October 19, 2011
Robert A. Baker / The Post-Standard

Syracuse, NY -- Police in Syracuse and seven other police departments in New York are overusing and misusing Tasers and are inadequately trained in the use of the stun guns, the New York Civil Liberties Union said in a report to be released today.

Officers are using Tasers on people who are not a threat, targeting vulnerable areas of the body, administering excessive numbers of shocks and excessively long shocks, failing to give prior warnings, and using Tasers on vulnerable populations and a disproportionate number of people of color, the report states.

“If you look at Syracuse’s Taser policy, like most of the policies we reviewed, it does not comport with what experts say is appropriate use of Tasers,” Corey Stoughton, the report’s author, said.

The report calls for agencies to expand training beyond Taser International guidelines and for New York state to regulate and monitor Taser training and the use of force policies in departments statewide.

Syracuse Police Chief Frank Fowler declined to comment until he’s had a chance to read the report, which was embargoed until today.

The report, called “Taking Tasers Seriously: The Need for Better Regulation of Stun Guns in New York,” was based on 851 Taser-use reports filed by eight police departments across the state from 2005 to 2009. The departments are Syracuse, Albany, Glens Falls, Greece, Guilderland, Nassau County, Rochester and Saratoga Springs. The report, which The Post-Standard has received a copy of, will be released at 11 a.m. today.

The departments were picked for their size and each department has a liberties union office in the area, a spokeswoman said. The NYCLU also looked at the use-of-force policies and the Taser training procedures in the eight departments as well as the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office and the Suffolk County Police Department.

There are 350 law enforcement agencies that carry Tasers in New York, the report says. Two-hundred people, including a Central New York man, have died after being stunned by a Taser, according a U.S. Department of Justice statistic cited by the report. Tasers deliver up to 50,000 volts of electricity, either from probes that are shot from the gun or by placing the device directly against the skin of the target.

The report cited two Syracuse incident as examples of inappropriate Taser use:

•In 2009, a 15-year-old boy was hit by a Taser probe fired by a Syracuse police officer in an attempt to break up a fight at Fowler High School. The officer was aiming for another student. The NYCLU is representing the boy and his mother in a federal suit against the Syracuse Police Department. The family could not be reached for comment.

•A mentally ill man who was shocked at least a dozen times by three Syracuse officers using Tasers. Charges were never filed against the man, the NYCLU said. The NYCLU report calls the incident “particularly disturbing.”

According to Syracuse Police Department Taser-use reports on the incident, police were called a “mental complaint” Aug. 5, 2006, in the city. The 6-foot 2-inch, 260-pound, 53-year-old man refused officers’ orders to get on the floor. One officer noted that the man was “highly agitated” and “became combative” after a first use of the Taser had no effect. The report does not identify the man or say where the incident took place.

In the reports, the three officers gave their estimates on how many times they each used their Tasers: five to six times, three to six times and four to five times. After the Tasers were used, the man was admitted to a psychiatric hospital, the report states.

Although the advocacy group did not study cases involving the Onondaga Sheriff’s Office and the now-defunct Clay Police Department, incidents involving those agencies are singled out:

•The death in March 2008 of Christopher H. Jackson, who was pronounced dead after he was hit by a Taser used by a Clay police officer inside Jackson’s home in Norstar Apartments in Clay.

•The January 2009 use of a Taser on a mother in the town of Salina by Onondaga County sheriff’s Deputy Sean Andrews after the woman was pulled over in a traffic stop. The deputy pulled the woman from her van and used a Taser on her in front of her children. The incident made national news and the county settled a resulting lawsuit for $75,000.

The two cases were pulled from news stories because they are examples of the points the NYCLU is trying to make, Stoughten said.

In reviewing the Taser-use reports statewide, one statistic stood out, Stoughton said.

“Sixty percent of the reports had not documented information for using the Taser,” said Stoughton, a senior staff attorney with the NYCLU. “That’s crazy.”

Instead of being used as a non-lethal weapon of last resort, “you’re seeing Tasers being used as a pain compliance tool for people who are passively resisting or are restrained,” Stoughton said.

In Syracuse, 56 percent of the people involved in a Taser incident with Syracuse police were black. That is disproportionately high considering blacks make up 25 percent of the city’s population, the NYCLU said.

In Albany, where blacks make up 28 percent of the population, 68 percent of the people who were shocked were black. In Rochester, 48 percent of the people who were shocked were black. Blacks comprise 38 percent of that city’s population.

Each time a Taser is used, departments document the incident in a Taser-use form. While those forms are compiled, the NYCLU found “almost no police departments surveyed” required a review of the data to assess their Taser programs.

The Syracuse and Greece police departments “actively interfere with attempts to provide sufficient information” through the forms they use to report Taser use, the NYCLU said.

The form the Syracuse department uses to report Taser incidences has little room for officers to describe the incident, the NYCLU said. And, when the officers have room, they often neglect to justify why multiple cycles of Tasers on individuals were justified.

The report calls for greater oversight by the state on the use of Tasers and Taser training of police.

Misuse of stun guns is linked directly to inadequate use-of-force policies and inadequate training on the use of Tasers, according to the report. Most departments rely solely on training materials prepared by the manufacturer, Taser International, to train police, the report states.

“The training Taser International provides is, literally, how to operate the weapon,” Stoughton said. “It doesn’t cover appropriate use or the dangers of multiple and prolonged shocks.”

The U.S. Department of Justice and the Police Executive Research Forum both warn departments that they should not rely solely on the Taser training manual, “but it appears that’s what we do in New York State,” Stoughton said.

As Taser use rises, so do questions about risks of fatalities

September 4, 2011
James Halpin, FayObserver

The prongs from the Taser latched onto Martin Mitchell Sr.'s side, feeling like a knife had stabbed into his torso. Mitchell says he instantly went limp and started convulsing, nearly swallowing his tongue.

"My whole left side went numb," said Mitchell, 45, who was zapped Tuesday by a Cumberland County sheriff's deputy after allegedly assaulting his 16-year-old son outside Westover Middle School. "I couldn't even remember too much that happened, you understand. That's how bad that thing messed me up. I kept blinking in and out."

Mitchell, who disputes deputies' account that he was punching his son and that he ran at one of the intervening deputies, says he believes officers are increasingly likely to use Tasers because they are less lethal than firearms.

Industry watchdogs say Mitchell is not too far off the mark.

Katy Parker, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, said the group has seen an increase in Taser use throughout the state and the country, partly because Tasers have become ubiquitous in law enforcement. As a result, Tasers are increasingly being used in situations where officers would not have pulled a firearm - situations that in some cases don't require much force at all, she said.

"Tasers are weapons that can be very effective if you have a suspect who is putting the officer in danger or someone else at risk of harm," Parker said. "But they're often used in situations where an officer issues an order and the suspect doesn't comply in some way. It's kind of used as pain compliance. ... That's very dangerous."

Fayetteville police have been using Tasers since 1996, and numbers released last week show that their use has been on the rise in recent years. Officers deployed Tasers 20 times in 2007 and only 16 times in 2008. But they stunned suspects 31 times in 2009 and 60 times last year, according to police numbers. Police had used their Tasers 25 times so far through August of this year.

Fayetteville police spokesman Gavin MacRoberts said Taser usage has been on the rise for several reasons. There are more officers in the field than before because the department has been nearly fully staffed in recent years, and those officers are equipped with newer, smaller Tasers that they keep on their belts, rather than in their patrol cars, he said.

