A few weeks ago, an elderly man drove up to a police station, engaged the police officer in conversation, and pulled a gun. Repeatedly ignoring demands to drop the weapon – which was continuously pointed at the cop – he was shot dead by backup officers. Police brutality? Excessive force? Something else?
Suicide-by-cop is the term used by police officers for incidents in which an individual, bent on killing himself, forces the police to use deadly force.” - Department of Justice:
Only 25-30% of suicides are accompanied by a note. Like the mythical Richard Cory [1], the rest want an explanation. However, one type of suicide occurring in 11% of cases of officer-involved shootings might provide additional clues as to the victim’s motivation. It’s called “suicide-by-cop.” In this scenario, the suicide manifests as an apparently mentally ill person with or without previously expressed suicidal intentions presenting an immediate threat to himself, the public, or the police, wielding a weapon pointed at the cop or hostage. The situation compels urgent action by law enforcement officers to prevent harm to themselves or others, often entailing shooting and killing the “would-be” suicide in the process. Here, the suicidal person provokes the police to do their “dirty work, pulling the trigger” that kills them by forcing authorities to shoot them in self-defense or to protect the public.
Some researchers believe that such people aim their behavior toward authorities or the public with the goal. This may be a passive-aggressive vendetta against authority figures; however, psychologists offer other reasons. In some cases, someone in the throes or aftermath of committing a crime is pursued by the police and simply decides they would rather die than be arrested. Concluding that life is not worth living if they are incarcerated, they choose to provoke (or allow) the police to kill them. In other cases, the suicides wish to circumvent the shame or stigma of suicide (or wish to be buried in consecrated ground).
“Psychologists believe people who commit suicide-by-cop are psychiatrically ill and choose this method in order to avoid the blame and stigma of causing their own death. “
This last explanation rings hollow to me. I would vote that perhaps cowardice at pulling the trigger themselves or hostility toward authorities (pinning the blame on the hated authority figure) would make more logical sense as the motivating factor. However, there is another possibility, and identifying this factor may make a difference – at least in protecting the mental health of our law enforcement personnel- by verifying that the officer bears no responsibility.
The Madness is Not in the Means
Life insurance is written to exclude suicides. This provision often confounds those contemplating ending their life yet simultaneously seeking to memorialize their existence with some financial forget-me-not.
Forensic insurance examiners are carefully trained to recognize a homicide, an accident, or a deliberate effort to side-step the suicide exclusion. Mostly, uncertainties are resolved against the claimants or end up in court. To be sure, most of those who instigate “suicide-by-cop” don’t have insurance considerations at stake, but it’s a possibility that has, to my knowledge, not been investigated. Staging a death so it looks like a homicide rather than a suicide would surely be a creative and highly plausible manner to bypass the exclusion.
Prevention
Police officers are given training to address these situations, but when harm appears imminent or danger to the public is palpable (including hostage-taking), sadly, these shoot-outs often cannot be avoided. The problem society faces is disentangling the perceived “trigger-happy” cop from the mentally impaired victim whose unspoken motive is to provoke the police.
Included in the training is the identification of scenarios that portend suicide but do not require a police response. These may include situations where the suspect sets a deadline for his death, talks about dead people as if they were still alive, discusses the disposition of their worldly goods, creates a confrontational negotiating posture, announces their intention to die, or makes biblical references, particularly to the Book of Revelations and resurrection. Other situations are more difficult to assess, as suspects desiring to die will fire live ammunition, even killing people before being killed themselves, putting the investigating officer in mortal and moral quandary.
Death and Consequences
Even when police pull the trigger, in many instances, the death is considered suicide by medical researchers. However, the incident still triggers a full homicide investigation of the shooting officer’s actions. Officers involved in these incidents often suffer psychological symptoms similar to posttraumatic stress disorder – even when their actions saved the lives of others. This type of stress may be instrumental in contributing to the “psychological distress, such as depression and anxiety” in law enforcement personnel, recently reported as high as 44%, culminating in taking their own lives. Compared to the general population, law enforcement officers face a 54% higher risk of death by suicide.
There is a conundrum in sorting out cases where a suicidal individual deliberately intends to provoke a lethal response from a law enforcement officer versus cases where the police have abused their power, inappropriately killing a civilian.
The quandary is illustrated by a 2003 case in Great Britain. There, Michael Malsbury attacked his wife with a rolling pin and barricaded himself in his house. During the 10-hour armed siege, Malsbury declared he had a powerful Glock (he didn’t) and then announced to the police, "Better get your guns out lads, I'm coming out," firing a shot in the direction of officers. Police sharpshooters killed him. Notwithstanding the boxes of bullets found in the house and two suicide notes Malsbury had written, the inquest jury found that Malsbury killed himself. The verdict was condemned as "perverse and dangerous" and a dangerous precedent. As Deborah Coles, co-director of Inquest, an advocacy group for families of those who die in police custody, said,
"Common sense says this was not suicide. He was shot dead by the police. How can that be suicide? It might well be lawful killing, but it was not suicide. Suicide by cop could be a verdict used by police to deflect attention away from the lawfulness of their actions."
The intersection of mental illness, suicidal intent, and police response creates a tragic and often legally fraught scenario — one where the line between self-destruction and excessive force blurs. While some individuals provoke law enforcement into lethal action as a means to end their own lives, well earning the appellation “suicide by cop,” others fall into a gray area where their intent remains uncertain. The consequences extend beyond the victim, leaving lasting psychological scars on officers and fueling public debates over police brutality.
Recognizing and addressing the complexities of suicide by cop is not just a matter of forensic classification; it’s a critical issue that demands improved crisis intervention training, mental health resources, and a more nuanced understanding of both law enforcement and psychiatric care. Without these efforts, the cycle of tragedy, controversy, and institutional mistrust will only continue.
[1] Richard Cory By Edwin Arlington Robinson
Whenever Richard Cory went down town,
We people on the pavement looked at him:
He was a gentleman from sole to crown,
Clean favored, and imperially slim.
And he was always quietly arrayed,
And he was always human when he talked;
But still he fluttered pulses when he said,
"Good-morning," and he glittered when he walked.
And he was rich—yes, richer than a king—
And admirably schooled in every grace:
In fine, we thought that he was everything
To make us wish that we were in his place.
So on we worked, and waited for the light,
And went without the meat, and cursed the bread;
And Richard Cory, one calm summer night,
Went home and put a bullet through his head.
