Post Report

MAPLE Impacts Provisions On Drinking While On Duty

On March 19, 2026, a use of force policy subcommittee presented their recommendations to the full POST Commission. The commission adopted the recommendations establishing a new state standard for use of force by police.  It was adopted on a 7 yes 2 absent vote.  Ironically, it was Commissioners Baker and Calderone, two of the three police representatives on the commission, who did not record a vote, because they were absent from the meeting.             

The new standard reiterates the principles established in Graham vs Connor that all use of force incidents must be judged from the perspective of the police officer and not in hindsight.   Force used must be “objectively reasonable” in light of the “totality of the circumstances”.  To illustrate the scope of the standard,  Annie Lee, the standards coordinator for POST, explained a recent 2025 Supreme Court ruling in “Barnes vs Felix”.    This was a case in which a Texas law enforcement officer stopped a man for a traffic violation.  During the interaction that occurred between the officer and the operator, the operator tried to drive away.  The officer jumped on the hood of the car ordering the man to stop and he subsequently shot the operator for failing to stop.  The officer was spread eagle on the car’s hood at the time.  The court rejected the “reasonableness” argument in that case.     

The new POST standard rejected several recommendations from the public. These included: offering a more specific  definition of mental illness; addressing the issue of juveniles more explicitly and making it mandatory to call to a SWAT team in all use of force situations.  POST also rejected a recommendation to require that body worn cameras be activated before a shooting.                 

POST rejected several recommendations from MAPLE.  These would have asserted a responsibility for police officers to take action to terminate an active shooter, and require notice be given to those planning demonstrations of the unlawful assembly law under MGL 269 Section1.  POST also rejected a more restricted standard for justifying interventions between police officers at civil disturbances.  MAPLE took the position that the purpose of noncommissioned officers at civil disturbances is to keep officers in line.  We added that putting the onus on individual officers to intervene on excessive force issues at a civil disturbance threatens unit cohesion and general confusion.  Commissioner Ed Chrispin, though voting yes for the standard, stated that more discussion on the duty to intervene was necessary as did Commissioner Clyde Tally.             

POST also rejected a recommendation by MAPLE to permit chokeholds in situations involving direct threats to an officer’s safety.  Interestingly,  Annie Lee acknowledged in her comments, that there was no prohibition against using a chokehold for personal self- defense.  The prohibition in the law pertains to  the use of chokeholds as an authorized control method only.             

Where MAPLE had its most significant impact was with a standard that banned consumption of alcohol by officers who are armed  and on duty.  We made the case that is was necessary at times for officers working under cover to be able to drink because much criminal planning is done in a barroom.  Instituting this standard would provide a method that criminals could use for identifying undercover officers.  Commissioner Bluestone said that the standard should be modified andsuggested that the blood alcohol content for OUI be the standard.   This provision was held for more work.