Limiting Law Enforcement Liability with Technology – June 2019 Webinar
We hope you enjoyed our June 2019 Webinar. To make sure you don’t miss the next one, signup here: www.leftasystems.org/webinar
Please Note: The views expressed herein are those of the presenter; they do not necessarily reflect the views of LEFTA Systems.
“I first want to thank you all for joining us today. The title of this is Limiting Law Enforcement Liability with Technology and we’re delighted to have you all in attendance for the LEFTA Systems June webinar series. Again, the topic is going to be limiting law enforcement liability with technology. I’m your presenter, my name is Cory Keith. I’m a retired deputy sheriff from a large law enforcement agency here in Florida and I now work for LEFTA Systems as a Regional Account Manager and one of the benefits of my job now is I get to talk to all law enforcement agencies across the nation. I get to hear what they’re doing and how they’re implementing things. Just a little bit of background about me. I was a Field Training Officer as well as a classroom instructor and defensive tactics instructor while I worked for the Sheriff’s Office. Before that, I got a Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice and a Minor degree in Computer Science. So, I have a pretty unique experience. I was always excited about technology and excited about law enforcement as well, and luckily I was able to get somewhat in both careers.
When I was working for my sheriff’s office, I was always interested in what’s new and what was coming out. And it was a really interesting time to be in law enforcement because when I started it was pretty much the rise of cell phones, and a lot of other technologies have come out, including social media. And now there’s even more coming out in the future, and we’re going to get to that in a little bit. I just want to say that again, this is put on by LEFTA Systems, but the views expressed herein are those of me, the presenter, and they do not necessarily reflect the views of LEFTA Systems. All right, so let’s get started on what we’re going to actually talk about today.
This is just the overview. First, I’m going to talk about the history of documentation. Documentation and technology go hand in hand nowadays. As you can see in the picture, this is maybe a little bit of an unorganized system, but this is kind of how we used to do it with documenting everything with paper and hard copy, storing everything in filing cabinets. Of course, we’re getting away from that and we’re turning into a digital society. I notice a lot of law enforcement, compared to commercial enterprises, that law enforcement is a little bit behind the eight ball when technology comes out. I feel like there’s a reaction to technology instead of it growing side by side, and I could see why it kind of has to be that way, because there has to be laws and court cases that have to be in existence. We’re going to get into all that. We’re going to talk about why proper documentation is important. We’re going to talk about failure to train lawsuits that came already into effect, court case examples, preventative measures against lawsuits and studies, pros and cons of using different types of technologies.
Now, I don’t know if you noticed, but we have a questions box. It’s a little chat box where you could type in any question that you have. I may not answer the questions right away. I may not see it immediately as it comes up, but please feel free if anything comes to your mind, type in the questions and if I don’t address it right then and there, I have a slide at the very end where I will address all the questions. Without further ado, let’s get started into what needs to be documented.
Again, this is a little bit of a history of documentation. We realized reports definitely need to be documented. That’s a staple with police work. There has to be a report done. So every agency, I’m sure, nowadays has sort of digital report management system and agencies found a lot of value in them because instead of having to store all your paperwork in filing cabinets, you could now store your reports in digital files. One thing I’ve noticed with my agency is a lot of our reports that we were doing, a lot of the investigators would want us to answer specific questions within our reports. Like if we did a robbery or if we did a burglary, they want specific questions answered when they’re given to them, so they’d come up with templates because these are important questions that not only they want to know but the courts will want to know in the future.
So we started implementing some sort of templates. Now, in more high liability things, it was so imperative that these types of questions needed answers that law enforcement has created use of force reports, vehicle pursuit reports, and even field investigation reports where it asks specific questions about people maybe that you stop during your shift. And also injury reports, of course. But the problem with just writing a report is the information, it could be anything. And if you want it unified within your agency, you would need to ask specific questions with use of force, vehicle pursuits, and so on.
Now, the other type of documentation we’re going to talk about is training documentation. Training documentation, like I have written there, shields your agency from employees as well as the public. There’s a lot of cases that come up when you have, let’s say a use of force incident, where there will also be a lack of training claim within that lawsuit. We’ll get to that in a little bit, but it’s of course imperative that we keep academy training records, field training records, including FTO field training or PTO models, employee training records, employee vehicle/property damage reports. I mean, we can all see the value in these types of reports. We’re going to get into a little bit how we can use technology for these reports as well as other applications within law enforcement.
