... are Louisville, Kentucky police officers Trey McKinley, Donald Pugh, Jeremy Linton, Daniel English and Joseph Vidourek, as well as Sgt. Kirby Shobe.
These fine public servants, especially "Officer" English, rousted National Guard Lt. Col. Donald Blake Settle, a highly decorated 29-year soldier with a traumatic brain injury, last January simply because he was wearing dirty clothes from a remodeling job and was observed by English to be having difficulty speaking while Settle was conversing with an acquaintance he ran into at a local mall while shopping for a gift card.
Despite his (accurate) protestations that he was neither impaired nor a homeless vagrant, Settle was menaced twice with a TASER, brutally tossed to the ground and handcuffed, and then threatened with arrest (for what? The story doesn't say, and there definitely was no actual crime being committed) before the cops made some calls and finally managed to figure out that he was telling the truth. Did that information make one bit of difference?
Naw, they still rudely told him to hit the road:
"Settle said he was told to leave the mall and get his gift card somewhere else on the way out of Louisville."
Didn't they already make a movie about exactly this kind of official abuse of innocent veterans by such smug self-proclaimed guardians of proper dress and diction?
Naturally, none of the cops were disciplined for their wrongdoing, not even "Sergeant" Shobe, who despite apparently being the supervisor at the scene didn't bother to fill out a report on the incident, most likely because enough clock ticks had passed for even that half-wit to figure out that he and his fellow thugs might actually face some consequences for their unlawful actions.
"'You always err on the side of caution because what, to me, this looks like, is that we were trying to cover something up,' [Louisville PD Col. Vince] Robison said, later clarifying, however, that it didn’t appear there was any “conspiracy” to cover anything up, just a “poor job” in not documenting what happened."
Oh no, no conspiracy at all, it was just a (very convenient) crappy job by his officers. But no punishment for said crap performance. What a professionally-run department.
Settle has been told he will have to sue the department to receive a copy of the sham "investigation" into incident. According to the story, he plans to do exactly that. We hope he gets some significant monetary damages as well to assist him in his recovery.
Showing posts with label TASER. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TASER. Show all posts
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Friday, June 22, 2012
Today's TASER Travesty
At least one Peru, Indiana police officer is currently on administrative leave after an incident in which a 64-year-old man with end-stage Alzheimer's disease residing in a locked nursing home was TASED three times by cops for not following their barked orders, which the patient most likely didn't understand anyway since according to his wife he's not even comprehending at a two-year-old's level:
"Three Peru officers and a Dukes EMS unit arrived at Miller’s Merry Manor Nursing Home just before 6 a.m. Sunday after staff reported resident James Howard was combative and struck several employees."
Of course Mr. Howard's bad behavior had to be addressed, but you're telling us three strapping officers and (presumably) two paramedics couldn't get control of a sick old man without shocking him into oblivion?
We once again point out that the TASER is designed to be a "less-than-lethal" defensive weapon, not a consequence-free pain compliance tool for lazy cops to use when they don't feel like doing their jobs properly.
The local chief is asking for patience while the incident is "investigated". We hope he wraps things up quickly and metes out discipline where it's due.
"Three Peru officers and a Dukes EMS unit arrived at Miller’s Merry Manor Nursing Home just before 6 a.m. Sunday after staff reported resident James Howard was combative and struck several employees."
Of course Mr. Howard's bad behavior had to be addressed, but you're telling us three strapping officers and (presumably) two paramedics couldn't get control of a sick old man without shocking him into oblivion?
We once again point out that the TASER is designed to be a "less-than-lethal" defensive weapon, not a consequence-free pain compliance tool for lazy cops to use when they don't feel like doing their jobs properly.
The local chief is asking for patience while the incident is "investigated". We hope he wraps things up quickly and metes out discipline where it's due.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Today's TASER Travesty
"A police officer tasered a north Queensland [Australia] man up to 28 times because he believed the device, which emits a shock of 50,000 volts, did not cause pain, a coronial inquest has heard.
Senior Constable Craig Myles told the inquest into the death in custody of Antonio Galeano he used the Taser repeatedly because it was not having the desired effect on the 39-year-old."
