I originally posted this as an announcement on October 12th, 2022, in some of my Blackboard classes after I saw students' analysis of Terry v. Ohio and Illinois v. Wardlow, assigned to them as case studies.

Lorenz says running from the police is suspicious. Social media disagrees. Who will win the argument?

Do you think we even need to ask or have this argument? I am almost embarrassed because it’s so easy. Then again, winning an argument against many emotionally compromised, anonymous individuals who can’t string a sentence together is easy for me. I also cheat. I look at data and facts and read court opinions, so it’s not a fair fight. I also have many years of experience as a police officer and investigator, if that matters. Sometimes, we must play it out anyway. So here goes.

First, let me say you guys have been fantastic as a class. I am talking about all my classes this semester. Intro to Criminal Justice, Court Systems and Practices, and Legal Aspects of Law. The following lesson is for all my current, past, and future classes and the police academy cadets we train at CTC. It is for everyone. This message stems from our case studies on (Terry v. Ohio, 1968) and (Illinois v. Wardlow, 2000) (often misunderstood cases), but this general discussion comes up in many contexts. My students eventually figure them out correctly; however, they feel bad about their conclusions. I am telling them all – don’t. There is a reason we study this stuff. My explanation is long, but it has to be because we have lost ourselves in the noise.

How to Become a Great Detective

I've been struggling with a way I can explain to students what has been lost over the years. In face-to-face classes, it's easier because I can take my time, watch their reactions, get their feedback, and ask them scenario questions. Explaining details online is challenging, but I have discovered that students can arrive at the correct conclusion, even if they have been led astray by society's illogical noise.

Sadly, at the beginning of class, most students believe that running away from a crime scene is not suspicious. To be fair, when they are first asked, they default to that answer because it's popular. Believe me, I have the same discussion with family members and friends I have known for years and they get fooled, also. What is amazing is that most students don’t believe their answer, and when questioned, they can’t say why they said it, except that there is a concerted effort by pop culture to redefine the universe so that nothing is bad or suspicious. All in the name of social justice. When students see someone running from their house, apartment, or car, they immediately regard that as suspicious. Why? It's because your instincts are correct. Stop listening to the latest fad of ignoring your eyes and common sense because it gets pushed across social media feeds. Your detective skills are just fine. There is nothing wrong with your instincts; you are just being pressured to believe otherwise.

We Love Complicated Evidence

In an age where students love CSI, my students can make complicated connections regarding DNA, fingerprints, and fiber, connecting suspects to crime scenes even years after the crime occurs. Yet, when asked about the guy running away from the crime scene, should that clue be ignored?  So, this message attempts to bring you all back to reality and better explain reasonable suspicion and probable cause. We all use both concepts daily, but you don't call them by those terms.

Flight (running, driving away very fast) is one of the most common and observable clues on the planet that something is wrong. That I must explain something so obvious in a criminal justice class is not your fault. We are bombarded daily with lists of facts we are told to ignore in the name of reform. Criminal justice reform is good. Ignoring crime and facts is just dumb, and it’s not reform. Ignoring data and facts is bad for victims and criminals. We are now being asked and taught to ignore facts and data. So here is a lesson on legal terms, science, critical thinking, and just plain old common sense.

Mere suspicion - is not enough to justify any interference with someone's freedom of movement, meaning no stop or detention. We all have mere suspicion. Something that makes us nervous or uneasy, or just the hair on the back of our neck stands up. For police, it's not enough to act on. Sure, they can continue watching, following, and viewing from a distance, but mere suspicion is not enough for an investigative stop. A "stop" is interfering with our freedom of movement. We have long ago determined that mere suspicion is not enough for that. If you can't explain what is suspicious, but you just feel it, it's mere suspicion and not enough for an investigative stop. Keep looking.

Reasonable suspicion - facts and circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe criminal activity is afoot. This level of suspicion is more than mere suspicion. It is describable, definable, explainable, and, most of the time, universally understood. This level of suspicion does not involve identifying a specific crime. Students seem to have lost the ability to see a crime happening, but really, they haven’t. Students are smart but have been told not to use critical thinking and instead default to emotional anecdotes. Social media also teaches us to go with what is possible and ignore what is probable. 

It is possible that I am an alien from another world. 

It is probable that I am a human from Earth.

Do you see the difference between the two terms?

The legal term is "probable cause" not "possible cause". 

