by Bill Lewis II
In 2011, I wrote an article titled “The K9 Announcement: Can you prove you gave one?” based on a case in federal court that I had assisted in successfully defending. I updated that article in 2017, 2020 and 2022. Instead of updating that article again, I have decided to expand on it with this article.
Nowadays, in 2025, I believe there are four primary issues that K9 handlers must prioritize and consider before and after deploying their police dogs: 1) lawful authority to deploy, 2) proportionality, 3) time on a bite, and 4) K9 announcements. Yes, there are other issues and factors to consider, but I’m sticking with these four at the top of my current list and I’m going to revisit and expand upon the topic of announcements and warnings herein.
The catalyst for this article came recently while I was reading “Passing the Badge” by Blake Cordell. Blake is a police K9 handler in Oregon who attended one of my recent liability classes and he wrote a book containing short stories based on his actual experiences as both an officer and K9 handler.
In one chapter, Blake describes the tracking of a felony suspect in a heavily-wooded area and the announcements he gave. During the search, he gave the following announcement: “Police with a police dog! The area is going to be searched by a dog! If you are in the area you need to make yourself known! If you are in the area you need to yell out and come out with your hands up, open and empty!” He added, “I announced this several times, with no response.”
When I read the announcement, I said to myself “I like it” even though Blake should have included within the announcement the consequence for non-compliance, like “if you don’t come out and surrender, the police dog will be sent to find you and you may be bitten.” However, I liked the improvisation of his announcement beyond what verbiage is typically given – and sometimes not given at all.
I recall back in 2017 when I first heard “make yourself known” recited within a K9 announcement. I thought that slight addition was outstanding because, whenever possible, handlers should try to establish verbal contact with a suspect (or innocent person within a search area) either before, during or after deployment. The announcement is often the first opportunity to engage a suspect in conversation to resolve a situation. If a handler can establish verbal contact with the suspect, it often negates the infamous “I didn’t hear your announcement” selective-hearing defense.
The purpose of an announcement is to primarily elicit a surrender and warn of the potential consequence for not surrendering. So, whatever a handler can include within the announcement being delivered beyond the standard policy requirements – authority, demand to surrender (with an exit), and potential consequence for non-compliance – should be considered and even practiced often at training sessions with various scenarios. “Last chance” and “final warning” are often added to encourage a surrender.
Being a handler is more than just physically working a police dog and following policies; it is just as important to develop good verbal communication skills with suspects and others on scene before and during deployment. Those skills include delivering announcements.
A handler’s ability to verbally communicate with suspects is essential. Handlers should be flexible and experienced enough to verbally adapt to the situations as necessary to be successful in their communications to resolve incidents. Not every suspect will comply – but handlers must make every reasonable attempt to de-escalate these situations and gain compliance. Handlers must be patient enough to work through the challenges they may encounter with applicable announcements. Being “talkative” is easier for some handlers than others – but knowing what to say and how to say it is critical to resolve situations with clear directions and commands. And to be honest, I’ve seen quite a few handlers use very poor communications skills that were unsuccessful in resolving a deployment – announcements and otherwise.
Handlers should periodically review individually and/or as a training exercise with other handlers the body worn camera footage of prior deployments initiated by themselves and others and the verbal communication being used. Were the communications clear and understandable? Did the suspects appear to acknowledge commands? Were there attempts to de-escalate? Were there additional commands or instructions that could have been given to improve the situation and arrest? Were there unnecessary commands being given? Were the handler and backup deputies yelling, overlapping their commands and/or giving conflicting instructions? Did it sound like a coordinated effort? Can verbal communications be improved? Does our training address these communications?
In anticipation of a suspect stating they did not hear the announcements or other commands; a handler should make attempts to “test” the suspect’s hearing during an incident by engaging in conversations at a distance. For example, if the dog is on a bite and the handler is giving commands for compliance and the suspect is being compliant with those verbal commands, it should be noted later in the report and record the distance between suspect and handler. If a suspect can clearly hear commands while the dog is biting, it’s highly likely they heard the announcement before the bite.
After a suspect is taken into custody, particularly when the suspect was hiding or initially out of view of the handler, the location where the suspect was located or visually confirmed when the dog encountered the suspect should be noted in a photograph and the distance estimated (or measured) from that location to the handler’s location where announcements were last given. A hand-drawn sketch or diagram may also assist with the documentation as evidence.
Also, it is sometimes recommended to conduct an “audio reenactment” by placing an officer (wearing a body worn camera) at the location where the suspect first encountered the dog and record the handler repeating his announcement or making conversation at the same volume as the announcement from the spot where it was last given prior to the deployment of the dog to determine if an announcement was clearly audible from that distance – and report the distance.
Several years ago, I attended a tactical class being instructed by Jeff Meyer. Jeff is a retired handler from Colorado who now runs Police K9 Training, LLC, and hosts the Police K9 Training podcasts. In the class, Jeff suggested using something similar to “It would have been physically impossible for the suspect not to have heard my announcements” in a report when a suspect denies hearing the announcement(s) depending obviously on the environment and distance.
I liked Jeff’s suggestion, and I have endorsed that phrase since then in my liability and supervision classes. I used something similar in one K9 case I helped to successfully defend with the following where the suspect claimed he did not hear the announcement because he was asleep; “If [the Plaintiff] were not asleep, it would have been physically impossible for him to not have heard the announcements from the front door to his bedroom based on the distance as the sounds of his encounter with the police dog within his bedroom could be heard by the officers at the front door as noted in the body
worn camera video footage.”
Is it important for handlers to develop and practice clear verbal communications that might be used during a K9 deployment? Is it necessary to report the distance from a suspect to handler as part of a post-bite investigation regarding the ability of a suspect to hear announcements? Are tests and reenactments vital to assist in proving a suspect could hear announcements and commands prior to the use of force?
These questions are just a few that handlers should be asking themselves to determine the appropriate preparation and training that will be necessary to improve their performance, defend their work, and assist in delivering the best K9 announcement based on the situation.
Bill Lewis II © February 2025
Excerpts from “Passing the Badge” used with the author’s permission.
You can read more about K9 announcements:
Article: “The K9 Announcement: Can you prove you gave one” click here
Reasons We Get in Trouble: “Barking during announcements” click here
Reasons We Get in Trouble: “Failure to give a running announcement” click here
You can purchase “Passing the Badge” on Amazon in Kindle or paperback version by clicking here.