"Constable" Myles apparently is also either an amnesiac or somehow has made it to adulthood without being able to make a reasonable estimate:
"The officer told the inquest he remembered using the Taser eight times against Mr Galeano but conceded it was possible he deployed it 28 times - as data recorded by the device suggested."
Maybe someone should TASER him 28 times in a row, as we imagine any lingering doubts about the device's ability to cause pain or the exact number of times he was shocked would be immediately removed from Myles's pea-sized brain.
Senior Constable Craig Myles told the inquest into the death in custody of Antonio Galeano he used the Taser repeatedly because it was not having the desired effect on the 39-year-old."
"Constable" Myles apparently is also either an amnesiac or somehow has made it to adulthood without being able to make a reasonable estimate:
"The officer told the inquest he remembered using the Taser eight times against Mr Galeano but conceded it was possible he deployed it 28 times - as data recorded by the device suggested."
Maybe someone should TASER him 28 times in a row, as we imagine any lingering doubts about the device's ability to cause pain or the exact number of times he was shocked would be immediately removed from Myles's pea-sized brain.
Tuesday, March 01, 2011
Today's TASER Travesty
Three Portland, Oregon police officers have been found to have violated department policy in two separate incidents because they TASERed misdemeanor suspects who had already surrendered.
Actually, it's much worse than that. Official investigations in both cases revealed that both men were on their knees with their hands on their head or interlaced behind their neck when the cops went ahead and zapped them anyway:
"As the Portland Police Bureau grapples with how to update its Taser policy, two federal lawsuits stemming from inappropriate Taser use suggest some city police aren't familiar with the current restrictions on their use."
"Suggest"? "Prove" would seem to be a much more appropriate term right here.
Both brutality victims were subsequently found not guilty by juries or had their charges (one was for interfering with police; nope, no unwarranted "you will respect my authoritah" beefs here) dropped, and they subsequently filed federal lawsuits against the city for damages.
Portland has agreed to settle those suits by paying out close to $140,000 of local taxpayers' hard-earned money, yet unbelievably (and sadly, not surprisingly) Officers Jennifer Thompson, John Hughes and Michelle Tafoya have not received any discipline whatsoever for their actions, despite the following evidence of their malfeasance:
"'Officer Thompson denies deploying her Taser against [Hung Minh] Tran while he was on his knees, facing away from her, but based upon the testimony of several witnesses, I find that she did,' arbitrator Alan Bonebrake wrote, adding she deployed probes into Tran's back.
'This was unnecessary, unreasonable and an excessive use of force,' he wrote. Tran proved he was deprived of his civil rights from the use of the Taser, assault and Thompson's negligence, the arbitrator found."
...
"At [Christopher] Clay's criminal trial, Hughes acknowledged Clay was passively resisting, not moving toward him, not reaching for anything. When questioned by Clay's criminal defense attorney Stephanie Engelsman, Hughes admitted he violated bureau policy.
'I don't think there was any dispute dramatically as to what Clay was doing at the moment he was Tasered,' said deputy city attorney Scott Moede, who represented the officers in the civil suit.
Clay said he sued Tafoya because she started the encounter 'yelling at me like a mad person,' without ever trying to talk, and Hughes for shooting him."
By way of comparison, in what private company would employees that were found to have blatantly violated policy, causing undue harm to people (and then apparently lying about it, at least in Thompson's case), and whose actions ended up costing their firm a six-figure settlement would be allowed to continue on in their positions without any punishment whatsoever?
Actually, it's much worse than that. Official investigations in both cases revealed that both men were on their knees with their hands on their head or interlaced behind their neck when the cops went ahead and zapped them anyway:
"As the Portland Police Bureau grapples with how to update its Taser policy, two federal lawsuits stemming from inappropriate Taser use suggest some city police aren't familiar with the current restrictions on their use."
"Suggest"? "Prove" would seem to be a much more appropriate term right here.
Both brutality victims were subsequently found not guilty by juries or had their charges (one was for interfering with police; nope, no unwarranted "you will respect my authoritah" beefs here) dropped, and they subsequently filed federal lawsuits against the city for damages.