Students are perfectly fine with the crime scene after it is secured and the cool CSI stuff starts. But crimes don't just "appear" out of nowhere. Crimes must start with a suspect traveling to the scene, with some preparation, committing the crime, and then leaving the scene. Traveling to, preparing, and leaving the scene is visible, noticeable, and can be observed. Not just by police. Most of that is observed by citizens who see that stuff going on and call the police. Those people calling the police, you and me, know a CLUE when you see one. Don’t let anyone else tell you what you are seeing with your eyes is not a clue or is not suspicious.

Probable cause (to arrest) - facts and circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe a crime has been committed. For an arrest, it requires identifying a specific crime committed by a specific person. Probable cause usually occurs after the investigative stop is initiated based on reasonable suspicion.

How did the obvious behavior of criminal activity become so controversial?

Can someone please explain to me how running away from places late at night or at your neighbor's house, or from a burning building is now NOT A CLUE?! I must have missed that episode of CSI where the bad guy running away is not a clue. I can't blame this on CSI because even CSI identifies "flight" to avoid detection as a clue, as do all other police programs my students love to watch.  

So, in this instance, I can’t blame this ridiculous myth (running is not suspicious) on CSI, NCIS, or Law and Order. Those shows get it correct. In fact, nearly every episode depicts the bad guy (or girl) running away from a crime scene when they are spotted – by anyone. And the cops always chase them. I never thought I would use CSI and NCIS to justify any argument, but dammit, I am desperate as the number of my students who think running is not suspicious is increasing. But don’t worry; I have the boring facts to back it up in this document. Running is not only a clue but also one of the most observable and identifiable clues in the universe. You can see it from a car, from a hundred yards away, or even from a helicopter.

But Mr. Lorenz, some people run from the police because they are scared. Okay, how many? What percentage? What does that mean? Does that mean the police now must ignore everyone running because some people may run because they are scared? Does that mean we reverse science and medicine and don't react to what is known and observable but instead react to what "could be"? People do run because they are scared - usually scared of being caught. I can back that up with statistical data and will. And if we are allowed to all be honest with ourselves without being worried about being canceled on social media, we already know this. Remember, in my class; I won’t judge you for your opinion nor punish you for it. I’m not Twitter!

If you arrive home and someone is running from your house you have never seen, it's okay to be suspicious. I won't judge you. It’s normal. It's smart. It's obvious.

Investigative stops are NOT ARRESTS.

They are brief detentions. For what? To find out why someone is running from a building at 2 am! Or to find out why someone is hiding behind a dumpster. Or to find out why someone threw something out of the window of their car when they saw the police. Or why someone is hiding in the bushes on the side of someone’s house. What is suspicious depends on all the facts and circumstances surrounding the activity. It is everything taken together - the totality of the circumstances.

Running from the Police is RARE!

Suspicious activity is events or actions that are out of place or unusual. Running from the police is not only unusual, but it is also rare. We can further narrow this by considering how many people run from the police "for no reason at all." But Mr. Lorenz, how do you know that? I'm glad you asked. Police drive around in marked cars all day and all night. You see them on the highway, on the way to school, and everywhere in town. Everyone is going about their business, and if you pay attention, you will notice everyone doing the same thing - NOT RUNNING FROM THE POLICE CAR! Why? It's probably because most people have no reason to run. 

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) has numbers on police contacts and separates them into categories, including "street stops" by police. These "stops" are not for traffic and are defined as "While in a public place or a parked vehicle." Police contact over 61 million people annually and over 2.5 million contacts during "street stops". This data was gathered through the BJS Police-Public Contact Survey (PPCS), which is a supplement to the National Crime Victim's Survey (NCVS). People self-report their contacts with police, including uses of force during those contacts (Harrell & Davis, 2020). 

Only 2.8% of people contacted by police experience any use of force. That is because most people cooperate when being contacted by the police. So, when running occurs, whether from police, from you, from your Ring Doorbell that just scared them, it’s because there is something wrong, something different - something suspicious. It is why running is noticeable and makes everyone on the planet take a second look. Running from the police stands out and is suspicious because most people DO NOT run from the police.

Are you still not convinced?

How many crimes end in flight? Can we measure it?