Police also have been encountering more incidents each year that meet the department's requirements for using Tasers, MacRoberts said. That has to do in part with police encountering an increasing number of suspects under the influence of drugs or alcohol or with mental-health problems, he said.

Last week, the department pulled all of its Taser M26 units off the streets for testing following the death of 56-year-old Michael Wade Evans, a political activist who died after he was stunned by police on Aug. 24. Police say he was acting erratically and trying to jump on vehicles on Eastern Boulevard.

Evans was pronounced dead at Cape Fear Valley Medical Center. His cause of death remains under investigation.

Cumberland deaths

Evans is the third person to die in Cumberland County after being hit with a stun gun.

In 2005, a Cumberland County deputy hit 52-year-old Richard McKinnon with a Taser. McKinnon, who had crashed his van after trying to elude deputies, was soaked in gasoline and burst into flames.

Otis C. Anderson, 36, died after Fayetteville police used a Taser to subdue him in January 2008. An autopsy found he had a lethal amount of cocaine in his system.

Earlier this year, Brandon Jolvon "Red" Bethea, a 24-year-old schizophrenic inmate at the Harnett County Jail, died after being shocked with a stun gun multiple times, according to an autopsy report. Deputies left the Fayetteville man lying unchecked on the floor for about 20 minutes before discovering that he was unconscious.

The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner concluded following the autopsy that his death was caused by "complications of conducted energy device application."

Eddie Caldwell Jr., executive vice president and general counsel of the North Carolina Sheriffs' Association, noted that many deaths associated with Tasers are not caused by the shock but rather by other causes, such as drug overdoses. He said his understanding is that Tasers are safe when used on healthy people and that many law enforcement agencies require officers who carry them to be shocked as part of the certification process so they understand the consequences.

Tasers can help reduce the likelihood of a struggle - and the risk of injury to officers and suspects - during an arrest of an aggressive person, he said.

"If you've got a suspect with a butcher knife coming at you, as an officer, you have the legal right to kill him. But if you've got a Taser, you can tase him and that's more humane and a much better outcome for the suspect," Caldwell said. "The Taser is a device that, as much as anything, helps the citizen who is at that point belligerent and uncooperative."

Taser International says it has sold more than a 500,000 stun guns to more than 16,000 law enforcement and military agencies around the world. The company maintains that its weapons protect life.

Tasers reduce excessive use-of-force complaints and save lives while reducing the risk of injuries to suspects and police, Taser spokesman Steve Tuttle said.

"Although no use-of-force device is risk free - including Taser technology - when used properly, medical and law enforcement experts have concluded that Taser technology is among the most effective response to resistance tools available," Tuttle said. "We continue to stand by the independent peer-reviewed medical studies that have shown that the Taser electronic-control devices are generally safe and effective."

Study

In May, the National Institute of Justice published a study of nearly 300 people who died after being shot with stun guns. In the vast majority of those cases, the devices "played no role in the death," according to the study, which reviewed 22 cases in which a stun gun was listed as a cause of death.

The study found that the risk of death when police deploy stun guns is less than 0.25 percent and says that "there is no conclusive medical evidence" that short-term electric shocks cause a high risk of serious injury or death in healthy, non-stressed and non-intoxicated people.

"However, there are groups who may be at risk for sudden death and those who are more vulnerable to physical insult," the report says. "These disparate but occasionally overlapping groups include small children, those with diseased hearts, the elderly and pregnant women."

It advised officers to avoid continuously shocking suspects for longer than 15 seconds but concluded that law enforcement officers do not need to refrain from using the devices to arrest uncooperative or combative subjects so long as the devices are used properly.

Amnesty International, which counts more than 460 deaths following Taser use since June 2001, responded by saying that the report underscores the need for strict limits on the use of shock weapons.

The group expressed concern that many of the study's nearly 300 people who died after being stunned did not appear to present a serious threat at the time they were shocked.

"Amnesty International believes that, apart from safety concerns, electro-shock weapons are particularly open to abuse as they are easy to use and they can inflict severe pain at the push of a button without leaving substantial marks," the group said in a statement.

Lawsuit

The ACLU's Parker pointed to the death of 17-year-old Darryl Wayne Turner - a teen who suffered a fatal arrhythmia in Charlotte in 2008 after being shocked for 37 seconds by a Taser X26 - as an example of how Tasers can be dangerous when police hold the trigger down.

Dr. Douglas Zipes, an electrophysiologist and former director of the Division of Cardiology at the Krannert Institute of Cardiology, filed an expert report in a civil lawsuit against Taser by Turner's family. In the report, Zipes cites studies on animals conducted before Turner's death that showed Tasers have the potential to produce heart arrhythmias and ventricular fibrillation in the hearts of pigs.

"The medical hazard of ECD shocks resulting in cardiac arrest was foreseeable prior to March 2008 and appropriate testing should have been done to investigate this possibility before placing these products on the market," Zipes wrote.

In September 2009, Taser issued new warnings indicating that the risk of ventricular fibrillation following shocks is 1 in 100,000, he wrote. A federal jury in July awarded Turner's family a $10 million judgment against Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Taser because of his death.

The day after that award, a 21-year-old man died after a Taser was used on him, prompting the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department to pull its Tasers from use pending a review.

Guidelines

Pat Norris, president of the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police, said the association recommends that departments have policies in place regarding Taser use, but does not itself issue guidelines.

Law enforcement in Cumberland County do have such policies. The Fayetteville Police Department's policy addresses when it is appropriate for officers to use their stun guns. Those situations include:

When officers need to control violent subjects when deadly force does not appear to be necessary.

When conventional tactics including verbal commands and firm grip control are ineffective.

When officers cannot safely get close to a subject.

To keep a person from committing suicide or hurting himself.

After Evans' death, however, the department said it plans to review its Taser policies and procedures, in addition to inspecting the weapons. Police say they have no reason to believe the Taser that was used in Evans' arrest malfunctioned, but they were pulling the devices for inspection as a precaution.

"In light of recent incidents in not only here, but in other jurisdictions as well, it was decided that it was the prudent and responsible action to ensure all Tasers are in proper working condition," said MacRoberts, the Fayetteville police spokesman.

The weapons are being sent to the manufacturer to be tested to ensure the Tasers are operating within factory specifications for output and also to verify that their data recording systems are properly functioning, he said.

It was not known how long it would take Taser to complete the inspections, MacRoberts said.

Numbers for the Cumberland County Sheriff's Office use of Tasers were not available as of Friday.

Debbie Tanna, a spokeswoman for the Sheriff's Office, said deputies have no plans to change their policy on using Tasers.

Deputies are sometimes confronted with aggressive people while alone, and Tasers offer them a way to subdue the suspects without bloodshed or causing permanent injury, she said.

Deputies carry batons, pepper spray and Tasers, but not all deputies carry all of those tools, Tanna said. When confronted with a threatening situation, the deputies must make a split-second decision on how best to negate the threat, she said.

"Our deputies don't have the luxury, in most cases, of making a decision by sitting around and mulling about it," Tanna said. "We feel that (Tasers) are safe. We like the fact that it is an option for us when trying to subdue a violent suspect or in a situation that is out of control."

In 2008, the ACLU helped start the N.C. Taser Safety Project, which sought to have law enforcement agencies develop policies to ensure people are safely subdued when Tasers must be used. Parker said that because of a number of recent high-profile cases involving Tasers, the ACLU is planning to send out a new records request to all 100 sheriff's offices in the state and 25 police departments seeking an update on their policies on using Tasers. Law enforcement agencies should have policies limiting Taser use on the old, young and sick, Parker said.