Portland has agreed to settle those suits by paying out close to $140,000 of local taxpayers' hard-earned money, yet unbelievably (and sadly, not surprisingly) Officers Jennifer Thompson, John Hughes and Michelle Tafoya have not received any discipline whatsoever for their actions, despite the following evidence of their malfeasance:
"'Officer Thompson denies deploying her Taser against [Hung Minh] Tran while he was on his knees, facing away from her, but based upon the testimony of several witnesses, I find that she did,' arbitrator Alan Bonebrake wrote, adding she deployed probes into Tran's back.
'This was unnecessary, unreasonable and an excessive use of force,' he wrote. Tran proved he was deprived of his civil rights from the use of the Taser, assault and Thompson's negligence, the arbitrator found."
...
"At [Christopher] Clay's criminal trial, Hughes acknowledged Clay was passively resisting, not moving toward him, not reaching for anything. When questioned by Clay's criminal defense attorney Stephanie Engelsman, Hughes admitted he violated bureau policy.
'I don't think there was any dispute dramatically as to what Clay was doing at the moment he was Tasered,' said deputy city attorney Scott Moede, who represented the officers in the civil suit.
Clay said he sued Tafoya because she started the encounter 'yelling at me like a mad person,' without ever trying to talk, and Hughes for shooting him."
By way of comparison, in what private company would employees that were found to have blatantly violated policy, causing undue harm to people (and then apparently lying about it, at least in Thompson's case), and whose actions ended up costing their firm a six-figure settlement would be allowed to continue on in their positions without any punishment whatsoever?
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Today's TASER Travesty/The Jack-Booted Thug of the Week...
... double winner is Toronto, Ontario Constable Sgt. Christopher Hominuk, who was caught on police cruiser interior cam footage threatening to torture TASER not one but two different handcuffed burglary suspects, one in the neck and one in the genitals, if they didn't immediately provide information on another suspect who was still on the loose:
"Hominuk replied: 'I’ll f---ing Taser you. If you are lying to me, when I get back to the station, I’m Tasering you in the f---ing n-ts.'"
Exactly the kind of misuse that the TASER is specifically not designed for, yet here's clear proof that such undeserved shocking sessions still get handed out with disturbing regularity by out-of-control cops like this one.
We have to give credit where it's due to the unnamed officer with integrity (and guts to boot) who noticed the video footage while researching another case and notified the professional standards branch (presumably the Canadian version of Internal Affairs), who then investigated the incident and referred the cop for prosecution.
Wannabe-Jack Bauer Hominuk pleaded guilty to one count of threatening bodily harm and will be sentenced on June 14, yet oddly enough "He remains suspended from the force with pay."
We don't think we're going out on a limb to speculate that the department is probably on fairly solid legal ground should it decide to can that convicted bully without further delay.
"Hominuk replied: 'I’ll f---ing Taser you. If you are lying to me, when I get back to the station, I’m Tasering you in the f---ing n-ts.'"
Exactly the kind of misuse that the TASER is specifically not designed for, yet here's clear proof that such undeserved shocking sessions still get handed out with disturbing regularity by out-of-control cops like this one.
We have to give credit where it's due to the unnamed officer with integrity (and guts to boot) who noticed the video footage while researching another case and notified the professional standards branch (presumably the Canadian version of Internal Affairs), who then investigated the incident and referred the cop for prosecution.
We don't think we're going out on a limb to speculate that the department is probably on fairly solid legal ground should it decide to can that convicted bully without further delay.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
The Jack-Booted Thug of the Week...
... is (now former) Sarasota County, Florida Sheriff's Deputy Mark Perrin, who was fired after an investigation confirmed that he indeed cursed out a misbehaving but unresisting special-needs student, flung her across a school bus and then threatened to TASER her for good measure:
"I'll snatch your ass out of that seat."
What an appropriate way to deal with handicapped students.
The firing of this bully is a very good start, but it's clear that Perrin's abusive behavior is outrageous enough to be deserving of further legal consequences. If the driver or aide present on that bus had similarly abused that student in front of so many neutral eyewitnesses they would have (rightly) been immediately arrested and charged with assault.
Why, then, hasn't the same happened toDeputy Mr. Perrin?
"I'll snatch your ass out of that seat."
What an appropriate way to deal with handicapped students.