How many hit-and-run crashes occur each year in the United States? Hit and RUN statutes literally define someone fleeing the scene. Even if the accident is not a crime, FLEEING from the accident scene is a crime. Fleeing the scene of an accident does not usually occur because the police are there. The person is fleeing from being caught by anyone. According to AAA, Over a 10-year period from 2006 to 2016, there was an average of 682,000 hit-and-run crashes per year (Benson et al., 2017). That’s a lot of running away from accidents, and most of those incidents do not involve the police. 

People who commit crimes run from everyone else much more than they run from the police. A vehicle leaving an intersection at a high rate of speed while everyone else is not moving is called a CLUE! Nationwide, Texas has the 8th-highest number of fatal hit-and-runs. In 2016, there were 2,049 deaths due to hit-and-run accidents. That's a lot of hitting and a lot of RUNNING. The running part is a CLUE.

Here are a few easy multiple-choice questions.

Fill in the blank to this headline.

1. Escaped Texas inmate is on the _________

A. walk    B. crawl    C. run

If you answered C. run, congratulations.

Escaped East Texas inmate still on the run from officials (KENS 5:, 2022)

2. A drunk driver hit a pedestrian and _______ the scene.

A. photographed    B. diagramed    C. fled

If you answered C. fled, congratulations, you are catching on.

News story obtained from Channel 8 News in Law Vegas Las Vegas police: Woman fled scene in suspected DUI crash that left motorcylist dead (Romero, 2022).

Not only do people who escape from jail and prison run at the sight of the police, but people who have warrants for their arrest run at the sight of the police. They have a warrant for their arrest because they have failed to appear somewhere, have committed a crime, skipped bail, absconded from parole, or committed any number of other violations in which they are attempting to avoid detection by police. When they see the police, they RUN. Sometimes on foot, sometimes in a car. The running is a CLUE.

How many people are wanted or on the run each year? Great Question. Let’s just look at U.S. Marshalls and serious offenses only! The U.S. Marshalls arrested more than 6,000 murder suspects in 2021 and over 84,000 fugitives (Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs, 2022).

In fact, here is a breakdown from the U.S. Department of Justice Report:

The U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) arrested 84,247 fugitives (27,399 on federal and 56,848 on state and local warrants) in Fiscal Year 2021. On average, the agency arrested 337 fugitives per day (based on 250 operational days).

That number breaks down as follows:

Sex offenders - 10,510 (Sex offenses include sexual assault, failure to register/noncompliance with the national sex offender registry, and other offenses.)

Gang members - 6,240

Homicide suspects - 6,119

International/foreign fugitives - 1,239 (A foreign fugitive is wanted by a foreign nation and believed to be in the United States.)

Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces Program (OCDETF) fugitives - 1,002 (OCDETF cases combine the resources and expertise of numerous federal agencies to target drug trafficking and money laundering organizations.)

Adam Walsh Act violations – 278 (The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (AWA) categorized sex offenders into a three-tiered system based on the crime committed and requires offenders to maintain their registration information accordingly. For example, Tier 3 offenders – the most serious – must update their whereabouts every three months with lifetime registration requirements.)

“15 Most Wanted” fugitives – 1

Additionally, the USMS seized 7,028 guns during numerous violence reduction and counter gang operations in FY21.

Victims of Crimes Run Too!

Flight is always suspicious when triggered by the sight of authority. To assume flight is not suspicious based on "it could be" is not scientific, and the only way to know why someone is running is to chase them and stop them. Victims and witnesses of crimes also run from the police. So, while social media tells us to ignore the person running away, that person running away can be the victim. Victims of crime run from bad people and get chased. 

To use an anecdote from my days in patrol, I saw a female running for her life one night, and when I tried to stop her, I saw she was being chased by her drunk husband, who was beating her. It’s a good thing we didn’t have social media in those days to convince me to ignore running when I see it. Whether the person running is the victim, a witness, or the suspect, running is a CLUE. Police have to act, and citizens shouldn’t ignore it.

Acting on Reasonable Suspicious does not require ruling everything else out first.

Remember that standards like reasonable suspicion and probable cause do not require the dismissal of every legitimate explanation for suspicious behavior before an officer may act. If that were the case, no officer could EVER stop anyone as it would always be possible to explain suspicious behavior with a legitimate reason when all we can do is guess from a distance. If before an officer, a doctor, or a firefighter could act, they had to rule out everything else, everyone would die. It’s absurd, and it’s not science. 