All right, why is proper documentation important? There’s always that adage in law enforcement, if an incident wasn’t documented, then it didn’t happen. Basically, that’s because when you’re brought up to the court, you’re brought up to the stand, and you have to testify about what happened it’s a lot harder to recall by memory than reviewing a report and then stating the facts of the case. One of the staples of the police report is being able to review that. Again, high liability stuff. Use of force reports, vehicle pursuit reports, field investigation reports. A lot of liability in that. Again, the details of these are extremely important. It’s unfair to burden officers to remember every question needed that the court is going to ask, and courts demand that this information is known and documented.
Now, why is proper training documentation important? Well, same thing. I mean, if the training wasn’t documented, then it didn’t happen. And this is where we’re going to get a little bit into some of the legal court cases. We’re going to start with liability because we have to understand what the courts have said over time what your agency is liable for. Training, it’s not good enough anymore to just take the police’s word for it. This is why body cameras have been implemented. The court now wants to see all types of evidence to make sure that everything was in place so when we need questions answered like if you have training, when was the training held? Why was the training done? Which officers attended the training? Who was the instructor? What material was covered? Where was the training done? How was the training done? Now, we’re going to go ahead and get into a little bit of the court cases onto liability. I’m going to get into the meat and potatoes of this now.
This case is actually not a law enforcement case, but it sets precedence for law enforcement agencies. In this case, Monell versus the Department of Social Services, originally this case was brought forth because the females that worked for the department of social services were required to take unpaid leave for pregnancies and so it was a class action lawsuit brought to the court. They thought that was wrong and so they said that they should have been paid for their leave. Now, after this went to the Supreme Court, it was shown the Supreme Court said well, government municipalities can be held monetarily liable for unconstitutional acts. And this, they decided, was an unconstitutional act and they should be paid for their leave. The problem with this though is it didn’t really give a bright line response about when is the acts unconstitutional.
It took another court case, and this next court case is going to be the City of Canton, Ohio versus Harris. Basically, just a background about this case, a female was arrested and put in a police car. When she was in the police car, after they checked on her, she was sitting on the floorboard of the police car. It appeared she was incoherent. When they asked her questions, she gave incoherent remarks and she kind of slumped over a few times on occasion. The officers asked her if she needed medical attention but they couldn’t understand her response and she was kind of left in the police car. Well, they ended up unarresting her and taking her to a hospital. When she went to the hospital, she had to go through medical procedures and she was under medical care for over a year.
What this case’s significance is the courts came up and said deliberate indifference exists only when training is obvious and failure to implement such training is likely to result in a constitutional violation. That’s when that deliberate indifference comes in. So, if the courts determine that your agency was deliberately indifferent, then your agency could be held liable for violating people’s constitutional rights. They said, in order to find this deliberate indifference, they had these three categories. Let’s review these three categories. A moral certainty standard violation. If the subject area was one of the clearly established laws in which a reasonably policy maker known or should have known that a constitutional violation would occur if employees were not trained, liability could arise. For example, they should have known that if you have a policy maker who says they’re going to put into place these laws and they’re constitutional violations, then that could arise to deliberate indifference.
Number two, custom, pattern, or practice. Now, this could be a liability in your agency, let’s just say if you have officers that say yeah, we do stuff that’s not really in our policy or procedures or it’s not really in our laws but we do it anyway because this is how we’ve been doing it for years, that’s when this custom, pattern, or practice comes in. If the policy makers haven’t put in a policy or practice for stuff that’s constantly being done over and over again and they don’t address it at all, then your agency could have that deliberate indifference label attached to it and you could be liable, monetarily, for constitution violations. The last one is an official policy. If you have an official policy, again that you knew or should have known liability could arise from it, if you have, say for example a correction facility, and you have cross-gender strip searches and that’s in your policy, that could fall under a deliberate indifference again, where your agency could be held monetarily responsible for a constitutional violation.
All right, moving on. This next case, basically this happened a little bit later. I’m going through these cases, and these are past cases, but this is how it’s setting the legal standard as it goes. Basically, this agency went out and they did a bunch of traffic stops. During the traffic stops, the officers, it says, beat some people. Hopefully no one was hurt too much, but everybody that was stopped in this particular time, they came back and did a lawsuit against the agency. The agency lost over $1 million in this, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees. That deliberate indifference was found because the training program was inadequate due to the county’s official policy. Basically, the county didn’t want to really fund training, and that lack of funding to do adequate training, they labeled the department as deliberately indifferent.