They also should prohibit officers from holding the trigger down or repeatedly pressing the trigger when unnecessary, she said.

"It can be an effective weapon, but there ought to be reasonable limitations and restrictions put on those weapons to keep people safe," Parker said. "I think most of the time law enforcement is trying to do the best job that they can. But Tasers are still relatively new, and I think a lot of times people aren't aware of the risks."

EDITORIAL: Reaffirm policy on Taser use

February 27, 2011
The Town Talk

The Lafayette Parish Coroner's Office has issued its report on the death of Javon Rakestrau, 28, who died in October after being Tasered by a Lafayette Parish sheriff's deputy. The report says Rakestrau died of complications of bronchial asthma, and that the stress of his arrest and the Tasering contributed to the death.

Rakestrau's blood contained a chemical indicating that he had smoked marijuana.

The finding is consistent with coroners' findings in similar cases, although we'd note that cases in which suspects die soon after Tasering seem to dwarf the number of deaths that occur as a result of asthma, cardiac problems or other conditions in arrests that don't involve Tasers. Rakestrau's death is one of at least 15 in Louisiana among suspects subjected to Tasering since 2004.

Lafayette Parish, with less than 5 percent of the state's population, accounts for three of them.

We'd urge local law enforcement agencies to take this opportunity to make sure officers know Tasers are to be used as an alternative to deadly force. The mounting list of deaths after arrests involving Tasers makes their use too risky for any other application, at least until more data can be collected and analyzed.

The Lafayette Parish Sheriff's Office has said the deputy involved in the Rakestrau arrest acted properly and within policy. The deputy performed first aid on Rakestrau until an ambulance arrived.

The video from the deputy's patrol car shows an arrest in a known drug trafficking area.

The deputy places Rakestrau against the hood of the patrol car, apparently to be frisked. Rakestrau reaches into his jacket pocket. He appears to try to throw something on the ground. Was it a weapon?

It doesn't seem to be, although the suspect's body shields it from the deputy. The deputy pulls Rakestrau away from the car, and they end up on the ground and mostly off camera. A few seconds later, they're both on their feet again, and the deputy shocks Rakestrau with the Taser.

If the deputy's use of a Taser was an alternative to the justifiable use of a firearm, then Rakestrau had a chance to live that he wouldn't have had otherwise, even though the suspect didn't act sensibly during the arrest.

The Taser becomes a humanitarian tool.

If the Taser is used for a lesser purpose, it becomes a tool with potentially lethal consequences that neither the law enforcement officer nor the suspect is in a position to predict.

Police must have reasonable grounds for using Tasers, 9th Circuit rules

December 1, 2010
Carol Williams, Los Angeles Times

A Coronado, Calif., police officer used excessive force when he shot a Taser dart at a young driver who was stopped for a seat belt violation, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

Carl Bryan, then 21, fell to the asphalt after being struck by the dart, breaking four teeth and suffering facial cuts. He later sued the Coronado Police Department and Officer Brian MacPherson.

The excessive-force ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals could have consequences for police use-of-force policies across the West, legal experts predicted. Two other lawsuits over Taser incidents are still pending before the appeals court, including a case in which a pregnant woman in Seattle was subjected to the device in a routine traffic stop.

Police must have reasonable grounds for using a Taser on a suspect, the appeals panel said, noting that Bryan was wearing only boxer shorts and tennis shoes and was clearly unarmed. Bryan was standing about 20 feet away with his back to MacPherson when he was hit.

"I think police departments will have to tailor their use-of-force policies to the Bryan decision from now on," said Steven E. Boehmer, the El Cajon, Calif., attorney who represented MacPherson.

The appeals panel, while deeming the Taser use excessive and unjustified, said the officer nonetheless deserved immunity from prosecution because the circumstances in which the weapon could be reasonably deployed weren't clearly defined at the time.

Because of the immunity grant, Coronado, in San Diego County, won't appeal the excessive-force ruling, Boehmer said, and would work with police to establish guidelines for use of the weapon.

Bryan, who now lives in Europe, where he assists his tennis-champion cousins Bob and Mike Bryan, still has state court actions in which he hopes to recover damages, said his attorney, Julia Yoo.

Bryan had been stopped at a seat belt enforcement roadblock at the Coronado Bridge after spending hours on the morning of July 24, 2005, driving between Camarillo and Los Angeles to fetch his keys that had been accidentally taken by a cousin's girlfriend. On the drive home from Camarillo to Coronado, Bryan had been cited for speeding and was agitated when he was stopped a second time by MacPherson, according to court records.

Western Australia police shift policy on Taser use

December 1, 2010
Sydney Morning Herald

Western Australia's police commissioner has announced a policy shift on Tasers, saying the stun guns should only be used when officers believe they are at risk of serious injury.

The change follows recent publicity over incidents in which police were deemed to have overstepped the mark in their use of tasers.

Karl O'Callaghan says the WA Police Professional Standards Division will also review police use-of-force incidents captured on CCTV to determine if officers' accounts of incidents match the tapes.

The policy change comes after charges against a Perth family were dropped after CCTV footage undermined the police case against them. The footage shown in the Perth Magistrates Court on Monday showed no evidence Ryan Walker, 24, had punched a plain-clothes officer, as police had alleged. An assault charge against him was dropped as were obstruction charges against his parents, Ken and Raelene Walker, who had questioned officers over their handling of a melee outside a Perth nightclub on January 16. Ms Walker sustained a broken ankle as she was taken from the scene by officers. The family is seeking an apology from police.

WA Police were heavily criticised earlier this year after video footage was released of unarmed man Kevin Spratt being tasered 13 times in East Perth Watch House in 2008 with nine officers present.

Mr O'Callaghan on Wednesday told reporters the new trial policy on Taser use meant officers had to believe they were at risk of serious injury before deploying the weapons.

That could include officers being attacked with a broken glass or some other type of weapon, he said.

"We are moving forward but what we are doing is making sure all of our processes are correct, because questions have been asked and I don't want those questions to continue; I want to answer them."

WA Premier Colin Barnett has apologised to the Walker family but says he retains confidence in the state's police force.

"These police men and women doing the day-to-day frontline work do need strong support and maybe do feel a little bit isolated at the moment, as there have been some situations that have gone wrong," he told reporters on Wednesday.

"Some mistakes have been made ... and maybe it's time to look at whether they do need to have some extra training in dealing with difficult situations they encounter on a daily basis."

Former WA deputy police commissioner Murray Lampard said the tasering of Mr Spratt was indefensible and the obstruction charges laid against the Walker family showed young officers lacked training.

Professor Lampard, who retired from the force in 2008, stressed the need for negotiation and communication skills training for young officers.

He said they needed to be trained in the importance of "verbal judo", conflict resolution and negotiation.

"When you're dealing with people, the community has an expectation that the police will act responsibly and will act appropriately and basically keep their oath of office to preserve life," Prof Lampard told ABC Radio.

"I think police need to, in certain circumstances, explore a number of options, to negotiate with people before deploying a weapon like a Taser."

Sheriff's Office, feds agree to new Taser rules

When the U.S. Justice Department announced its inquiry into the Orange County Sheriff's Office use of stun guns in 2007, it was a first of its kind review.