Could you remember this simple phrase? You act on what is known and probable, not on what is unknown and possible.  In the case of running, acting on what is possible would also require officers to make a judgment based on what is unknown (the runner's mind) instead of acting on what is known (the person running from the scene). Known always beats unknown in science, medicine, and the law, and I’ll bet it’s the same with every decision my students make for themselves every day.

Investigative Stops are the Least Intrusive

Most investigative stops result in the person stopped being released with no charges. That doesn't mean the stop is bad. It means the stop was doing what it was supposed to - investigate. Statistically, most stops result in no one being arrested because the officer interceded before the actor committed the crime, or the strange behavior is now explained by a legitimate provable explanation for what appears suspicious from a distance. It’s impossible to know how much crime is prevented because if it never happens, it can’t always be measured.

Investigative detention is a minor intrusion into our day-to-day freedom that we all want officers to protect. We want officers to react to things that occur that are out of the ordinary. That reaction is necessary and saves lives. It is also temporary and lasts for a few minutes if nothing is wrong. In terms of risk versus reward, investigative stops have the biggest bang for the buck.  That is why investigative stops are allowed on reasonable suspicion. They are brief and must be based on observable facts. When there is a determination that no crime has been committed, the detention must end. It happens thousands of times a day without incident.

The Trend to Disregard Everything Suspicious

The trend to disregard everything suspicious by inserting possible innocent motives into observable suspicious behavior is popular with anti-anything movements. When we are anti-(something), then we ignore any fact or data that doesn’t help our belief in which we have become emotionally invested. It helps no one, and it is very costly. Most people don’t hold themselves to that behavior because it just doesn’t make sense when they apply it to themselves.

What does crime look like?

If I asked my students what a murder looks like, most would describe a dead person or someone killing someone. But what does a murder look like before or after it happens?

There is a serial killer on the loose in Stockton, California. Police have released a video of a “person of interest” who was captured on video leaving the scene of one of the killings. This is a photo from that video. The video of an unknown man leaving the scene of the murder was recorded on an outside camera. If this is the serial killer, he is armed with a gun. He is LEAVING the scene. If the police tried to stop him, would he run? Maybe. Social media would say that activity (running) is not suspicious and should be ignored. The only thing that should be ignored when it comes to more than superficial banter is social media. I love social media for sharing photos with family and friends. When it comes to solving crimes, legal analysis, taking medicine, or whether or not I should get vaccinated, I could care less what social media says.

We know that the murderer had to get to the scene and leave the scene. We know murderers also carry weapons to the scene and leave with those weapons. We know that murderers run when caught in the act of murder. We know they drive away with their lights off and ignore traffic signs. Sometimes they steal cars from other people to get away from the scene. Some murderers also carry the body away from the scene and dispose of it. When they see the police, they speed away and run. We know that some murderers stalk their victims for hours or days before deciding to commit their crimes. They park down the street, peek in windows, and hide in the bushes. They dive behind trash cans when hit by headlights. They run like their hair is on fire when they hear someone yell on a Ring security camera. 

I could go on for hours using statistical data and case studies about criminals, including serial killers and serial rapists, who were caught because police and citizens paid attention to what someone was doing BEFORE or AFTER the crime happened. I could also provide the same data and examples for when citizens picked up the phone and called the police when they saw someone strange RUNNING from their neighbor’s house. Those things are called CLUES, and if we start believing we should ignore reality just because it’s trending and popular to do so on social media, then we are no longer thinking. And we certainly can’t be scientists, doctors, or detectives.

How did ignoring the obvious and being blindly led become so hip? Willful ignorance of facts requires your cooperation. Last I checked, we still live in a free country where we can think and form logical opinions. That is certainly true in my classes, and I promise I won’t judge you if you conclude that a series of facts observed around a crime scene is suspicious. I say, “Good job.” My advice to everyone is to use that freedom more. Think for yourself, and don’t be led by anyone, including me. 

What is crime prevention?

Before or after a crime occurs, suspects prepare to commit crimes and flee crime scenes. Whether burglaries, drug deals, or murders, criminals must travel to and from the scene. Criminals must prepare. Criminals behave in certain ways that are observable and measurable. Most of my students find solving serial killings and cold cases intriguing and want to do something like that in the future. That is fantastic, but if we can’t get past our fear of obvious data due to political correctness, we can’t solve crimes.