The firing of this bully is a very good start, but it's clear that Perrin's abusive behavior is outrageous enough to be deserving of further legal consequences. If the driver or aide present on that bus had similarly abused that student in front of so many neutral eyewitnesses they would have (rightly) been immediately arrested and charged with assault.
Why, then, hasn't the same happened to
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Two of the three 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges on a panel who heard arguments on this recent case have decided that it's perfectly fine for three Seattle, Washington police officers to TASER (three times!) a 7-months pregnant women whose sole "crime" was to refuse to sign a traffic ticket:
"The majority [Judges Cynthia Holcomb Hall and Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain] noted that the M26 Taser was set in “stun mode” and did not cause as much pain as when set on 'dart mode.'"
Well that minor distinction certainly changes the circumstances, doesn't it?
According to these learned jurists, it's not the misuse of a less-than-lethal self-defense weapon as a pain compliance tool but rather deploying it on too high a setting that makes it "excessive force".
"An officer was holding [Malaika] Brooks’ arm behind Brooks’ back while she was being shocked."
That sounds like unbelievable brutality to us. She was already being restrained and would seemingly be unable to put up much further resistance due to her obviously gravid condition, yet these cops saw fit to continue to make her twitch and dance, leaving permanent physical scars, according to the story.
One wonders if these judges would have the same opinion if they were required to personally experience the two settings for themselves.
"The majority [Judges Cynthia Holcomb Hall and Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain] noted that the M26 Taser was set in “stun mode” and did not cause as much pain as when set on 'dart mode.'"
Well that minor distinction certainly changes the circumstances, doesn't it?
According to these learned jurists, it's not the misuse of a less-than-lethal self-defense weapon as a pain compliance tool but rather deploying it on too high a setting that makes it "excessive force".
"An officer was holding [Malaika] Brooks’ arm behind Brooks’ back while she was being shocked."
That sounds like unbelievable brutality to us. She was already being restrained and would seemingly be unable to put up much further resistance due to her obviously gravid condition, yet these cops saw fit to continue to make her twitch and dance, leaving permanent physical scars, according to the story.
One wonders if these judges would have the same opinion if they were required to personally experience the two settings for themselves.
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Just one more reason to stay well clear of the corrupt cesspool that is Chicago:
"According to the report, officers used Tasers on 683 occasions in the year ended Sept. 30, up sharply from 197 in 2009 and 163 in 2008."
The article notes that the approximately 200% increase in TASER usage is attributed to the fact that CPD is now handing them out like PEZ dispensers to pretty much every officer, despite the department's previously halting a plan to distribute them department-wide after several high-profile cases of alleged misuse.
The force has apparently also decided, according to the article, that it will no longer follow up on every incident in which a TASER is discharged, citing a backlog of other police complaints and manpower problems with its independent review board.
An enormous increase in TASER usage + no more review of that usage except in the most egregious of cases + a police agency famous for its many cases of abuse of power?
Not a comforting thought, to say the least.
"According to the report, officers used Tasers on 683 occasions in the year ended Sept. 30, up sharply from 197 in 2009 and 163 in 2008."
The article notes that the approximately 200% increase in TASER usage is attributed to the fact that CPD is now handing them out like PEZ dispensers to pretty much every officer, despite the department's previously halting a plan to distribute them department-wide after several high-profile cases of alleged misuse.
The force has apparently also decided, according to the article, that it will no longer follow up on every incident in which a TASER is discharged, citing a backlog of other police complaints and manpower problems with its independent review board.
An enormous increase in TASER usage + no more review of that usage except in the most egregious of cases + a police agency famous for its many cases of abuse of power?
Not a comforting thought, to say the least.
Friday, October 08, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Today's story comes out of Western Australia, where police officers saw fit to TASER an aboriginal man named Kevin Spratt an incomprehensible 24 times in two incidents over the two weeks he was in custody at the East Perth Watch House.
Mr. Spratt was TASERED 13 times after refusing to submit to a strip search and 11 times the next week after declining to come out of his cell (but he's merely an Abo so what's the big deal over his treatment, right?).
In other words, in these incidents the TASER was clearly misused as a pain-delivering compliance tool rather than a "potentially lethal" self-defense weapon, as it is only now being sensibly reclassified by such agencies as the Minneapolis, Minnesota Police Department.