October 13, 2010
By Walter Pacheco, Orlando Sentinel

After a three-year Department of Justice probe into the Orange County Sheriff's Office use of Tasers, an agreement has been reached that calls for Sheriff Jerry Demings to implement more than a dozen new policies for Taser stun gun use by his deputies.

The DOJ agreement with the Sheriff's Office, which was formalized in September, lists 19 policy, training and accountability provisions that include new procedures and amendments to their current rules on Taser use.

They include:

*The Sheriff's Office must develop a policy requiring that deputies give a verbal warning before deploying a Taser.

*It must alert medical personnel before deploying Tasers at subjects suspected of being under an extreme state of mental and physiological excitement.

*It must develop a policy that prohibits the use of Tasers on passive subjects, those in handcuffs or otherwise restrained.

*Tasers cannot be used in a "punitive or reckless manner," such as using it to awaken a person or as a "prod."

*Only one deputy can deploy a Taser at a time.

The report also shows tweaks to some of the Sheriff's Office existing training and accountability procedures.

When the U.S. Justice Department announced its inquiry into the Orange County Sheriff's Office use of stun guns in 2007, it was a first of its kind review.

The changes to the Sheriff's Office policies on Taser use stemmed from that federal investigation, into "an alleged pattern or practice of excessive force" by sheriff's personnel, according to a 2008 report from the DOJ's Civil Rights Division.

That report included 35 recommendations which have been folded into the recently-crafted agreement.

In the 2008 report the DOJ had warned the Sheriff's Office against using Tasers on someone under the influence of drugs or showing signs of extreme agitation, bizarre or violent behavior and imperviousness to pain, among other symptoms — known as "excited delirium."

It also advised the Sheriff's Office not to stun suspects who are restrained or in handcuffs, or to stun them more than once, which increases the chances of harm.

Those two recommendations are included in the final agreement.

Critics of Tasers contend they are dangerous, particularly when used on suspects who use drugs or suffer from heart problems.

The stun guns have been controversial since Taser International started selling its product to thousands of law-enforcement agencies across the United States in 1999.

The devices, which deliver electrical jolts of 1,200 to 5,000 volts, have been connected to more than 70 deaths across the country, including five who died after being stunned by Orange County deputies.

Several incidents involving the deployment of stun guns placed the Sheriff's Office under scrutiny:

*José Aníbal Amaro, 45, died in Oct. 1, 2008 after deputies shocked him three times with a Taser. Reports show he was foaming at the mouth and running in and out of traffic.

*A deputy sheriff on Oct. 13, 2008 stunned a man who was threatening to jump off a 25-foot embankment onto State Road 408. The deputy, who was standing in a fire-rescue bucket truck, caught the man after shocking him.

*John Mattiuzzi, an out-of-state filmmaker, was stunned twice and struck with a baton on Sept. 21, 2008 after taking pictures of a crime scene with his phone. Police warned him twice to move back, then chased and subdued him after he ran from officers.

*A deputy sheriff working as a resource officer at Moss Park Middle School stunned an unruly 11-year-old girl injuring her nose, after she swung at the deputy in March 2008.

Officials at the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida also had launched their own inquiry of Taser use by the Sheriff's Office, but the results of that probe are not known.

Expert: Mehserle made right call to use taser

June 27, 2010
Demian Bulwa, San Francisco Chronicle

A use-of-force expert hired to defend Johannes Mehserle at his murder trial testified today that the former BART officer was justified in using a Taser shock weapon to subdue train rider Oscar Grant because Grant was fighting Mehserle's efforts to handcuff him.

Mehserle, 28, said last week that he meant to deploy his Taser on Grant, but accidentally pulled out his pistol and fired a single shot into the 22-year-old Hayward resident's back at Fruitvale Station in Oakland on Jan. 1, 2009.

In calling retired Los Angeles police Capt. Greg Meyer to the stand, the defense sought to varnish Mehserle's testimony last Thursday and Friday.

But Meyer, who indicated he was paid at least $44,000, was also put through a bruising cross-examination by Alameda County prosecutor David Stein - a session that lasted longer than his direct examination by defense attorney Michael Rains.

Meyer, who often defends police officers over their use of force, said he had not reviewed some evidence that Stein considers vital, and that he did not have a mastery of some of the case's central facts.

Meyer also said he had been closely involved in the aftermath of the Rodney King case, and that he had concluded that the officers who beat King did not use excessive force. Rather, he said, the officers had acted in accordance with faulty training and policies.

At one point, Meyer referred to Grant as "the defendant in this case" before Stein corrected him.

Under questioning by Rains, Meyer said Grant was properly arrested by former BART Officer Anthony Pirone for resisting officers. It was Pirone who ordered Mehserle to handcuff Grant.

According to witnesses, Grant had been in a fight on a Dublin-Pleasanton train. His arrest, Meyer said, was justifiable because he tried to avoid Pirone - the first officer on the scene - by ducking back into the train, and because at one point he stood up after being told to sit down.

Pressed by Stein, though, Meyer said that if a person were arrested for standing after being told to sit, that would be a "cheap arrest."

Meyer said his review of video footage of the shooting convinced him that Grant resisted Mehserle's efforts to handcuff him by keeping his right hand underneath him as he lay on his chest and by using "evasive movements - twisting, turning."

A decision to use a Taser on Grant would have been a good one, Meyer said, because it would have caused lesser injuries than a gun or a baton, and it wouldn't have inflamed the emotions of onlookers.

Meyer also said the Taser training BART gave Mehserle a month before the shooting was deficient because officers were not put in role-playing situations that "got their adrenaline up" and were not asked to make split-second choices between different weapons.

Meyer said he had reviewed other cases in which officers have claimed they confused their gun and Taser, and that in each case the officers wore the Tasers in a way that necessitated a strong-hand - or gun-hand - draw from a holster. That's how Mehserle was wearing his Taser on the night of the shooting.

Meyer said police officers should only draw Tasers with their weak hands to avoid confusion. Stein asked Meyer, who has long given advice to the company that makes the Taser, whether he had said the same thing to the firm's officials.

Yes, Meyer said, "On Saturday."

MONTREAL Exclusive: Taming police Tasers - Public security panel Cops urged to use stun gun only when a life is at risk

June 11, 2010
JAMES MENNIE, The Montreal Gazette

Montreal police should continue to use Tasers but only when they're the sole alternative to a firearm, Montreal Island's public security committee will recommend next week.

But that recommendation is not the unanimous finding of the nine-member committee, The Gazette has learned. A minority report will recommend that Taser use by Montreal's police force be subject to a moratorium until more is known about just how dangerous the device can be.

During a series of public hearings this year, Montreal police representatives described the Taser -a stun gun that can deliver a 50,000-volt charge -as "an intermediate weapon" that would be used as an alternative to a firearm.

But the police representatives also noted that the device could be used to bring incidents involving heavily disturbed individuals to a quick conclusion -even when police use of a firearm is not necessarily the only alternative.

The committee's recommendation, which is scheduled to be tabled next week during a meeting of Montreal's agglomeration council, will seek to have the protocols for Taser use by police mirror those already in place for firearms -that the officer's life, or the lives of bystanders, be at risk.

The protocol would also allow a Taser to be used if the life of the suspect is at risk -police intervening in a suicide attempt, for example.

The recommendation also calls for a Taser, once drawn, to be used only once on a suspect, and for the public security committee to be notified of any technological or training changes that might affect the Montreal police department's use of the device.

The report will also recommend that rather than using a Taser on mentally disturbed suspects, police call in support from someone trained to deal with individuals who have psychiatric problems.

