Mooresville Police Commission adopts SOP for carotid control hold and new emergency-response policy

Mooresville, Ind. — The Mooresville Police Commission voted Aug. 21 to adopt two new standard operating procedures: SOP 29.01, authorizing a carotid (vascular neck) control hold for officers who have received specific training, and a separate emergency-response SOP that defines when officers may use lights and sirens during responses.

The new SOP 29.01—split out rather than changing the state-provided use-of-force SOP—was presented by the police chief as an option limited to officers who have completed the training. “It’s not a choke that involves anything of the airway,” the chief said, describing the technique as pressure on both sides of the neck that “basically slows down the blood to the brain, the circulatory system, and it just makes people pass out, and then you take a minute.” The chief and other commissioners emphasized it is a tool, not a default tactic, for subjects actively resisting.

Commissioner Charles raised concerns about altering the use-of-force policy supplied by the Law Enforcement Training Board (LETB). Charles said the LETB policy “does not allow for changes” and recommended keeping the LETB-issued document intact. The commission agreed to create a separate SOP numbered 29.01 containing the chief’s definitions and procedural language so the original LETB SOP (29) remains unchanged.

The emergency-response SOP sets parameters for emergency driving (lights and siren), nonemergency driving and “lights-only” silent responses. The chief told the commission that, under state code referenced in the draft, emergency driving requires both lights and an audible signal and should be used when there is a possible threat to life or violence. He said dispatch does not determine whether a response is emergency; officers are expected to exercise judgment, and the policy lists call types that typically authorize an emergency response. The chief also said fire/EMS policies can affect decisions: because fire responds emergently to some unknown-accident calls, the department discussed when police should respond emergency as well.

Commission action and votes

The commission requested a motion to approve SOP 29.01; a motion and second were made and the chair called for a voice vote. The minutes record a voice vote of “Aye” and the motion was approved. Later in the meeting the commission took a separate motion to approve the emergency-response SOP; that motion also passed on a voice vote recorded as “Aye.” The minutes do not record individual yes/no votes or a roll-call tally.

Key implementation details and limits

- SOP 29.01 is limited to officers who have completed the carotid-control training. The chief estimated “3 or 4” officers had prior training; some officers have used the technique previously because of prior training, but the SOP makes it an authorized, documented option only for trained personnel. - The commission and the chief emphasized the technique is for subjects who are actively resisting, not for a subject simply attempting to flee. - The commission opted for a separate SOP rather than altering the LETB-provided use-of-force policy, citing uncertainty in LETB guidance and case law. - The emergency-response SOP defines emergent driving as lights and siren; “lights-only” silent runs (for example, alarm responses) are handled under a different SOP.

Why this matters

The two SOPs change department guidance on two consequential operational areas: a specific use-of-force technique and when officers may operate with emergency equipment. Both topics have implications for training, liability and public-safety outcomes. The commission’s choice to keep the LETB-issued use-of-force policy intact while adding a separate SOP preserves the state-provided text in department files while documenting the local allowance for a carotid control hold for trained officers.

The commission did not provide a timeline in the meeting for broader officer training or a public release of the new SOP texts; the chief said he will renumber and file the documents in the department’s SOP system and distribute the text he provided to the commission.