"The two police officers responsible have so far escaped criminal prosecution but were fined a combined total of $1950 after a police disciplinary hearing into the incident."
Don't strain yourselves with the discipline down there, mates.
It's unbelievable that these officers are still employed as cops and face no other criminal sanction than having to pay such a trifling monetary penalty. It's obvious that their bosses aren't taking this clear incident of police brutality seriously at all.
"Mr Spratt said he was disgusted the two officers had not been stood down.
'They don't deserve to to hold a weapon like that if they're just going to use it like it's a water pistol,' he told the West Australian."
We certainly agree.
Mr. Spratt was TASERED 13 times after refusing to submit to a strip search and 11 times the next week after declining to come out of his cell (but he's merely an Abo so what's the big deal over his treatment, right?).
In other words, in these incidents the TASER was clearly misused as a pain-delivering compliance tool rather than a "potentially lethal" self-defense weapon, as it is only now being sensibly reclassified by such agencies as the Minneapolis, Minnesota Police Department.
"The two police officers responsible have so far escaped criminal prosecution but were fined a combined total of $1950 after a police disciplinary hearing into the incident."
Don't strain yourselves with the discipline down there, mates.
It's unbelievable that these officers are still employed as cops and face no other criminal sanction than having to pay such a trifling monetary penalty. It's obvious that their bosses aren't taking this clear incident of police brutality seriously at all.
"Mr Spratt said he was disgusted the two officers had not been stood down.
'They don't deserve to to hold a weapon like that if they're just going to use it like it's a water pistol,' he told the West Australian."
We certainly agree.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
"NORTH BELLE VERNON, Pa. — Police had to use a stun gun on a Pittsburgh-area man whose house was on fire because they say the man was endangering himself trying to battle the blaze with a garden hose."
Sounds eerily reminiscent of "We had to destroy the village in order to save it", doesn't it?
The homeowner, Damon Baker, was frantically trying to save his many reptiles from being consumed by the flames. He saved five; six more didn't make it because the cops forced him to stop his efforts by shocking him senseless.
Yep, that sure is a legitimate use of a "less than lethal" self defense weapon right there. Not. Maybe the cops could have grabbed some buckets or a neighbor's hose if they really wanted to help Mr. Baker, instead of arrogantly deciding to assert their putative authority over him and his selfless actions.
When one comes right down to it it's Baker's pets, house, property and, ultimately, his life. If he wants to risk it by wading in with a garden hose that's his business and no one else's.
"Police say no charges will be filed against Baker."
Of course there won't be any charges, because he committed no crime. We're sure being let off without penalty is of pretty small comfort to him right now, though, especially as he grieves the senseless loss of his pets.
Sounds eerily reminiscent of "We had to destroy the village in order to save it", doesn't it?
The homeowner, Damon Baker, was frantically trying to save his many reptiles from being consumed by the flames. He saved five; six more didn't make it because the cops forced him to stop his efforts by shocking him senseless.
Yep, that sure is a legitimate use of a "less than lethal" self defense weapon right there. Not. Maybe the cops could have grabbed some buckets or a neighbor's hose if they really wanted to help Mr. Baker, instead of arrogantly deciding to assert their putative authority over him and his selfless actions.
When one comes right down to it it's Baker's pets, house, property and, ultimately, his life. If he wants to risk it by wading in with a garden hose that's his business and no one else's.
"Police say no charges will be filed against Baker."
Of course there won't be any charges, because he committed no crime. We're sure being let off without penalty is of pretty small comfort to him right now, though, especially as he grieves the senseless loss of his pets.
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Marin County, California resident Peter McFarland was returning with his wife from a charity fundraiser last June 29 when he tripped and fell on his own front stoop. Mrs. McFarland called paramedics, who arrived and treated her husband for his minor injury.
As the EMTs were leaving, according to the McFarlands, two Marin County sheriff's deputies showed up and announced that they were going to force Mr. McFarland to go to the hospital because he "may be suicidal" (he had apparently joked about shooting himself in the head if he had possessed a gun in a presumably (and admittedly dumb) gesture to lessen his pain and embarrassment at the situation).