We have one more that’s bringing it to the future. Why I bring these up is because what happens in the past is setting the standard for what happens in the future. A lot of times with technology it’s hard to see what’s going to happen with it, what are the courts going to decide about it. This was a big thing when cell phones came out. I was working on the streets when cell phones came out and everybody started recording the police. A lot of law enforcement agencies didn’t know how to react to this. Officers and deputies acted one way. There was a lot of court cases, a lot of liability cases that were brought forth. Let me show you this by moving on to the next slide.
In more recent cases, and this is just one case but this really happened all over. This case happened about 2007 to 2008. They said officers had infringed on this person’s freedom of speech. Basically how this story goes is somebody was being arrested and Mr. Glick here was arrested for filming the arrest. He took it to court, said it was a First Amendment violation, and the court agreed with him. The department had to settle for $170,000. A lot of agencies have reacted to this and have put policies in place about videotaping. I remember when I was out on the street, before, really, the cell phone thing hit, there was a group called Cop Watch and they showed up on my traffic stop. This was after I arrested the person. I don’t know what the arrest was for, this happened a little while ago, but they showed up to the scene and just started videotaping everything. They had big lights on that was shining right on me.
Usually, we’re used to the media coming on scene, but usually the media kind of stays back when they come on. This guy, he was walking on the sidewalk, wanted to videotape everything. I talked to my supervisor and basically my supervisor said just ignore him, which I pretty much did and moved on. But, a lot of agencies didn’t. A lot of agencies arrested people for videotaping. It just brings into how do we move forward when new technology comes out? So, that’s what we’re going to answer coming up. I first want to say again, we have new people that have joined this webinar, and again I want to thank you all for joining us today and I just want to say, like I said before, if you have any questions during the presentation, please write them into the chat box. If I don’t answer them right away, I will answer them coming up toward the end. All right, moving on.
All right, so this is agency lawsuits. I found this study. The study is called Emerging Trends in Police Failure to Train Liability. It’s a study put on, I think, by the University of North Carolina. Via computer, you could actually type that into Google and this study will come up. This talks about failure to train lawsuits and top 10 most frequent litigated training categories there are. Now, let me just tell you a little bit of something about this top 10 list. First of all, let’s use the first one as an example, non-lethal force. Say an agency was sued for non-lethal force. The reason why it’s on this list is because not only were they sued for non-lethal force, but they were also sued for a failure to train claim.
In all these categories here, there’s a failure to train claim. If your agency had been sued before, it’s usually not just on one claim. They usually have multiple claims. Sometimes it’s just one. These are the top 10. When you have that failure to train claim attached to the lawsuit, these are the top 10 things. You have non-lethal force, false arrest/detention, search and seizure, and so on. Police as a plaintiff is if the police officer sues your agency with a claim of failure to train. Usually that occurs if there’s a complaint or they’re going to fire or let the officer go, the officer may come back and sue the agency for this type of claim. These are the top 10 that I would definitely look into and make sure your agency is covered for. We’re going to go a little bit more into this study on the next slide.
The study’s findings indicate that in a lawsuit, agencies lose approximately one out of every three of those type of cases, when you have that failure to train in there. If you calculate compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, on average it’s over half a million dollars that your agency will lose. That’s a one out of three gamble that your agency could lose in these types of situations. They give four recommendations to limit liability. The top three, most agencies are actually doing already. Agency administrators should be checking regularly tasks what officers are doing and modifying as the law changes over time. This is very important when it comes to technology because technology is changing over time and there’s different ways and channels that crime is being committed. For example, when I was working for my agency, we had a lot of investigative leads through social media and there’s not too much case law yet on social media, but there is some, and more, I’m sure, will be coming as time goes on and as technology evolves. So, agency administrators should look at what kind of technologies are being used by not only the criminals but also your officers and you should have your foot in the water in making sure that you are modifying your training and your policies because if not, your agency could be opened up to liability.
