Use of Force and the Mentally Disturbed: Lessons from a California Shooting Case
Learn how a California court ruling on the shooting of a mentally disturbed woman impacts church security teams, use-of-force policies, and training decisions.
Case Synopsis
County of Nevada v. Superior Court (2025): Summary of Events and Legal Ruling
On February 4, 2021, two deputies with the Nevada County Sheriff’s Department responded to multiple 911 calls about a woman acting erratically while walking along a cold road with two small children. Callers reported she was scared, confused, talking about being followed, and saying someone was hurting her kids. Deputies located the woman, Ariella Sage Crawford, walking with the children near Alta Sierra Drive.
Deputy #1 approached on foot and attempted to speak with Crawford. She ignored him. When Deputy #2 arrived, both deputies tried to de-escalate the situation verbally. Without warning, Crawford turned to face them, unsheathed a knife, and accused them of harming her children. Deputy #1 drew his firearm to low ready. Deputy #2 held a Taser in-hand but not aimed.
Crawford began shouting and making paranoid statements, raising her voice and gesturing with the knife. She moved toward Deputy #1 repeatedly. The deputies maintained distance, with Deputy #1 backing up and Deputy #2 maneuvering around the patrol car. One of the children physically tried to stop Crawford at one point, further complicating the threat dynamic.
As the deputies attempted to calm her, Crawford suddenly turned and charged Deputy #2 with the knife raised. He deployed the Taser, but it had no effect. As she continued to pursue him into the street, Deputy #1, observing the imminent threat, fired a single shot from behind, striking and killing Crawford. The entire event unfolded in under two minutes.
The children, through a guardian, filed a civil lawsuit under California’s Bane Civil Rights Act and for wrongful death and emotional distress. The trial court dismissed the case against Deputy #1, finding his shooting justified, but allowed the suit against Deputy #2 and the County of Nevada to proceed—arguing that closing distance and deploying a Taser may have been unreasonable. The county appealed.
In May 2025, the California Third District Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Deputy #2 and the county, reversing the trial court. The court held:
Deadly force was justified under the totality of the circumstances.
Attempting to tase Crawford was reasonable and done to protect a fellow deputy.
Officers are not required to warn before using a Taser when time and safety don’t permit it.
There was no triable issue for a jury to consider—summary judgment was proper.
This decision reinforces several legal principles relevant not just to police, but to armed or trained church safety teams—especially those that operate in high-risk ministry environments or respond to threats involving mental health crises and weapons.
Watch the Body Cam Video (VERY GRAPHIC)
Only watch this if you have a strong stomach. It’s the kids that will get you in this one.
Legal Analysis and Church Security Implications
The County of Nevada v. Superior Court decision is binding in the state of California under the Third District Court of Appeal. While not binding in other states, the reasoning and precedent may still influence courts and legal counsel elsewhere, particularly in the western U.S. and in civil lawsuits involving similar fact patterns.
Although the case involved two sheriff’s deputies, it holds practical and legal insight for church security teams—especially those that are armed, serve in a volunteer capacity, or may face emotionally disturbed individuals on church grounds.
1. Deadly Force Against a Knife-Wielding Individual Is Lawful If the Threat Is Immediate
The court reaffirmed the rule that deadly force is justified when someone armed with a knife is in close proximity and displaying intent and capability to attack. Crawford’s erratic behavior, weapon presentation, movement toward the deputies, and the ineffectiveness of the Taser all created a situation where deadly force was found to be objectively reasonable.
Church Implication: If your team faces a mentally unstable person with a weapon—especially one closing distance on a team member or congregant—you may be legally justified in using deadly force. The mental illness factor does not shield a person from the consequences of threatening others with lethal force. What matters is whether they pose an imminent threat at the time.
2. Pre-Shooting Conduct Must Be Reasonable—Not Perfect
The plaintiff’s argument in this case centered on Deputy #2’s decision to close the distance and attempt to use a Taser. The court disagreed, ruling that Deputy #2’s actions were reasonable given his belief that Crawford was moving to stab Deputy #1, and he could no longer see or protect his partner from his previous position.
Church Implication: If you're involved in a use-of-force incident, what you did leading up to it will be examined. This includes movement, communication, attempts to de-escalate, and positioning. Your actions don’t have to be perfect—just within the range of what a reasonable person with your training would have done in the moment.
This reinforces the importance of documenting training and scenario drills. If your only plan is to react in the moment, you’re vulnerable legally and tactically. If you’ve trained and can articulate your decision-making, you’re in a much stronger position.
3. Intermediate Weapons Strengthen Legal Defense—Even When They Fail
One of the strongest points in favor of the deputies was that they attempted to use less-lethal force first. Even though the Taser failed, the court saw this as evidence that they tried to resolve the incident without deadly force.
Church Implication: Most church teams don’t carry intermediate weapons like Tasers or OC spray. This is a gap. If all you have is a firearm, you're jumping from verbal commands straight to lethal force.