When McFarland, a 64-year-old pancreatic cancer survivor with a heart condition, refused to go with the two cops, guess what? Out came the TASERs, which were then used on him three times:
McFarland was then taken in on resisting arrest charges (which were then naturally subsequently dropped since he, well, wasn't actually being arrested for anything).
"[Attorney John] Scott says the deputies had no search warrant or legal reason to enter McFarland's home and even if they thought he was drunk and suicidal, Scott says the Tasing was excessive force."
Gee, you think?
As the EMTs were leaving, according to the McFarlands, two Marin County sheriff's deputies showed up and announced that they were going to force Mr. McFarland to go to the hospital because he "may be suicidal" (he had apparently joked about shooting himself in the head if he had possessed a gun in a presumably (and admittedly dumb) gesture to lessen his pain and embarrassment at the situation).
When McFarland, a 64-year-old pancreatic cancer survivor with a heart condition, refused to go with the two cops, guess what? Out came the TASERs, which were then used on him three times:
McFarland was then taken in on resisting arrest charges (which were then naturally subsequently dropped since he, well, wasn't actually being arrested for anything).
"[Attorney John] Scott says the deputies had no search warrant or legal reason to enter McFarland's home and even if they thought he was drunk and suicidal, Scott says the Tasing was excessive force."
Gee, you think?
Sunday, August 22, 2010
The Jack-Booted Thug(s) of the Week...
... are one of the fine persons who comprise the Okaloosa County, Florida Sheriff's Department as well as two members of the Denver, Colorado Police Department (all unnamed, of course) for not one but two recent incidents in which bystanders were arrested by officers for daring to object out loud to the way those cops were mistreating some of their fellow citizens:
1. Two young Florida men with apparently much more sense than the local gendarmes were arrested after they loudly complained to a sheriff's deputy about his TASERING a car-crash victim in order to "render aid" to the patient:
"About 3 a.m. Aug. 14, the deputy was assisting EMS at a traffic crash on the 6000 block of Old River Road that involved a 4-wheeler, according to an Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office arrest report. The patient became combative with EMS.
'I had to deploy my Taser to gain compliance,” the report said. The 19-year-old aggressively moved toward the deputy and yelled, “You’re a (expletive) for Tasing an injured person.'"
That's some mighty fine "aid rendering", Deputy. By the way, sir, you are an (expletive) if that is indeed how the incident went down.
2. Two Denver PD officers were caught on tape beating local resident Mark Ashford senseless after Ashford, walking his dogs past the scene of a routine traffic stop, remarked to the driver that he did observe the motorist come to a halt at the stop sign and that he would be happy to testify to that fact in court:
"[Attorney Will] Hart says Mark Ashford was walking his dogs near 20th and Little Raven in LoDo, when he saw police pull over a driver for failing to stop at a stop sign. Ashford told the driver he saw him stop and would be willing to testify in court. Hart says the officer overheard him and 'wasn't very happy.'
That's when Ashford says the Denver police officers demanded his I.D. and detained him. Ashford tried to take a picture of the officers to document the incident, and a few second later he was on the ground."
Again with the retaliation for daring to film an officer in action. When will this madness end?
Ashford was booked for interference and resisting arrest, charges that were subsequently dropped for an obvious lack of evidence. He has now filed a formal complaint against the two officers alleging excessive force. After viewing the raw video (available at the link), we tend to support that course of action.
Being a vocal critic while at the same time not interfering with a police officer's actions might be annoying to you badged fellows, but it certainly isn't illegal. Official retaliation for doing so, however, is. Good luck fighting those forthcoming civil-rights violation complaints.
1. Two young Florida men with apparently much more sense than the local gendarmes were arrested after they loudly complained to a sheriff's deputy about his TASERING a car-crash victim in order to "render aid" to the patient:
"About 3 a.m. Aug. 14, the deputy was assisting EMS at a traffic crash on the 6000 block of Old River Road that involved a 4-wheeler, according to an Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office arrest report. The patient became combative with EMS.
'I had to deploy my Taser to gain compliance,” the report said. The 19-year-old aggressively moved toward the deputy and yelled, “You’re a (expletive) for Tasing an injured person.'"
That's some mighty fine "aid rendering", Deputy. By the way, sir, you are an (expletive) if that is indeed how the incident went down.