All right, number two, once a training assessment has been finalized, again, police administrators are encouraged to revise these policies and procedures. A lot of times you set the policy, and then you have to make sure you go back. You have to make sure that you’re updating your policies and procedures as time goes on. Supervisory training. Making sure that your supervisors, in this study it recommends a bi-annual training for your supervisors, making sure that they understand what policy is being implemented, making sure what laws are being implemented, and just asking them. Your supervisors are reading all the reports that your officers are writing and they’ll see a lot of new technology. It’s very important to ask them what they see is coming out and how your agency is going to deal with it. Because, like the cell phone thing, when the cell phones came out, that was one of the biggest shifts that happened along time and overall a lot of agencies lost court cases and lost a lot of money because of the way their officers handled those type of cases. There was a lot of First Amendment violations for freedom of speech and Fourth Amendment violations for unlawful search and seizure. Let me just see, is there any agencies in here that were affected by that? By a raise of hands. All right, got one that came up. All right, moving on.
All right, so now technology uses for law enforcement. Now we’re getting into the fun stuff. This is pretty much a lot of the current new technology that’s out now. We have social media agency. Social media is huge, and a lot of times you’ll see agencies on social media. A lot of agencies are on Facebook. We also have to look at sites like Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat. Instagram and Snapchat hold a majority of your younger audience, whereas Facebook is a majority older audience. Twitter puts out a lot of your media information, so it’s almost like another source that you’re putting out information on. You want to make sure that you can communicate with your community in all different ways. Not only through Facebook, because I see there is a lot of agencies in Facebook, but also Instagram and Snapchat.
One thing that we have to also keep in mind, YouTube. YouTube is neglected a lot and it’s the number two search behind Google. You want to make sure that your agency is on YouTube, maybe putting out a video every now and then, just talking to the community. And then, a lot of times with social media, we forget to engage, we kind of just put out all this information. But make sure there’s somebody that’s also engaging with the community that’s on social media, responding to the replies and responses. Because if you’re agency is not doing it, then somebody else will. A lot of misinformation could be transferred that way.
Also with social media, a lot of agencies are using it for investigative leads. Basically, this is using fake social media accounts to gain intelligence on people in the community possibly committing crimes or are committing crimes and we may just want to get a little bit more insight to what they’re doing. One thing I’ve noticed with this is a lot of times where your agencies get in trouble is using another person’s identity as your user profile. If you do that, you could be held liable. There’s been court cases that agencies have lost because the person whose likeness that you’re using finds out and goes and sues your agency. There’s been some court cases like that, but not too much court cases about using social media and law enforcement creating fake accounts. But, that’s the tool. I want to point out too, there’s a lot of stuff going on with technology that law enforcement will like, but also law enforcement will not like. There’s also a lot of technology where law enforcement supervisors will like but law enforcement officers will not.
We know all about body cameras. Great current technology. Generally helps police complaints in cases. And if you implement the data storage, you know that that can be high as well. One thing with body cameras if you use them. A lot of them have the option for night vision and you may want to be careful turning that on because now you’re seeing a picture that your officer could not see, and that could open your agency up for some liability, because say this case goes to court. Your officer is on the stand and testifies what he or she saw and then the body cam footage comes up and it’s different. Well, that could just because if the body camera was shooting in night vision mode, we’ll be able to see a lot more than what the officer could see at the time and it would be hard to explain to a jury that the officer could not see what’s on the video. So, you might want to have night vision turned off so the camera only views what the officer can see.
Advancements in electronic control devices, such as tasers. The companies are always modifying them. I know there’s a big push for putting cameras in tasers now. It’s just things to be aware of. I’m just mentioning all these as things to be aware of, current technology. Also smartphones and tablets in lieu of computers. Computers are big and clunky, smartphones and tablets are small. I would recommend, if you’re using tablets in lieu of computers, to make sure that your officers are comfortable using them. For example, adding keyboards to them instead of just typing with the keyboard on the hand, because then you have to hold the tablet with one hand while you type with the other.
Now we’re going to get into some future technologies that are coming into law enforcement. How do we know that these are coming? Well, one way is to look at what other countries are doing. This example I’m going to show you, Chinese law enforcement has already implemented this technology. I’m just going to show you a brief, brief clip about this. Now, it’s just going to be very brief here, so if there’s some sort of … Here we go.
The security push in China is bringing reality closer to science fiction. In this mock up, a policeman on patrol wearing smart glasses can immediately recognize a suspicious passerby, who must now stop for identification. Using artificial intelligence, the glasses can scan details like car number plates or facial features, matching them in real time with a centralized blacklist. That, for many watching on …
All right, so that’s something that is coming, and a lot of this technology is going to go through the courts because we’re going to have a real good picture of everybody instantaneously. If we implement that kind of technology, it’s just going to bring up future questions. You know, is law enforcement being too watchful? Is Big Brother watching too much? Those are the kind of future questions that we’re going to run into moving forward. The first thing I want to talk about in future technology is drones. There’s some agencies that have already purchased drones and they’re waiting on legal to make sure that they’re okay to use them. Now, drones would be great for the replacement of a helicopter. I know in my agency, our agency was large enough to have a helicopter. The surrounding agencies were not.