Taser use by police has been under scrutiny in Montreal since the 2007 death of Quilem Registre, 38, four days after being tasered six times by police after he was stopped for a traffic violation. Coroner Catherine Rudel-Tessier concluded that while cocaine and alcohol in Registre's system might have contributed it to his death, it was "difficult to believe (the taserings) played no role."

The hearings heard that about 100 Montreal police officers are trained to use the 17 Tasers in the department. Montreal police discharged Tasers during 11 incidents in 2009, and they drew them from their holsters without using them another seven times.

Police statistics show Tasers were fired 11 times and drawn as a threat three more times in 2008; fired 23 times and used as a threat 10 times in 2007; fired 17 times and used as a threat 11 times in 2006.

During the three years after their introduction in 2001, Montreal police pulled out the stun gun 14 times.

Amnesty official wants national policy on stun gun use

The Canadian Press

FREDERICTON — The secretary general for Amnesty International Canada says while there have been great strides to improve stun gun use in Canada, there needs to be a strict set of national standards.

Alex Neve said Tuesday the federal government needs to show leadership to ensure new standards for use of the weapons apply to all police forces, and not just the RCMP.

"We've seen some very welcome restrictions placed on RCMP use of the Taser," said Neve, who was attending a conference in Fredericton organized by the Canadian Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement. "What we don't have though is consistency and coherence across the country. There are a multitude of different policing jurisdictions in Canada."

Neve said there is a place for the use of stun guns as long as they are used in accordance with the law and proper training.

"We have been calling for very careful guidelines and restrictions to be imposed on how Tasers get used, by whom, under what circumstance, how often, on what parts of the body, and many other aspects," he said in an interview.

In May, the Mounties announced they would fire stun guns at people only when they are hurting someone or clearly about to harm them.

"We would have liked there to have been an adjective there for serious bodily harm or grievous bodily harm," Neve said.

The use of the weapons has come under public scrutiny as the result of numerous incidents across the country, including the death of airline passenger Robert Dziekanski in Vancouver, which prompted the Braidwood inquiry in British Columbia.

Kevin Brosseau, senior director of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP said he believes public scrutiny may be one of the reasons for nearly a 50 per cent drop in stun gun use by the Mounties over the last couple of years.

He said their use fell from about 1,200 uses in 2007 to about 650 in 2009.

"From my point of view, the reports -- whether it's the Braidwood inquiry or our report -- the significant media attention paid to this thing has given members of the police a greater appreciation of what this thing is and how it needs to be used in a more judicious way," Brosseau said in an interview.

Like Neve, Brosseau said stun guns are an important part of a police officer's arsenal as long as they are used properly.

Brosseau said a national policy is needed, but believes some forces may be reluctant to agree to a "one size fits all" set of guidelines.

"Every police force has its own terminology and is reluctant to change terminology to someone else's, but that is really what is going to have to happen," he said.

Another Nail in the Coffin of TASER

OHCHR-UNOG
Committee against Torture
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Telephone Number (41-22) 917-9000
Fax Number (41-22) 917-9006
E-mail to urgent-action@ohchr.org

Another Nail in the Coffin of TASER
By Eddie Griffin
Wednesday, May 19, 2010

When the Fort Worth City Council voted on Tuesday to accept a $2 million settlement in the Taser related death of Michael Jacobs Jr., they cast down their eyes and droop their heads in painful sorrow of this salt in the wound. They wanted to say as little as possible to stir the winds. She was a City eager to heal and move on.

Yet the City would not concede liability into the young man’s death. Maybe, to do so, would expose her to more similar lawsuits. After all, there have been five taser related deaths in the past five years. For to be culpable in one, infers guilt in the other.

Fort Worth Councilwoman Kathleen Hicks spoke for the City and for the community, declaring now to be the time to begin the healing process.

An exhausted pastor, Kyev Tatum, who has led the mass public awareness campaign which gained national and international attention, sighed with some relief that this part of the battle against tasers was over. Tomorrow, he would take up the matter of the Arlington Police Department and its plan to purchase 300 more stun guns. By no means, for him, was the war over.

Pastor Tatum was drawn into the taser controversy when the Jacobs family called out for help. The Fort Worth Police Department had electrocuted the son of Charlotte and Michael Sr., with a 50,000-volt taser, and nobody was saying anything, not even a word of regret or sympathy. There was no explanation from the police department as to why the officer engaged the weapon for a full 54 seconds upon a young man with mental problems. And, no city leader was willing to condemn the officer without all the facts.

The City was silent and complacent and its populous impervious. Michael Jacobs, Jr. was on his way to becoming just another silent statistic in a string of taser related deaths.

Tatum organized a local chapter of the Southern Leadership Conference (SCLC) and pulled together coalition of other civil rights organizations, including NAACP, LULAC, ACLU, and community activists. The community coalition called for an investigation, and to make the results public.

The medical examiner, upon finding no contributory causes such as drugs or alcohol in Jacobs’ system, declared his death a homicide. But the police department refused to dismiss the officer, and the grand jury refused to indict. There was no recourse except to seek redress by civil suit; otherwise, no one would be accountable for the death of an innocent, mentally challenged young man.

The $2 million settlement is a small penance to pay for a human life, though the largest in city history, but it may pave the way for reconciliation. The Fort Worth Police Department plans to meet with Pastor Tatum and other ministers to “begin the healing process”, and discuss strategies for better policing in the community. There will continue to be disagreement, however, on the usefulness of tasers and their lethality.

There is an axiom here: As the death count rises, the cost of using tasers will go up.

Although the manufacturer of the weapon, TASER International, has been sued over 100 times, it remains largely unscathed. They sell the instruments based upon its claim of non-lethality, and leave municipalities to pay the cost of wrongful deaths.

“Tasers are not only deadly”, Tatum declares. “They are torture.”

Officer Stephanie Phillips did not know that when she continuously engaged the trigger of her taser that 50,000 volts of electricity continued to course through the body of Michael Jacobs Jr., and that she was inadvertently frying him alive, from the inside out. No one ever told her the weapon was lethal. She was never trained to “disengage” the electrodes before electrocuting the subject. Maybe this is why the Tarrant County grand jury declined to indict her. And, she did not violate department policies by using her own discretion to deploy.

Hindsight is 20/20, and many people wish that certain events could be undone. Had the officer known the deadliness of the weapon, she would have ceased engagement. This being the premise, a Star-Telegram editorial emphasized “better training” as a resolution to taser death.

Not so. Teaching an officer how to use discretion in the field, when deploying the weapon, is no guarantee against abuse, nor does it mitigate the fact that the taser itself is an implement of torture. But proving torture, on the other hand, is much harder than proving the cause of death. By its very definition, a torturous act must be one that horrifies the social consciousness of humanity. And yet we, as a nation, have been conditioned into accepting the Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs) as non-lethal and harmless.

We discount the fact that they have been used on pregnant women such as Valreca Redden and claimed the life of the 6-month unborn child of Hannah Rogers-Grippi, that they have been used on senior citizens in their 70s and 80s, against the wheel-chair bound and mentally ill, and that the death count in the U.S.A. and Canada now stands at 481.

What is more, there is now mounting evidence that tasers cause serious and permanent injuries. A young victim is tasered over a minor incident, falls flat on his face, unable to catch himself, and breaks out his front teeth. He sues and wins. And, it has been reported, that those who have been tasered and survived, have “never been the same” since, having suffered neurological brain damages.