2. Two Denver PD officers were caught on tape beating local resident Mark Ashford senseless after Ashford, walking his dogs past the scene of a routine traffic stop, remarked to the driver that he did observe the motorist come to a halt at the stop sign and that he would be happy to testify to that fact in court:
"[Attorney Will] Hart says Mark Ashford was walking his dogs near 20th and Little Raven in LoDo, when he saw police pull over a driver for failing to stop at a stop sign. Ashford told the driver he saw him stop and would be willing to testify in court. Hart says the officer overheard him and 'wasn't very happy.'
That's when Ashford says the Denver police officers demanded his I.D. and detained him. Ashford tried to take a picture of the officers to document the incident, and a few second later he was on the ground."
Again with the retaliation for daring to film an officer in action. When will this madness end?
Ashford was booked for interference and resisting arrest, charges that were subsequently dropped for an obvious lack of evidence. He has now filed a formal complaint against the two officers alleging excessive force. After viewing the raw video (available at the link), we tend to support that course of action.
Being a vocal critic while at the same time not interfering with a police officer's actions might be annoying to you badged fellows, but it certainly isn't illegal. Official retaliation for doing so, however, is. Good luck fighting those forthcoming civil-rights violation complaints.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
A couple of cases of less-than-professional police officers getting a little taste of their own medicine:
1. Phoenix, Arizona police officer Seth Samuel Castillo has filed a $500,000 notice of claim against the nearby city of Gilbert alleging excessive force and the violation of his Fourth Amendment rights because officers in that burg used a TASER on Castillo while attempting to arrest him for DUI.
There's apparently not much doubt that Officer Drunky was guilty of his alleged crime,
[Castillo] was found on Jan. 3 "slumped over" behind the wheel of a [running] black Jeep Commander, which was blocking an intersection in his Gilbert neighborhood, according to a police report.
1. Phoenix, Arizona police officer Seth Samuel Castillo has filed a $500,000 notice of claim against the nearby city of Gilbert alleging excessive force and the violation of his Fourth Amendment rights because officers in that burg used a TASER on Castillo while attempting to arrest him for DUI.
There's apparently not much doubt that Officer Drunky was guilty of his alleged crime,
[Castillo] was found on Jan. 3 "slumped over" behind the wheel of a [running] black Jeep Commander, which was blocking an intersection in his Gilbert neighborhood, according to a police report.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Australia's Sydney Morning Herald recently concluded a year-long freedom-of-information court fight to obtain the results of a 2008-2009 trial by the police down there (results that the cops did not want released, judging by their fighting tooth and nail to avoid having this become public reluctance to give out the data) that was used to justify the apparently already-made decision to give a TASER to every officer in the state of New South Wales:
"The documents reveal that police and the government used the trial as window dressing to affirm a decision they had already made - to give the weapon to all general duties police - and ignored worrying results."
"Worrying results" is an total understatement, to say the very least.
Some of the many "stunning" and thuggish incidents of police misusing TASERS the paper uncovered were:
"Stunning a handcuffed child at a juvenile detention centre.
Stunning two suicidal people covered in fuel, which can be ignited by a Taser blast.
The repeated stunning of a compliant man who presented no threat and was surrounded by members of the riot squad. This is being investigated by the Ombudsman and police.
...
Since its introduction, 26 officers have been disciplined for not following police operating procedures, and the NSW Ombudsman has had 14 complaints.
...
There were cases of people being hit by a Taser as many as six times, and others where police appeared to use the weapon to make argumentative but non-threatening people comply with directions.
In one case a sergeant drew his Taser when he encountered two young men spray painting. He drew the weapon, he later said, because one of the vandals was carrying an extendable paint roller and he was ''unsure what their reaction would be to his presence''. He did not fire the weapon.
A mother was accidentally hit when police fired at her son in one incident and a police officer was accidentally stunned in another.
Police also pointed Tasers at groups of people, including protesters inside the Villawood Detention Centre, despite Tasers being acknowledged as an ''inappropriate'' weapon for use against crowds.
Police also appeared habitually to misuse the weapon in its ''drive-stun'' mode, in which the Taser is held against the target's body and causes pain without incapacitation. According to the Australian distributor, that mode is designed to be used only when the initial discharge fails. But the trial showed numerous examples of police using only drive-stun mode to gain compliance." (Emphasis ours)
Showing complete disregard for the TASER's intended use as a less-than-lethal defensive weapon, we remind everyone, not to mention a disgusting misuse of their official police powers.
