ARTICLE 04 · HANDCUFFING & CUSTODY
Handcuffing a person who continues to resist.
Handcuffing a cooperative person and handcuffing someone who continues to pull their arms away, rotate their body, attempt to stand up, or flee are physically different problems.
The distinction may seem obvious. But it has an important consequence for research: simply recording that a person was handcuffed does not describe what occurred before that point.
Before the first cuff was applied, there may have been verbal communication, an attempt to flee, physical resistance, a fall, physical restraint, involvement by additional officers, and multiple attempts to gain control of the arms.
Handcuffing may therefore be better understood as a phase in the transition from physical control to custody.
Being on the ground does not mean being under control. Being partially controlled does not mean being handcuffed.
THE TRANSITION
There are stages between resistance and custody.
In an incident involving resistance, handcuffing should not be analyzed separately from what occurred immediately beforehand.
The person may still retain enough mobility to pull an arm away, rotate, attempt to stand, reach toward the waist, or regain a position that allows continued resistance.
At the same time, the officer must convert temporary bodily control into a sufficiently stable condition to apply the restraint.
HOME OFFICE · UNITED KINGDOM
Compliant and non-compliant handcuffing are recorded separately.
The national police use-of-force data system for England and Wales provides an important example of how handcuffing can be recorded in greater detail.
The Home Office requires officers to record whether handcuffing was compliant or non-compliant.
The statistical guidance defines compliant handcuffing as handcuffing where the person does not resist and complies with the officer's requests.
Compliant handcuffing is still recorded as a use of force because it involves physical restraint and restriction of freedom of movement.
01 79%
of recorded restraint tactics in 2023/24 involved handcuffing.
02 65%
of handcuffing records were classified as compliant.
03 34%
were classified as non-compliant handcuffing.
These figures are useful not because they can be automatically transferred to Brazil, but because they demonstrate the value of not treating all handcuffing as a single category.
WHAT IS BEING OBSERVED?
âWas handcuffedâ is still an incomplete description.
To analyze a physical encounter, we need to know how restraint was achieved and the person's state of resistance at that point.
Different situations can produce exactly the same final outcome: a handcuffed person.
01
Cooperation
The person presents their hands and follows instructions without meaningful physical resistance.
02
Initial resistance
The person pulls their arms away, tenses their body, attempts to move away, or engages in other behavior that interferes with restraint.
03
Partial control
Some mobility has been reduced, but one or more extremities remain free.
04
First cuff applied
One wrist has been restrained, but the person's capacity for movement and resistance may not yet have ended.
05
Handcuffing completed
Both wrists have been restrained, but the person's overall condition and the status of the incident still require assessment.
06
Custody stabilized
Restraint has been established and the physical situation no longer requires an active struggle for control.
RESEARCH · UNITED STATES
Resistance changes the dynamics of control.
Studies funded by the National Institute of Justice â NIJ show a consistent relationship between increased resistance and increased risk of injury during use-of-force incidents.
In a multi-agency evaluation, physical force and hands-on control were associated with a greater risk of injury to both officers and citizens.
Higher levels of resistance were also associated with increased injury risk, particularly for officers.
This helps explain why the handcuffing phase deserves to be studied within the complete sequence of the incident.
When a person is still resisting, the officer is not simply applying a piece of equipment. The officer may still be attempting to establish the control necessary to use it.
7,512 ARRESTS
Not every arrest ends in the same way.
An NIJ-sponsored study examined 7,512 adult arrests across six jurisdictions in the United States.
The research found that officers used unarmed tactics in 15.8% of arrests. The most frequent action in this category was grabbing the person.
Weapons or other instruments were used by officers in 2.1% of arrests.
In 16.4% of arrests, according to the police records analyzed, the arrested person was not placed in handcuffs or another form of restraint.
The study also found higher levels of force when individuals used physical force to resist officers.
HANDCUFFS â PROCESS
The equipment is only one part of the problem.
The NIJ maintains specific technical standards for restraint devices used within the criminal justice system, including wrist and ankle restraints.