If nothing is suspicious, then there is no prevention. If nothing is suspicious, we have done away with most of the clues in any murder case. If running and hiding from police, lights, cameras, and people is not suspicious, we might as well close our eyes and never look out the window. If we give up the power of observation to a politically correct world where we fear describing and noticing suspicious conduct, then stop paying attention to everything. If there is no crime prevention, no fear of being caught on the way to the crime scene, or being caught after leaving the crime scene, crime will rise.

Without suspicious behavior, we have narrowed the window to catching criminals to witnessing them in the act and completing the crime before we can act. Remember, if there is no suspicion, then we may make no assumption unless all the elements of the act are directly observed. Without suspicion, we can’t solve cold cases or prevent someone from being raped and killed. We must let it happen first. We also can’t prescribe medicine without a blood test or believe the loud bang we heard outside was a gunshot or that the person screaming is in trouble. No suspicion means we stop thinking and stop acting.   

What does criminal behavior look like?

Right before a person commits a crime and right after a person commits a crime is when suspects are the most paranoid and reactive. People get nervous, anxious, overcompensate, lose fine motor skills, talk louder than normal, drive too fast or too slow for the conditions, throw things out the window of their car, or toss things into the bushes. When questioned, their stories change, don’t make sense, and they lie about their name and date of birth when stopped and questioned.

But guess what the most common and observable factor is on the planet? THEY RUN.

The fact that people flee from the police or citizens who see them is usually a clue that something bad is happening or is going to happen or has already happened. When you see many people running in the same direction, they may be running from something bad. If they are all wearing shorts and have a number on their shirt, it’s called a marathon. If the old and young are running like their hair is on fire in different directions, it’s probably because something bad is happening.

These people in Vegas were running for their lives from a madman with a machine gun who killed 50 people.  RUNNING IS A CLUE!

Running away from something is the most obvious clue in the universe that something is bad. How we got to the point of ignoring something like that shouldn’t surprise me anymore. But I guess society is still able to surprise even me.

I teach my students how to collect DNA, hair, and fiber from crime scenes and to look for evidence that is tiny and hard to see. But the one thing I remind them about crime scenes is that all the DNA in the world is not as important as the person running from the burning building when you pull up at the scene. It's called a CLUE. Always has been and always will be.

Thus, we teach cops to chase that clue. We teach citizens that if they see something, say something. We teach our kids to run away from strangers, offering them candy on the playground. We teach citizens to report strange things they see at their neighbor’s house and to look out for each other.

You could follow the current social media fad of saying running away from something is never suspicious and blindly going on about your business. But I bet most of my nay-saying students would react exactly as their common sense tells them to act and exactly how I would act because it works and is prudent.

 Sources:

Benson, A. J., Arnold, L. S., Tefft, B. C., & Horrey, W. J. (2017). Hit-and-Run Crashes: Prevalence, Contributing Factors and Countermeasures. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. https://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/18-0058_Hit-and-Run-Brief_FINALv2.pdf

Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs. (2022, January 3). U.S. Marshals Arrest More Than 6,000 Murder Suspects in 2021, Over 84,000 Fugitives Apprehended. The United States Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-marshals-arrest-more-6000-murder-suspects-2021-over-84000-fugitives-apprehended

Farberov, S. (2022, October 5). New video shows California serial killer tied “on a mission.” New York Post. https://nypost.com/2022/10/05/new-video-shows-california-serial-killer-tied-on-a-mission/

Harrell, E., & Davis, E. (2020). Contacts Between Police and the Public, 2018—Statistical Tables (NCJ 255730; p. 14). Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/contacts-between-police-and-public-2018-statistical-tables

Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (Supreme Court 2000). https://www.oyez.org/cases/1999/98-1036

KENS 5: (Director). (2022, August 31). Escaped East Texas inmate still on the run from officials. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt8Tz3GYxFU

Romero, J. (2022, October 7). Las Vegas police: Woman fled scene in suspected DUI crash that left motorcylist dead [News]. 8Newsnow.Com. https://www.8newsnow.com/news/local-news/moped-rider-injured-in-east-las-vegas-hit-and-run-crash/

Sidner, D. A., Sara. (2018, January 19). What we learned from the Las Vegas shooting report. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/19/us/las-vegas-shooting-investigation-report-details/index.html

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court 1968). https://www.oyez.org/cases/1967/67