Courts look at whether you had other means available. Pepper spray is inexpensive, effective, and easy to deploy at close range. You may never use it on someone with a knife, but simply having it adds credibility to your use-of-force continuum.
If your church insurance provider or board resists authorizing non-lethal options, this case is a clear example of how lacking tools limits your team’s flexibility and increases liability exposure.
4. Children Present at the Scene Do Not Override the Right to Defend Life
The presence of Crawford’s children made the incident more traumatic, but not illegal. The court acknowledged the tragedy but emphasized that the deputies still acted lawfully in defending themselves and each other.
Church Implication: Many incidents—whether domestic violence, mental breakdowns, or custody disputes—will happen around children. Your team must be trained to consider backdrop, maintain spatial control, and account for crossfire without hesitating to act when someone is about to be stabbed or killed.
It’s also worth incorporating family-based scenarios into training: violent or suicidal individuals holding children, blocking exits, or creating chaos in nurseries and Sunday school areas. Your team must be mentally and tactically prepared for this.
5. No Warning Required Before Taser Use in Rapid, Evolving Situations
Some argue that officers should always give a warning before deploying any force. The court here was clear: warnings are preferred, but when events are moving quickly and the threat is imminent, failure to warn is not unconstitutional or unreasonable.
Church Implication: Most church teams won’t be using a Taser, so this point may seem irrelevant—but it reinforces the principle of urgency. If time, distance, and safety don’t allow for a perfect verbal protocol, that’s okay under the law—as long as your actions are justified based on the threat.
raining Recommendations for Church Security Teams
The County of Nevada v. Superior Court decision underscores the need for practical, documented, and scenario-based training. While the case involved deputies, the principles apply directly to armed or unarmed church safety teams facing threats from emotionally unstable individuals, edged weapons, and unpredictable dynamics with children nearby.
This isn’t theory. This is real-world use of force—and your team must be ready for it.
1. Scenario-Based Use of Force Training Must Be Non-Negotiable
The incident unfolded in under two minutes. Verbal commands failed. A Taser failed. Deadly force became necessary. That’s the kind of compressed timeline church teams must be ready for—and the only way to prepare is through realistic training under stress.
Application: Use this case as a training scenario. Walk your team through:
Initial approach to a disturbed person
Weapon presentation and recognition
Safe communication under emotional duress
Tactical positioning and containment
Determining when deadly force is justified
Incident command decisions and call-outs during chaos
Managing bystanders or children in the backdrop
This can be done with dry runs, roleplay, or structured reality-based training. Document each session.
2. Train for Threat Assessment, Not Diagnosis
The woman in this case was clearly mentally disturbed. But the deputies didn’t need to be mental health professionals. They only needed to ask:
Does this person have the intent, means, and opportunity to cause harm?
That’s the threat triangle. Not “Is she ill?” or “What’s her diagnosis?”
Application: Teach your team to assess behavior, not background.
Someone ranting about God, holding a weapon, and advancing? That’s a threat.
If they’re yelling nonsense but sitting on a bench? That’s not a threat.
Train your team to observe, verbalize, assess, and act—not hesitate trying to diagnose.
3. Intermediate Weapons Matter—Even If You Never Use Them
Tasers, batons, and OC spray exist for one reason: to give trained individuals options between shouting and shooting. The fact that a Taser was used—even unsuccessfully—gave weight to the court’s decision to dismiss the lawsuit.
Application: Most church teams are reluctant to carry intermediate weapons. That needs to change.
A $20 can of pepper spray can:
Stop an attack
Back up verbal commands
Show in court that you tried something before going to deadly force
If your church won't authorize Tasers or sprays, at least train and prepare for defensive alternatives. Document these limitations in your policy, so you're covered legally if a higher level of force is needed due to lack of options.
My Preferred Brand of Pepper Spray
Click here to get my preferred can of pepper spray.
4. Children Must Be Part of Your Use-of-Force Planning
The most emotionally charged part of this case wasn’t the weapon—it was the presence of children. The deputies were surrounded by kids who were screaming, intervening, and physically stepping between the suspect and the officers.
Application: Many church security incidents—especially involving custody disputes, domestic violence, or mental health—will occur in front of or involving children.
Training recommendations:
Run drills where children are present or simulated (e.g., cardboard cutouts, volunteers)
Practice positioning to shield kids without creating unsafe backstops
Train on how to give clear verbal direction to children under stress
You don’t want your first exposure to this to be live.
5. Verbal Warnings Are Important, but Timing Is Critical
The court ruled that a warning before tasing wasn’t required because events were moving too fast. This applies more broadly to other force decisions too.
Application: Your policy and training should state that verbal warnings are preferred, but not always possible or safe.
Don’t allow a hesitation mindset to creep in because you’re worried about phrasing a perfect command under pressure. If time allows—warn. If it doesn’t—act lawfully and decisively based on what the threat demands.