These are the risks, and no one is without fair warning.

[Post Note- The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice is soliciting "Alternatives to Conducted Energy Less-Lethal Devices", to wit Tasers (R)]

The handwriting is on the wall: The days of tasers are coming to an end.


http://eddiegriffinbasg.blogspot.com/2010/05/another-nail-in-coffin-of-taser.html

EDITORIAL: Couldn’t They Just Tag Him?

May 8, 2010
NEW YORK TIMES

The question is not whether Steve Consalvi should have jumped onto the field during a major-league baseball game in Philadelphia on Monday, waving a towel and running in circles like a toddler trying to avoid bath time. He shouldn’t have. Nor is it whether he should have been subdued and arrested. That seems obvious.

No, the question is how. Subdued, yes. Tackled, maybe. Tasered, no.

The electric stun gun that instantly dropped Mr. Consalvi in the eighth inning was fired by a police officer who clearly had no desire to dance around the outfield with a 17-year-old. The Philadelphia police chief said he had acted properly to stop a fleeing suspect, which, we suppose, technically, Mr. Consalvi was.

Mr. Consalvi was also outnumbered, had no way to escape and posed no evident threat, except to the flow of a good ballgame and maybe to the pride of officers who were older, heavier and slower than he.

Taser defenders argue that stadium romps are no joke; athletes sometimes need protecting from deranged and violent fans. Other ballplayers have been harassed and tackled. The tennis star Monica Seles was stabbed.

Having a powerful weapon doesn’t mean you fire it with abandon. One fear about Tasers, which cause jolts of extreme pain and involuntary muscle contractions, but seldom kill, is that officers use them too readily. They should resort to Tasers if they are in danger and out of other options, not because they’re frustrated.

All cities have dumb fans. Philadelphia seems to have more than its share. The best course there, as anywhere, is smarter, more attentive security in the stands. Maybe it’s also higher Plexiglas, stiffer trespassing fines, less beer. Force must always be the last resort. Tasering a showboating kid is just plain excessive.

Use of tasers on field jumpers won't be first option

May 6, 2010
RANDY MILLER, Bucks County Courier Times

PHILADELPHIA - After further review, it appears the use of a Taser will be a last resort the next time a fan runs onto the Citizens Bank Park playing field during a Phillies game.

On Monday, a 17-year-old from Montgomery County had his in-game outfield sprint end with a Taser gun shock, then another fan ran onto the field late into Tuesday's game, this one giving up before a Taser was used.

The incidents led to meetings between Phillies security and the Philadelphia Police, and the team issued a statement on Wednesday:

"It has been agreed that in ordinary circumstances involving field intrusion, the Phillies game day security personnel will make the apprehension of the field jumper and turn him over to the Philadelphia Police on the field for handcuffing and subsequent charging. If greater force is necessary, requiring the assistance of Philadelphia Police in making the apprehension, such assistance will be employed.

"The Phillies will continue their policy of prosecuting all persons coming onto the field during a game to the maximum extent of the law, which could include imprisonment up to one year and a $2,500 fine."

Philadelphia police commissioner talks about Taser incident

And where, do you suppose, did the Philadelphia police department GET their "policies, procedures, training and things of that nature??" Why, the almighty CHURCH OF TASER, of course!! Hey CHIEF RAMSEY - in between sermons - be sure to check out the taser policy news out of Wyoming today, where they have finally chosen to follow their OWN religion!! And, hey - while you're at it, be sure to stop by yesterday's announcement from Canada's national police force - the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Philadelphia police commissioner Charles Ramsey appeared on 97.5 The Fanatic with Mike Missaneli to talk about the Taser incident at the Phillies game.

You can listen to the entire interview by clicking here.

Some excerpts:

"Well I mean again that is judgment. When I look at it, I look at it and review based on our policies, our procedures, training and things of that nature. They could still be chasing him around the outfield until they eventually brought him down. If they tackled him if he broke his arm and somebody thought that the tackle was too hard then you have got another issue. The kid should not have been out on the field.

... Again, I am not saying that every officer under the same set of circumstances would have done the same thing. I am not saying that at all, but when I look at this I have to have some set of guidelines, some set of rules. I don't know what people want me to do? Are they looking to get this kid fired? Are they looking for me to have him hanging up somehow because he used his Taser against this individual? The answer to that is, no! I am not going to do it. I mean that kid should stay off of the field period and whether or not I would have done it that way or what else."

Wyoming law agencies tighten Taser use policy

May 5, 2010
trib.com - Wyoming's online news source

The Jackson Police Department and Teton County sheriff's office are tightening their Taser policies to prohibit use of the stun guns to force compliance by people who don't pose an immediate threat.

The change follows an April 7 incident in which a Jackson police officer used a Taser to stun a man who resisted arrest.

Police had pulled over Frank Meek, 60, because of an alleged license plate violation for which he had already been issued a citation. A video of the arrest showed Meek was shocked with a Taser after Meek sat down when an officer tried to handcuff him.

County prosecutors later dismissed a misdemeanor charge against Meek for interfering with a police officer. The police department has sought an independent state review of the incident.

Jackson Police Chief Todd Smith said Tasers will no longer be allowed in such cases because Meek was not being physically aggressive toward officers. Under the old policy, the officer's use of a Taser after several warnings was allowed.
"We're really only using it as a defensive tool, rather than an offensive tool," Smith said.

Teton County Sheriff Jim Whalen said the incident presented an opportunity for his office to revisit its Taser policy, even though deputies weren't involved.

"Sometimes policy really doesn't come into focus as well as it should until we have these kinds of things happen," Whalen said. "What's important is that law enforcement agencies should be willing to take a second look at how we're doing business."

The Jackson police and Teton County sheriff's office are currently participating in a long-planned joint training session, officials said. The session includes a review of laws and focuses on a range of issues, including pursuit and use-of-force policies.

The agencies' new policies allow officers to use Tasers to defend themselves, citizens or suspects. Such uses might include cases in which the suspect is taking a posturing stance toward the officer, refuses to stop assaulting someone or threatens to commit suicide.

Tasers also may be used to stop a fleeing suspect if the suspect would be a threat to the community if he escaped. The nature of the crime plays into whether Taser use is appropriate, Smith and Whalen said.

"For me, it's going to come down to the gravity of the offense," Whalen said.

Smith said Tasers are intended as a low-level use of force that causes less damage than traditional police weapons such as batons and pepper spray. But the public seems to perceive it differently, he said.

"The public perception is that the Taser is a much greater use of force," Smith said. "You have to meet community standards."

Tasering of baseball fan sparks fresh debate over use of force

May 5, 2010
Sarah Boesveld, Globe and Mail

It was the top of the eighth inning when 17-year-old fan Steve Consalvi hopped the fence at Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia and dashed around the outfield – a silly stunt, just for fun.

Fans watched the 30-second chase during the pause in the game against St. Louis on Monday night. They cheered Mr. Consalvi on as he scurried away from security officials and twirled a white Phillies fan towel.

As quickly as it began, they saw the youth crumple in a heap in the outfield – tasered by security officials, unable to wave his white towel in surrender. They booed loudly.

Footage of the chase, quickly posted on the Internet, went viral, igniting a fierce debate online about whether it was necessary to deploy a taser – and whether unnecessary zapping in public spaces such as stadiums and malls is happening more often.

Officials stood behind the Philadelphia city police officer who deployed the taser at the game, and said he followed protocol that allows officers to taser a fleeing suspect. But critics were quick to point out it wasn’t the first time an officer has tasered a fan at Citizens Bank Park. Local reports say fans have been tasered there many times before.