These standards address characteristics such as design, fit, performance, testing, and equipment documentation.
This answers an important question: does the device meet the technical requirements?
But there is another, operationally different question: how does an officer reach the physical condition necessary to apply it to someone who continues to resist?
REAL-WORLD INCIDENTS
What would we need to measure?
To understand handcuffing during physical resistance, the final outcome is not enough.
We need to observe the sequence.
01
Did the person cooperate with or resist the initial contact?
02
Did the person attempt to pull away or conceal their arms?
03
Did handcuffing begin while standing or on the ground?
04
How many officers were physically involved?
05
How much time elapsed between initial control and application of the first cuff?
06
How much time elapsed between the first and second cuff?
07
Did resistance continue after the first cuff was applied?
08
Was control lost during the attempt to handcuff the person?
09
At what point did any injury occur?
10
At what point could custody be considered effectively stabilized?
COMBATIVES RESEARCH · CS-001
From reviewing the evidence to studying real-world incidents.
CS-001 â COMBATIVES Physical Control Study
Observational Study of the Dynamics of Resistance and Physical Control in Police Encounters
In CS-001, handcuffing will be observed as part of the sequence of the incident, rather than merely as a final outcome.
Where the available evidence permits, the study will distinguish the state of resistance, the person's position, the degree of bodily control already established, access to the hands, application of the first cuff, completion of handcuffing, and the point at which custody can be considered stabilized.
It will also be relevant to record whether resistance continues during this transition and how many officers are actively involved in physical control.
NEXT VARIABLE
What happens when more officers become involved in the restraint?
An encounter involving one officer can quickly become an intervention involving two, three, or more officers.
This may increase the capacity available to control a person, but it also changes space, coordination, communication, and the number of bodies involved in the same physical action.
For this reason, simply counting how many officers were present may not be sufficient.
The more precise question is: how many officers were actually participating in physical control, at what point, and doing what?
SOURCES & REFERENCES
Handcuffing must be studied within the context of the incident.
Home Office · England and Wales
Police use of force statistics, England and Wales: April 2023 to March 2024. Official statistics distinguishing compliant and non-compliant handcuffing, body restraint, and ground restraint.
Home Office · User Guide to Police Use of Force Statistics
Methodological guidance defining the categories used in data collection, including compliant handcuffing, non-compliant handcuffing, ground restraint, and limb/body restraints.
Adams, Kenneth; Alpert, Geoffrey P.; Dunham, Roger G.; Garner, Joel H.; Greenfeld, Lawrence A.; Henrique, Mark A.; Maxwell, Christopher D.; Smith, Michael R.
Understanding the Use of Force By and Against the Police in Six Jurisdictions: Final Report. National Institute of Justice, 2002.
Smith, Michael R.; Kaminski, Robert J.; Alpert, Geoffrey P.; Fridell, Lorie A.; MacDonald, John; Kubu, Bruce
Multi-Method Evaluation of Police Use of Force Outcomes. National Institute of Justice, 2009.
National Institute of Justice
Criminal Justice Restraints Standard, NIJ Standard-1001.00, Revision A. 2020. Technical standard for restraints used by criminal justice professionals.
The studies and statistics cited here relate to specific jurisdictions, time periods, and reporting systems. Their findings should not be automatically transferred to the Brazilian context.
The external references presented on this page are used for literature review, comparison, and development of the CS-001 variables. They do not constitute original CS-001 data, findings, or results. References to researchers, institutions, and organizations are provided solely for documentary and research purposes and do not imply affiliation, certification, support, sponsorship, or institutional endorsement of COMBATIVESâą.
COMBATIVES RESEARCH · CS-001 · ARTICLE 04
Controlling the body does not yet mean controlling the hands.
Handcuffing appears to be a simple moment when we look only at the final outcome.
During physical resistance, however, it may lie at the center of the transition between mobility, partial control, and custody.
Observing this transition separately makes it possible to distinguish states that, in the final record of an incident, may appear only as âhandcuffed.â
Control the hands.
Apply the restraint.
Establish custody.