But, imagine if drones are a lot cheaper than maintaining a helicopter and theoretically they could be replaced as a helicopter and you could follow suspects on the ground through not only one but even multiple drones, having multiple points of view, not just one. Another type of technology that hasn’t really been thought of too much, I haven’t really seen too many stories on this except for small drones. Small drones could be anywhere the size of like a Matchbox car or even smaller. This could be a real problem in the future because small drones are really tough to monitor. They don’t know where they are all the time. They could be anywhere. They could even commit crimes themselves. There’s even been some science fiction lately about that. These are type of things that we’re going to have to deal with and think about. I’m sure law enforcement could use small drones if that would be an advantage, but if anybody could use them then we may have some problems in the future.
All right, moving on to augmented reality. Google has Google Glass, Microsoft has a product called HoloLens. Basically what it does is when you wear these products, it generates an augmented reality in front of you. The vision of what you can see printed on the screen, different information, like the video I just showed you. And that video, I want to make sure that everybody understood that video. Sometimes the video, it doesn’t come through quite as well, but basically officers are able, as they walk out into the public, there’s future technology that you could automatically run people based on facial recognition. You could automatically run cars and license plates. I know that’s somewhat already done. There’s tow vehicles that have this technology. Even law enforcement has this technology currently, where it can automatically run cars in the street. But, it’s going to be exploited even more when you can wear that technology yourself and wherever you look it just has that technology.
All right, biometrics identification. Again, it’s just something, all this information is going to be stored and being able to brought up instantaneously, even more than it already is today. Speech to text is another technology that has a lot of advancement. I’m sure if you have a cell phone you could see that in certain technologies. Both Apple and Samsung, they both have great speech to text. But it’s going to be even better, where a lot of software and companies will be able to implement it right into your RMS, your CAD, and also other programs as well. GPS dispatch. Some agencies are already using this. I’m sure officers do not like this and supervisors may like this, but they could see where their units are at all times. The advantage of course, if a crime happens nearby, the dispatcher can dispatch the closest unit even if they’re out of their zone or territory. Fast response times to problems. And then, of course, web based software applications are always going to improved and generated in the future.
All right, now what is coming with technology? We don’t really know what the next thing is with technology, but what we do know is that information is going to have to be stored somewhere. It’s going to have to be either stored by your agency or your agency is going to have to outsource a third party agency to store that information for you. Let’s just go through a very brief history of data storage when it comes to that aspect.
We used to store data like this, on printed traditional documents. The pros of this, they cannot be mistakenly deleted. You cannot just mistakenly delete a whole file that’s sitting there that’s in your filing cabinet. Also, there’s no need for electricity or the internet. You could have a complete power outage, power failure, and you’re still going to be able to access your records. Now, the cons I think really outweigh the benefits. It takes up a lot of space. Let’s say there’s a major disaster that happens. They could be destroyed by water or fire major disaster. It’s really expensive to duplicate, both cost and human cost, where they have to go through them all and photocopy them, sort them, and then reorganize them and put them back in filing cabinets. It’s very labor intensive to find the information. You have to, again, pay more people to do that. And paper and ink deterioration. Over time, paper does deteriorate. You have to make sure the climate is correct to keep your hard copies in good condition.
Then we move on to the ’90s, and then the digital revolution happened. In the ’90s and early 2000s we had our digital documents. Basically, people started using computers to store all their information. Instead of putting everything in rooms, they could store everything on hard drives. This is when agencies brought in IT departments. The IT departments, they had their own servers that they maintained, and many do still to this day. Probably all agencies do that to this day. All the information was stored on drives. Quickly accessible information. The cons of this though? When computers came out, we all thought they were the greatest thing ever and then we started realizing the problems. If your electronic equipment went down, large data deleted mistakenly. Hard drives themselves were not reliable, they sometimes crash. Digital files can be deteriorated, be completely corrupted. And then, on top of that, there’s all the security concerns. Because information can be brought up quickly, that information can be exported very quickly as well, in a matter of seconds. So there was a lot of security concerns when everything went digital.