In Canada, the debate has moved far more in favour of restricting the use of the weapons even as more of them are in the hands of police officers nationwide as a safer alternative to guns and other weapons.

On Tuesday, the RCMP announced tighter guidelines for Mounties deploying tasers. They can now fire a stun gun only if it’s clear the person is injuring someone else or threatening to do so.

The changes stem from the Braidwood public inquiry into the death of Polish airline passenger Robert Dziekanski after officers tasered him at the Vancouver Airport.

Ontario introduced new guidelines and training standards in March after launching a study of its policies in 2008. Back then, the province relied on training from the companies selling the weapons.

Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair is trying to get more tasers into the hands of front-line workers and properly train them to deploy them because a supervisor is not always there to give direction in the heat of the moment, says Toronto Police spokesperson Mark Pugash.

At least 246 Torontonians were tasered last year, a number that’s dropped since 2008, he said. Special constables on the Toronto Transit Commission do not use tasers, only batons, handcuffs and a foam version of pepper spray.

While officials patrolling the SkyTrain in Vancouver use tasers, security in most public spaces such as university campuses and stadiums is delivered by private firms whose guards can’t use them. They’re prohibited weapons under the Private Security and Investigative Services Act in Ontario, and only police officers are authorized under the Criminal Code to carry them.

Employees at the Rogers’ Centre in Toronto are armed with batons and handcuffs, a worker there said last night. And Blue Jays president Paul Beeston, reacting to the Phillies fan tasering, said a case like that wouldn’t happen at his stadium.

“I can't believe that there would be anybody who would use a taser gun on somebody who ran on the field,” he said. “I can't believe that would happen here.”

That’s likely because about 95 per cent of security at stadiums is delivered by private firms, said David Hyde, owner and principal consultant at David Hyde & Associates, a security consulting practice.

Still, there’s no guarantee an incident similar to what happened in Philadelphia couldn’t happen here, he said.

If it’s a big game, stadiums often hire police officers for extra cover and those officers could be armed with tasers, as well as guns.

But because of a largely public outcry against the use of tasers, the chances of deployment are slim.

“A stadium is trying to attract customers,” he said. “The last thing they want to do, particularly in Canada, is to deploy weapons that could not only cause legal but reputational harm to that image.”

Police in the United States are more willing to use tasers at major events and at stadiums because the perceived level of threat is higher, he said, in terms of terrorism and violent crime.

Hilary Homes, a security and human rights campaigner for Amnesty International Canada, said the Braidwood inquiry has shaped public opinion and shone a brighter light on the unnecessary use of tasers. However, broader oversight and guidelines on how and when they should be used just doesn’t exist, she said. “There aren’t national standards on either side of the border,” she said. “There are such separate jurisdictions.”

Unnecessary deployment is happening more frequently because “new items are available and people want to use them.”

Oregon Group Gathers Signatures for Taser Restrictions

April 10, 2010
By Stacia Kalinoski, kezi.com

EUGENE, Ore.--Outrage over E-P-D's use of taser guns has spurred one man to try and change the policy.

Randy Prince wants a city ordinance that classifies tasers as deadly weapons. He brought the idea before the public at the Saturday Market, recruiting others to help him gather signatures. He's hoping to find enough names to put the proposal on the November ballot.

Though no one has died from being stunned by EPD, Prince says it has happened elsewhere, and therefore says it makes sense to place it under the same restrictions as a firearm.

He wants to limit taser use to the very serious cases, and says an ordinance will help decrease potential abuse of the weapon by officers.

"We think by carrying this petition that it's not enough to advise the police chief through some city council committees.

We want the principal established that people shouldn't be killed over lesser offenses, and the problem is, is that the taser does kill," he said.

Prince needs more than 12,000 registered Eugene voters in the next three months to get this on the November ballot.

Saturday, he recruited nearly 20 others to help him, and he plans to hit the campus area hard the next few weeks to gather signatures.

Prince said this measure could also regulate civilian use. While not putting a ban on tasers, he said new rules could change how residents use tasers for self defense.

Factbox: Taser policy timeline

April 1, 2010
Kirsten Smith, Canwest News Service

Robert Dziekanski's death in 2007 prompted an international outcry, and raised questions about the use of Tasers by Canadian law-enforcement officers.

These are some of the changes to Taser policy that have been made across the country since his death.

- June 2008

The Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP recommends tighter controls on the use of Taser.

A Parliamentary committee recommends that the RCMP restrict the circumstances in which Tasers are used, that the high-voltage devices be used less and that multiple firings also be restricted.

- July 2008

The Saskatchewan Police Commission reverses an earlier decision and no longer supports the idea that all police be equipped with a Taser.

Nova Scotia acts on recommendations from a ministerial review and restricts the circumstances in which Tasers can be used to cases of aggressive resistance or threats to a police officer.

- February 2009

The Canadian Police Association and Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police both recommend that all police officers be issued Tasers.

The RCMP tighten the guidelines on Taser use, now requiring that an immediate threat to an officer or the public exist before the weapon is deployed. Changes to training focus on multiple use of the device and the impact on acutely agitated individuals.

- July 2009

Alberta enacts new guidelines that require ongoing testing of the devices, and a use-of-force reporting system.

- July 2009

British Columbia issues new guidelines in response to the Braidwood inquiry's Phase 1 report. Police should only use the Taser when bodily harm is threatened, when lesser force has proved ineffective or during the enforcement of a federal criminal law.

- October 2009

Taser International sends a directive recommending the Taser not be aimed directly at the chest.

- March 2010

Ontario announces new guidelines for all police in the province beginning in a few months. Police should refrain from Tasering the elderly and should not aim for the head, throat or genitals, the guidelines say.

Palo Alto tightens policy on Taser-use by police

March 5, 2010
by Gennady Sheyner, Palo Alto Online

Palo Alto police officers will no longer be allowed to fire Tasers unless the person they use it against poses an immediate physical threat, police officials said this week.

The department has just finished revising its policy for Taser use, Police Chief Dennis Burns said. The revisions, which were several months in the making, establish stricter standards for when officers are allowed to use Tasers.

The department's current policy, which was adopted in 2007, relies on the vague "reasonableness" standard and allows officers to use only the force that "reasonably appears necessary, given the facts and circumstances perceived by the officer at the time of the event, to bring an incident under control."

But a recent court ruling and several controversial incidents on Taser use in Palo Alto prompted the department to raise the standards and clarify the policy.

The new policy specifies, "Absent exigent circumstances, the TASER X26 should only be used against persons who pose an immediate threat of bodily injuries."

The revised policy will be presented to the City Council in the coming weeks, police said.

Palo Alto police began using Tasers almost two-and-a-half years ago and have used or attempted to use them on 12 different suspects over that time period, according to a new report from Independent Police Auditor Michael Gennaco.

Most of these cases involved unruly and uncooperative suspects who attacked officers or refused to leave their vehicles. But Gennaco's newest report, released Wednesday night, also describes one case in which a Palo Alto officer mistakenly applied a Taser against an intoxicated man near a local nightclub. According to the report, the man had been trying to punch the bouncer at the nightclub when officers arrived and asked him to back away.

The man was allegedly swaying in place and mumbling, "What's the problem?" when an officer trained his Taser on him, the report states. The man allegedly moved his hands to his chest area, at which time the officer deployed the Taser.

