunch of stuff on HR 675,..(which I care nothing about because that's has been stalled in congress,..and probably won't pass until I'm dead and gone.)  I don't really care about the NSA, DLA, DCIS, PFPA, USPPD,  NGA, or any of the other DoD agencies that are not MCIOs or MPOs.   I'm just looking for an good answer that not even higher HQ for the Army,..has supplied a decent answer too,....yet.  


Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

Goodfella11 says ...



Sarge is right the law only covers ACTIVE DUTY military not the civlian side of DA Police OSI CID,NCIS,CGIS. as they fall under different laws.


 


Hey goodfella11,...see my response to sarge15mp. From the DoD's stand point, which at this time is the only one that counts,...he is not right. The DoD states in their directives to the military branches,..that civilian police officers working for them "DO" fall under PC. My question is,.. that if that is true,..how did the civilians agents for the MCIOs get around a law that is over  200 years old. 


Terry00007_max50

81 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

Chief_Robe says ...





Sarge15mp: Thank you for the reply but honestly,..you never answered the original question surrounding HOW,..did the civilian agents of the MCIOs (Army/Air Force) get around PC.  It is the official stance of the the Department of the Defense (as well as the Army, Air Force and even the Navy) that their civilians " DO" fall under PC.  This is because the agency itself does and thereby so do it's civilian police officers. Although the Navy technically does not, it is their stance that they remain uniform with the other branches of the service. Prohibition to assist local law enforcement because of PC is STATED in our regulations (Army) and is echoed in the "Official" DoD response to the President of the FOP Grand Lodge which I have a copy of.  Unlike you, this is not my opinion on the DoD's stance of their view on civilian police officers for the military.  THIS IS FACT!!!  Like you, however, I do agree that it shouldn't be the DoDs stance as I don't think it applies to us.  But I don't make that kind of money and neither do you to make OFFICIAL and LEGAL opines for the DoD.  Fortunately for you, other DoD organizations, such as yours, don't have to worry about this issue.


BTW,..no need to break down the who,what, when, and how about jurisdiction and authority.  I didn't get to where I'm at if i didn't know that stuff already. Been there done that on the federal side as well as local/state with 25 years law enforcement as an AFOSI special agent, Illinois State Trooper and a couple of other agencies I care not to bore you with. Most of us in Federal Law Enforcement have been to FLETC.  Although the Army doesn't send their people there anymore,..the academy isn't what gives a police officer the authority to do his job. It just prepares him.  Bottom line,..I'm just looking for the best answer to the question I originally asked.  Not a whole bunch of stuff on HR 675,..(which I care nothing about because that's has been stalled in congress,..and probably won't pass until I'm dead and gone.)  I don't really care about the NSA, DLA, DCIS, PFPA, USPPD,  NGA, or any of the other DoD agencies that are not MCIOs or MPOs.   I'm just looking for an good answer that not even higher HQ for the Army,..has supplied a decent answer too,....yet.  


 


Sorry Chief..... I'm just guessing here, the reason that they are exempt from PCA is because they are classified with OPM as an 1812 Special Agent. Members of the Army working CID are ASSIGNED to that command similar to the way members of the Army are assigned to DLA. I wanted to go CID when I was an MP in the Army. In order for you to go CID, you have to be released from your current command and assigned to CID. My Commander of course would NOT authorize the release because I went looking for CID and they didn't come looking for me. I was told by a CID Agent, that when my 4 year obligation to the RA was almost complete, I could apply for a position with CID at any Federal Building. I'm guessing that MP's who go CID are released from their Military obligation in order to work CID. Again,... this is just a guess.


The good news is that I heard HR675 is going to be pushed in the House again, and it has more support than last time. We may have a good chance of seeing it passed sometime in 2011. It really bothers me to hear what some DOD Commands are doing with their Civilian 0083 Police. I'm hoping that if ALL the DOD agencies that have 0083 police officers, (ARMY, NAVY, AF, MARINES, NSA, DLA, PFPA, NGA & DCIS) all get together and bug the SH*T out of our Congress, we will have a big enough voice to finall be heard and get that bill passed for ALL OF US! (Specially the Officers working for the Military branches because it seems that you guys are having the most problems with you commands)


Newpatch_sq90_max50

5991 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

Chief_Robe says ...



 @ Navyfiveo:  Either or.  I haven't found anyone to give me a good answer.  Army CID and AF OSI civilians were given statutory authority several year back.  The Army has always that stated the reason their Civilian Police Force hasn't been granted the same authority is because we are a part of the Army thus subject to Posse Comitatus.  So my question was,..why doesn't it apply to them?  I am a former OSI agent (active duty only) and current DACP Police Chief in Maryland so I have been on both sides of the fence (Investigations and Uniform).  This rational just has never made any sense to me and I can't get a good legal opine. I can understand being "apart of the Army" excuse,..but it doesn't seem to apply to everyone in the Army.  



It was my understanding that they were Federal Agents, who did not fall under the Posse Comitatus Act. Just like the FBI, they are exempt.


