Application of Force Statistics


This analysis will look at how and where force has been utilized as it relates to interactions with subjects by different Police Division units across the County. In this analysis the response to resistance, or use of force, was attributed to the unit that initiated the interaction or had the primary interaction that resulted in the application of force to better identify any trends within a particular unit.


Per Henrico Police policy, officers are directed to use only the force necessary to achieve the lawful objectives of the Division. An officer’s response to resistance should be objectively reasonable and he or she should consider the totality of the facts and circumstances of each incident, to include the severity of the crime, whether the suspect is posing an immediate threat or danger to himself or others, and whether the suspect is resisting arrest or attempting to evade.

Henrico Police develops and implements policies to govern the use of less-lethal weapons and ballistic shields use of force, the use of lethal force, and response to resistance, or, application of force. Every year Henrico Police conducts an analysis of use of force incidents, policies and reporting procedures.

Reporting Procedures

The review and analysis of all response to resistance/use of force reports falls under the purview of the Professional Standards Section. Documentation associated with each response to resistance instance are collected and forwarded to the Commander, Quality Assurance for review. The Commander, Quality Assurance reviews submitted reports, memorandums, photographs and body worn video footage for entry into its data tracking system. If the submitted incident complies with the Division’s policies and procedures, the packet is forwarded to the Commanding Officer, Professional Standards for review. If compliance with policy and procedures is questioned, the incident is forwarded to the Commander, Internal Affairs, after being entered into its data tracking system. Once the matter is examined by the Commander, Internal Affairs, it is forwarded to the Commanding Officer, Professional Standards for review. The Commanding Officer, Professional Standards forwards all completed packets to the affected member’s Deputy Chief for review. Once the Deputy Chief completes a review of the incident, it is sent back to the Commanding Officer, Professional Standards for retention as set forth by the Library of Virginia.

NOTE:  Division Policy Change in 2021 Affecting Data

The Police Division’s Response to Resistance After-Action Report captures officer reported data on the subject’s actions that created the need for an officer response.  The definitions for subjects’ actions were revised during a policy change to G-71, Response to Resistance, in June 2021.  Due to this revision an increase of Response to Resistance After-Action reports were created. The utilization of the precision immobilization technique (PIT) was also redefined on the use of force continuum with the Police Division policy in June, resulting in less applications Beginning June 21, 2021 subject actions were defined as passive, active, assaultive, life threatening/serious bodily injury, and other. Therefore, a direct correlation of data between calendar year 2021 and calendar year 2022 is not achievable for analysis, due to only six months of collected data (57.14% of 2021 encounters).

Incident Occurrence

During calendar year 2022, Henrico County Police Division officers responded to 131,571 calls for service and conducted 136,510 markouts. Officers reported only ninety-three (93) response to resistance incidents from the combined 268,081 calls for service and markouts, for an approximately 0.0347% response rate. 

Officers reported more interactions requiring a response to resistance during the afternoon and evening hours. More than 75% of officers’ response to resistance occurred between noon and midnight. The time periods between 12:01 a.m. and 6 a.m. reported 11.83%, while 6:01 a.m. to 12 p.m. reported 12.90% of responses to resistance.  

Response to resistance incidents had a relatively consistent disbursement from the second through the fourth quarter, with a quarterly high in the first quarter. January through March saw 35.48% of the response to resistance reported. April through June accounted for 20.43% and July through September accounted for 21.51% of incidents. The period from October through December concluded the year with 22.58% of reports.

Location and Police Sections

Patrol West accounted for 38.69% of response to resistance incidents, with Patrol Central reporting 27.74% of incidents, and Patrol South responding to 21.17% of the incidents. The response to resistance incidents by members of the School Services Unit was 2.19% of encounters.  Members of the Organized Crime Section were also involved in 2.19% of the resistance incidents. The Special Operations Group, consisting of the Emergency Services Unit (Emergency Response Team, Canine Unit, EOD, and Civil Disturbance Team) and the Traffic Enforcement Unit, accounted for 8.03% of response incidents. The Emergency Response Team deployed tactical munitions during two incidents during calendar year 2022.

Subject Demographics

The subjects involved in the response to resistance incidents varied in age from 13 to 56 years old, with an average age of 29 years old. Officers reported that male subjects were primarily involved in response to resistance instances, accounting for 82.83%, compared to 17.17% of female subjects requiring similar responses.

Subjects who identified as African American were involved in 66.67% of the response to resistance incidents, those identified as Caucasian represented 31.31% of the involved subjects, and subjects identified as Asian consisted of 2.02% of the reported incidents.

Force Used & Injuries

During 2022, officers utilized reactionary force in the following percentages for response to resistance incidents: Physical Force 70.20%; Taser 9.93%; OC Fogger 0.66%; Vehicular Precision Immobilization Technique (PIT) 0.00%; OC Spray 10.60%; Canine 0.00%; Baton 0.00%; Tactical Devices 1.32%; and vehicle containment 3.31%. Six officers utilized their firearms to neutralize armed encounters in three separate incidents, for a response rate of 3.97%.  

Response to resistance applications in 2022 resulted in documented injuries to involved subjects at a rate of 56.20%. Officers reported being injured at a rate of 29.20% during force applications. Injuries are defined for reporting purposes as pain/soreness, bruising/swelling, abrasions/lacerations, exposure to chemical agents or Taser barbs, fractures, stabbing/gunshot/puncture wounds, or other injuries not experienced prior to the encounter.

Reasons for Resistance & Application of Force

Individuals involved in these incidents indicated their resistance to the officers was based on being wanted 17.0% of the time, intoxicated 29.0% of the time, involved in a mental health crisis 9.0% of the time, and being scared 6.0% of the time. Individuals provided no reason for resisting in 30.0% of the incidents, and various other reasons were provided 9.0% of the time.  

The primary reason officers reported for the application of force during 2022 was the subject providing active resistance, 40.44%. Subjects being assaultive was the second most reported at 38.24%. Officers being confronted with serious bodily-injury or a life-threatening assault occurred in 9.56% of encounters. Passive resistance was experienced in 6.62% of encounters. Other types of incidents requiring a response, such as multiple individuals fighting or a need for tactical deployments, were presented in 5.15% of encounters.

Contact Us


7721 E. Parham Rd.
Henrico, VA 23294

Police Non-Emergency
(804) 501-5000
General Information
(804) 501-4800

Mailing Address
P. O. Box 90775
Henrico, VA 23273-0775

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn YouTube Instagram Pinterest

Social Media Policy 
Additional Contact Information
Email is not monitored 24 hours a day.
Please call 911 if you have an emergency.

Google Translate Icon