The man fell to the ground and "failed to put his hands behind his back as ordered." The officer then deployed the Taser in "stun drive" mode against the man's leg, according to the report. The man was then taken to the hospital, received a medical check-up and was released for booking into jail, the report states.

Gennaco, who reviews every case of Taser deployment, said his review prompted him to conclude that this use of Taser "was a mistaken application of the current PAPD policy to the factual situation." After reviewing the reports and video footage of the incident, Gennaco said he believed that the man was "simply gesturing to his own chest while referring to his own experiences in the narrative" when he was shot with a Taser.

The second use of Taser was also questionable, Gennaco wrote, because it was "unclear whether the man had time to comply with commands after his fall to the ground."

Gennaco recommended that the officer who fired the Taser receive more training on Taser deployment and be "debriefed on his failure to give warnings in this case." The officer should also be warned that future questionable Taser uses would likely lead to a formal internal-affairs investigations and possible disciplinary action.

Gennaco has been working with the police department to clarify its Taser policy. The department also considered last December's ruling by the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals against a Coronado, Calif., police officer who fired a Taser at a man after pulling him over for not wearing a seatbelt.

The court concluded that stunning a subject with a Taser is only justified when a suspect poses "an immediate threat to the officer or a member of the public."

Burns said the department had been in the process of revising the policy even before the federal court issued its ruling. He said he hopes the new guidelines will reduce instances of misapplied Taser use and clarify the standards for deployment.

"We want to give the officers more defined guidelines about where Taser use is appropriate," Burns said.

San Francisco Police Chief's proposal for Tasers rejected

March 4, 2010
San Francisco Chronicle

The San Francisco Police Commission late Wednesday voted down a proposal by police Chief George Gascon to explore the use of Tasers by the department.

The 4-3 vote denying Gascon that option was accompanied by disagreement among some commissioners about what the agenda item they were voting on actually meant.

The item would authorize Gascon to develop changes to the police department's general order to include the use of conducted energy devices, widely known as Tasers, and to develop policies and training practices to go along with that order.

While Gascon and some commissioners said this merely meant giving him permission to draft a Taser policy that would then later have to be approved by the commission at a future hearing, Commissioner Petra DeJesus, who said she opposes the introduction of Tasers, described it as "vague and ambiguous."

"It's putting Tasers in, it's putting them in tonight," she said.

Commissioner David Onek disagreed.

"We are not voting to approve Tasers tonight," Onek said. He said the vote was to ask the chief to draft a policy about Tasers "and to bring it back to us, where then we would vote for it, or not vote for it."

Onek said he would only approve Taser use for the department under a "very, very, very restrictive" policy introduced by Gascon.

"I think that he deserves the deference to come up with a plan," Onek said.

An apparently exasperated Gascon acknowledged that the agenda item could have been written more clearly, and said he could have begun drafting a Taser policy before bringing it to the commission, but did not do so "out of an abundance of caution."

Gascon added that it was well within the commission's ability to amend the item, but no amendment was offered.

In the end, commissioners Joe Marshall, Thomas Mazzucco and Onek voted for the proposal, and commissioners DeJesus, Vincent Pan, Yvonne Lee and Jim Hammer voted against.

Hammer, who was widely regarded as the swing vote on the commission and who attended a news conference held by Gascon last week in support of Tasers, said tonight, "I remain in favor of changing our use of force policy. I remain in favor of adding something to that, and that may be Tasers."

But the issue needed a "full vetting," Hammer said.

"I will not rush into this tonight," he said.

The commission gave nearly five hours of debate to the issue Wednesday night - mainly from advocates warning of the potential dangers of Taser use - and another several hours two weeks ago, where testimony centered on arguments for their implementation.

The devices, which deliver a powerful electric shock, rendering a person temporarily without muscle control, are controversial. They have been implicated as a contributing factor in some deaths and serious injuries during arrests by police. Opponents also say they are unregulated by any governmental agency.

Gascon has said Tasers represent a "less lethal" addition to the department's arsenal that would decrease the number of injuries and fatalities for both officers and suspects. He has also said that his officers would receive "very in-depth, Fourth Amendment training" on their use, and they would only be employed against aggressive, violent suspects.

Hammer expressed particular concern about the rights of mentally ill suspects who engage in violent encounters with police. Encounters with armed suspects intending to commit "suicide-by-cop" often end with officers defending themselves with a firearm and killing the suspects, police say. In some of those cases, Tasers would present a potentially non-lethal option, they argue.

Hammer did allow room for an "incredibly limited policy that could walk that fine line between reducing deaths and injuries, and not intentionally killing people who don't deserve to die."

Many of Wednesday night's speakers opposed to Tasers also argued community and civil rights groups, as well as mental health advocates, had not been part of the discussion leading up to the vote.

"If we vote this down tonight, then the policy dies," Mazzucco cautioned his fellow commissioners before the vote.

It remained unclear following the vote whether Taser use by the San Francisco Police Department could be revisited in the near future.

"I don't know," said Gascon as he left the hearing room.

EDITORIAL: San Jose (California) needs clear policy on use of force by police

March 3, 2010
Mercury News Editorial

The decision not to indict the San Jose police officers involved in the videotaped beating of college student Phuong Ho last September was no surprise. But the vehemence of District Attorney Dolores Carr's defense of the officers Wednesday was unexpected and disappointing.

Carr went out of her way to discredit Ho, noting he had been in trouble once before — a fact irrelevant to this case — and pointing out that the city's police manual nowhere says officers should use the lowest level of force necessary to subdue a suspect. The clear implication was that police conduct in this case not only was legal but acceptable.

It was not. Now it's up to Police Chief Rob Davis to make that clear.

What happened to Ho may not have been a crime; the law gives wide latitude to officers subduing suspects. But it was wrong. Davis implied as much when he saw the video last year, calling it "deeply disturbing." He said at the time that officers were supposed to use the "lowest amount of force" needed to make an arrest.

In fact, while two use-of-force experts Carr's office consulted on the Ho incident said the officers committed no crime, a third concluded that they had used excessive force.

On Wednesday, Davis said he couldn't discuss the case because his internal affairs unit is investigating whether the officers violated department policies. But he said the police manual, while not explicitly requiring the lowest level of force, makes it clear that the force used must be reasonable. Officers' training, he said, also makes that plain. But officers themselves seem less certain of the policy.

Police were called to Ho's apartment Sept. 3 after he got into an altercation with a roommate. The beating happened in a hallway, when Ho tried to follow officers into his room. They said he resisted arrest; he said he dropped his glasses and bent over to pick them up when the beating and Tasing began. A roommate captured it all in a cell phone video, which is online at www.mercurynews.com.

At a time when community groups were already raising questions about police conduct, the video struck a nerve, particularly with some Asian-Americans upset by the earlier police shooting of a mentally ill Vietnamese man who had attacked officers.

The Mercury News' Sean Webby has reported extensively on an unusual San Jose pattern of arrests for resisting arrest when no other major charge is involved — indicating that minor incidents seem to escalate to physical confrontation. When defendants fight the charge, it is often dropped or reduced. Charges against Ho were dropped last month, when Carr's office decided no jury seeing the beating video would convict him.

The video makes Ho's case unusual. Without it, he might well have been convicted and deported. But it presents an opportunity for Davis to clarify his expectations of officers when force must be used. We hope he does that when the internal investigation is complete.

Ho's beating may look fine to the district attorney, but it's not conduct that San Jose residents expect from their often-exemplary police department.