Photobucket
In Memory of the Fallen Officers

MODERATOR 3

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 


@ sarge15mp: I hear ya Sarge.  It's great to hear other DoD agencies pulling for the rest of us though.  To coin a phrase,...We're all riding on the same bus,..it's just that the rest of us (MPOs) are sitting in the back. LoL.  I hadn't heard that HR 675 was moving again. That would be a good thing but I know there are a lot of folks out there who believe giving civilian officers of the MPOs full constitutional arrest authority equates to the creation of a totalitarian state for the good ole USA. So I think there will be a big fight when it finally comes to the floor,..if it does come to the floor. Another reason I'm not so optimistic is because I have a copy of a report sent from the DoD to Congress on the feasibility of creating a single DoD Police Force. It was a really interesting read but in short, Leadership doesn't think it's good idea. So I'm not holding my breath for the bill passing anytime soon. If it does pass and become law in the near future,..I'd really be surprised. 




You know,..I like to say law enforcement is who we are, not just what we do. It's rough for individuals who are used to doing actual law enforcement with full authority to perform their duties, and then not to be able to them. In a way it's understandable because the Department of Defense was not created to enforce law, unlike the Department of Justice, but like other agencies, we have a need for law enforcement because of military installations and other DoD interest. It'll take a while but I do believe the DoD will eventually find a happy medium.  One where it's L.E. community will be fully empowered to do what we need to do but also one where we won't over step our boundaries outside our jurisdiction. Over all,...it has been a great place to work,..even with all the challenges.  Just my 2 cents worth. 




BTW,..Army civilian CID, AFOSI and Navy NCIS are OPM series 1811 Criminal Investigators, not 1812 (I believe 1812s are Game Wardens or Game Law enforcement).  Take care brother and thanks for the chat. Be safe,..always



Terry00007_max50

81 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

OOOOPPSS!!!.... Did I say 1812.... "MY BAD"....  Yeah... I dont think those brothers would like to be called Game Wardens... LOL

Photo_user_blank_big

29 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted over 3 years ago

 

I am only going to say this once read the law on PC as it makes no mention to 0083 1811 or 1812 it only makes referance to Active Duty Federal Uniformed Services and national guard when on title 10 not title 32. lets say for example that if a riot where to break out the National Guard would be the agency called up to quell it. even if you work for the military and the person you report to is AD you still do not fall under PC. and PC is only if you are off federal property and you have no authority off of federal property even if you are in hot persuit you would have to call the local leo's and the same goes if a local leo is chasing a bad guy onto federal property they would have to call you guys. read the law.

Me_max50

17 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted about 3 years ago

 

Goodfella11 says ...



I am only going to say this once read the law on PC as it makes no mention to 0083 1811 or 1812 it only makes referance to Active Duty Federal Uniformed Services and national guard when on title 10 not title 32. lets say for example that if a riot where to break out the National Guard would be the agency called up to quell it. even if you work for the military and the person you report to is AD you still do not fall under PC. and PC is only if you are off federal property and you have no authority off of federal property even if you are in hot persuit you would have to call the local leo's and the same goes if a local leo is chasing a bad guy onto federal property they would have to call you guys. read the law.



No arguement there brother,.... but the original question still stands and you didn't answer it.  Read the original question and then get back with me.  Which BTW,..is exactly what your answer is.  A personal opinion as you dont represent or have the authority to tell your department they can go out and make arrest,...regardless what PC says.   

800px-hk_usp_45_surrounded_by__45_caliber_hornady_tap___p__jacketed_hollow_point_rounds_max50

10 posts

back to top
Rate

Rate This | Posted about 3 years ago

 

Hello to all my DoD brothers.  I happened across this thread, and thought you might like this link.  Its a opinon from the DOJ to the FBI on wether a civilian employee of the DoD is subject to PC.  www.justice.gov/olc/pca1fnl.htm  My two cents.  Its a bit confusing with all the legal mumbo jumbo, but I'd like to hear what you guys think.  Lets hope things get straightened out eventually.

800px-hk_usp_45_surrounded_by__45_caliber_hornady_tap___p__jacketed_hollow_point_rounds_max50

10 posts

back to top
+1

Rated +1 | Posted about 3 years ago

 

Bump.  Excerpt from my above link.


      The staffing and organizational arrangements that you have proposed are permissible under the PCA because a civilian employee of the Department of Defense would not fall within the statutory or regulatory scope of the PCA. (5) By its plain terms, the PCA applies only to personnel who are "part" of the Army or Air Force. 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (unlawful to use "any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus to execute the law"); see also Bacon, 851 F.2d at 1313 (applying PCA to "military personnel"); Hartley, 796 F.2d at 114 (same); Bissonette, 776 F.2d at 1389 (applying PCA to "Army or Air Force personnel"); Yunis, 681 F. Supp. at 892 (applying PCA to "military personnel"); see also Transportation Opinion at 2 (military personnel detailed to civilian agency are not "part" of the military and not subject to PCA); Assignment of Army Lawyers, 10 Op. O.L.C. at 121 (PCA does not apply to military personnel functioning in civilian capacity under civilian command); cf. Memorandum for Jamie Gorelick, Deputy Attorney General, from Walter Dellinger, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, Re: Use of Military to Enforce Immigration Laws at 9-10 (May 10, 1994) (distinguishing between "employees of the United States" and "members of the Armed Forces"). Similarly, the Defense Directive, extending the statutory restrictions to the Navy and Marine Corps, excludes from its scope civilian employees of the Department. Directive 5525-5(B)(3) ("restrictions do not apply to a "civilian employee of the Department of Defense"). (6) This Office has distinguished between civilian and military personnel by applying the PCA to "persons subject to military discipline." Fraud Investigations Opinion at 11.

Next Page >