All right, I’m going to move on to the next phase, to where we are today. Now we’re getting to cloud based storage. Cloud based storage is the idea of having the internet always on. When you have the internet always on, you don’t have to store your information locally, you could store it remotely. What’s great about cloud storage is it could be accessed from anywhere. Now, my mother said to me not too long ago, she said to me Cory, I understand everything now is on the cloud. And I said yes, there’s a lot of things that are on the cloud. And she said Cory, but I have no idea what the cloud is. So, I thought that was funny. But, what is a cloud to begin with? The cloud are online servers. And when you store your information on the cloud, it’s not stored on one particular server, it’s stored on many different servers. That information is also redundant. So, say I have one server, something happens, a hard drive crashes, some natural disaster happens or some sort of disaster happens and that whole data center gets shut down. Well, your data is still in the cloud. Meaning it’s on other servers, maybe even miles away, depending on what kind of technology you’re using.
Again, the pros, no need for physical storage. Always accessible information. Data is backed up consistently. The data also lives in multiple areas. Employs that redundancy. Also today, security is a lot better than it used to be. We could encrypt data from your computer to the server and back again. So, if hacker were to intercept that information while the information was going back and forth, all they would receive is just garbage looking information. It wouldn’t mean anything to anybody. And it couldn’t even be deciphered by a computer unless you have a certain code that deciphers that information. That’s what that encrypted security is. Now, of course, the biggest con of this is you need an internet connection that’s somewhat always on. But, as we progress in the future, that’s becoming less of an issue. Nowadays, with cell phone technology, even if you get off a wifi router, you’re still on the internet with your cell phone. And there’s a lot of technology coming out that’s making that not just more accessible but even ridiculously fast, that we’re coming up to.
All right, and just a few notes here about cloud computing as it relates to law enforcement. You want to make sure if you’re going to implement a type of cloud storage, there’s a lot of companies out there that do this type of implementation, however most companies out there do commercial cloud storage. So, any company that needs cloud storage. They will take your money and they will store your information, and they will do it securely. However, when we’re talking about law enforcement data storage, you want to make sure that it’s a government cloud, and there’s a lot of services out there for this. The main ones, Microsoft has a product, Amazon has a product. Microsoft is Azure Government, Amazon web services is Amazon Web Services Government. You want to make sure that the cloud storage that you employ has the security standards that your agency or your state needs. I’m talking about sometimes they need CGS compliance. You just want to look into that, just to make sure that the cloud that you’re putting your information on will be able to hold up in court in case this information comes up.
All right, so now I’m going to see if we have any questions. If you have any questions right now, go ahead and type them into the box. This is pretty much the end of the presentation. I just want to put on this screen as we do this. Our next webinar is going to come out. Come join us. It’s going to be July 25, 2019, 11:00 AM Eastern time. As soon as this webinar is over, you’ll be able to go onto leftasystems.org/webinar and sign up for the next one. Again, the intention with these webinars is to put out valuable information for your agency. Hopefully you’ve found something valuable within this presentation. If I could get just a raise of hands if you found something, maybe a nugget of information from this webinar, that you find valuable. Would you mind just raising your hand real quick? Awesome. Awesome. Thank you. And thank you for joining us. We got a bunch of hands raised. I want to thank you all. Thank you very much for joining us. Woops, this was in the way. Again, if you found value in this webinar, please come back to the next one.
One last slide I have. There’s just a little bit here about our company, but if you would like to contact me, you have any questions for me specifically, again we talk to agencies all over the country and sometimes agencies reach out to us and say hey, I just want to understand how other agencies are doing it. It’s really cool that we are in communication with so many agencies at so many different times and we get to see the trends that are happening and how other agencies are taking care of things. We could definitely help you and probably give you some valuable information that way. Again, you could email me. There’s my email address on the screen. Let me just go through the chat window here and see if we have anything else.
All right, I just want to talk about LEFTA Systems real quick. LEFTA Systems is a law enforcement software company. We were founded in 2006 and 300 agencies are using our software across the US right now. We have field training, use of force, employee training records management, field investigative reporting, profiling, immigration investigation and internal affairs investigation, vehicle pursuit, employee complaints, and employee traffic crash reporting software. Our agency is a law enforcement software company. I want to thank you all for joining us today. Again, if you have any questions, feel free to reach out to us. That will conclude this webinar. Thank you again. Please take care.”