6. Train for Court, Not Just for the Incident
This case teaches us that courts care about what you did before, during, and after the force was used. Training and policy should reflect that.
Application:
Maintain a clear, written use-of-force policy (Christian Warrior Training offers free samples)
Train regularly on force options, verbal de-escalation, and legal standards
Document training completion for each team member
Assign a team member (preferably a law enforcement veteran) to serve as an incident recorder or debriefer
If something ever happens, your church will be asked:
Did you prepare these volunteers for this moment?
Make sure the answer is: Yes. Here’s the proof.
Biblical Application — A Shepherd’s Duty Under Threat
For Christian safety teams, the issue of using force isn’t just legal or tactical—it’s deeply spiritual. Every decision, every moment of readiness, and every act of defense must be anchored in Scripture and submitted to God’s authority.
The County of Nevada v. Superior Court case reminds us of the moral weight that comes with standing between danger and the innocent. In this case, two deputies faced a mentally unstable woman with a knife, her children beside her, and the responsibility to protect one another and the community. It’s a tragic but vivid picture of the role church defenders may one day face.
📖 John 10:12–13 — “The Hired Hand Runs Away”
“The hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away… He runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.”
This is foundational to church security. You are not a hired hand. You’re a shepherd under the Great Shepherd, tasked with protection, not passivity. The deputies in the case didn’t retreat when threatened—they acted. That’s the model church teams must emulate.
📖 Nehemiah 4:14 — “Fight for Your Families”
“Don’t be afraid of them. Remember the Lord, who is great and awesome, and fight for your families, your sons and your daughters, your wives and your homes.”
This verse is a call to courageous, God-centered defense. It’s not about vengeance or bravado. It’s about standing in the gap when evil threatens to enter the gates of the church—literally or spiritually.
If a threat like Crawford ever entered your children’s wing, or approached your worship team with a weapon, this verse becomes living doctrine.
📖 Proverbs 27:12 — “The Prudent See Danger and Take Refuge”
“The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and suffer for it.”
This case illustrates that discernment saves lives. The deputies saw the threat escalating and took proactive steps to contain and stop it. That is the very heart of preparedness. Christian watchmen don’t wait until the knife is in the air—they act when danger emerges on the horizon.
📖 Psalm 82:4 — “Rescue the Weak and Needy”
“Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”
The children in this incident were surrounded by confusion, delusion, and a weapon. The court made the right call, but the greater question is: Who was going to protect the innocent? Scripture demands that we step into that role, even when others shrink back.
✝️ Discernment and Restraint: A Christian Warrior's Balance
Church security isn’t about responding with force as a first option—it’s about having the spiritual maturity to discern when restraint glorifies God and when force is necessary to prevent evil.
This case offers a sobering reminder: defending the flock may one day mean making a life-or-death decision with children present, under immense pressure, in less than two minutes. That doesn’t make you a vigilante. That makes you a servant-protector who fears God more than man.
Final Thoughts — Prepare Now or Pay Later
The County of Nevada v. Superior Court decision doesn’t just clarify legal standards for law enforcement—it issues a wake-up call for church security teams across the country.
It confirms what many already know but few prepare for:
A threat can escalate in seconds.
The presence of children doesn’t stop it.
And if your only tool is a gun, your options are limited.
Church safety ministries must shift from being reactive volunteers to trained defenders grounded in law, Scripture, and sound tactics.
✅ Action Items for Your Team:
Review your current use-of-force policy. If you don’t have one, create one immediately.
Incorporate intermediate weapons like OC spray or defensive tools if legally allowed.
Start running scenario-based drills with time constraints, children present, and escalating threats.
Take free training like the one available at ChristianWarriorTraining.com. Go to the Training tab and select the Use of Force course.
Document every training session. It won’t just help your team perform better—it may one day help defend your actions in court.
You don’t get to decide when evil shows up. You only get to decide how prepared you’ll be when it does.
As defenders of the flock, you must be ready—not just tactically, but spiritually. Because our calling is not just to survive the threat, but to reflect the righteous strength of Christ as we do it.
Keith, This is an excellent article, well worth sharing with your followers. As someone who regularly provides expert opinions for attorneys and testifies in use-of-force cases, I find your analysis both accurate and profoundly relevant. The balance you've struck between operational realities and legal implications is commendable. Your insights speak directly to the staff and volunteers who often face rapid, high-risk decisions under immense pressure.
Your continued focus on safety, risk management, and liability awareness is making a meaningful impact in this critical area. Keep up the outstanding work! Your contributions are helping shape a safer and more informed community. Jeff
Another great article and update for church security teams. This is such a key comment: "Most church teams don’t carry intermediate weapons like Tasers or OC spray".
Please adopt, train, and authorize us to use less than deadly force Keith. We need immediate action and adoption of this at our church. The more I serve, the less I feel committed to full out lethal force when less than lethal is appropriate and available. Thank you for your service!