Nope, no worries or concerns here, according to Assistant Police Commissioner Alan Clarke:
"'I believe the overwhelming evidence is that Taser are being used appropriately by NSW Police.'"
Then you are a liar as well as a thug, sir.
How long will it be until the peasants of the world decide that being herded by the functional equivalent of a cattle prod whenever and wherever abusive cops wish is no longer acceptable?
"The documents reveal that police and the government used the trial as window dressing to affirm a decision they had already made - to give the weapon to all general duties police - and ignored worrying results."
"Worrying results" is an total understatement, to say the very least.
Some of the many "stunning" and thuggish incidents of police misusing TASERS the paper uncovered were:
"Stunning a handcuffed child at a juvenile detention centre.
Stunning two suicidal people covered in fuel, which can be ignited by a Taser blast.
The repeated stunning of a compliant man who presented no threat and was surrounded by members of the riot squad. This is being investigated by the Ombudsman and police.
...
Since its introduction, 26 officers have been disciplined for not following police operating procedures, and the NSW Ombudsman has had 14 complaints.
...
There were cases of people being hit by a Taser as many as six times, and others where police appeared to use the weapon to make argumentative but non-threatening people comply with directions.
In one case a sergeant drew his Taser when he encountered two young men spray painting. He drew the weapon, he later said, because one of the vandals was carrying an extendable paint roller and he was ''unsure what their reaction would be to his presence''. He did not fire the weapon.
A mother was accidentally hit when police fired at her son in one incident and a police officer was accidentally stunned in another.
Police also pointed Tasers at groups of people, including protesters inside the Villawood Detention Centre, despite Tasers being acknowledged as an ''inappropriate'' weapon for use against crowds.
Police also appeared habitually to misuse the weapon in its ''drive-stun'' mode, in which the Taser is held against the target's body and causes pain without incapacitation. According to the Australian distributor, that mode is designed to be used only when the initial discharge fails. But the trial showed numerous examples of police using only drive-stun mode to gain compliance." (Emphasis ours)
Showing complete disregard for the TASER's intended use as a less-than-lethal defensive weapon, we remind everyone, not to mention a disgusting misuse of their official police powers.
Nope, no worries or concerns here, according to Assistant Police Commissioner Alan Clarke:
"'I believe the overwhelming evidence is that Taser are being used appropriately by NSW Police.'"
Then you are a liar as well as a thug, sir.
How long will it be until the peasants of the world decide that being herded by the functional equivalent of a cattle prod whenever and wherever abusive cops wish is no longer acceptable?
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Officers with the Tybee Island, Georgia police (what's with the cops in Georgia lately, anyway?) are accused of using a TASER not once, but twice on an 18-year-old autistic man with a heart condition and then throwing him to the ground, breaking one of his front teeth in the process, simply because the teen was sitting on the curb with his head between his arms:
"[Clifford] Grevemberg's brother, Dario Mariani, says officers told him Grevemberg was being drunk and disorderly. He says he responded that the youth is a special needs child who has never had alcohol."
This sounds suspiciously like one of those all-too-often occurring incidents where a person didn't snap to as fast as the officers wanted, so the cops arrogantly decided to speed things up a bit by misusing a "less than lethal" weapon that was never intended to be deployed as a compliance tool. How helpful of them.
"A police dispatcher said Sunday nobody was available to comment."
No, we imagine no one at the department will be willing to opine on this apparently maddening turn of events for quite some time, at least until the inevitable lawsuit is settled.
"[Clifford] Grevemberg's brother, Dario Mariani, says officers told him Grevemberg was being drunk and disorderly. He says he responded that the youth is a special needs child who has never had alcohol."
This sounds suspiciously like one of those all-too-often occurring incidents where a person didn't snap to as fast as the officers wanted, so the cops arrogantly decided to speed things up a bit by misusing a "less than lethal" weapon that was never intended to be deployed as a compliance tool. How helpful of them.
"A police dispatcher said Sunday nobody was available to comment."
No, we imagine no one at the department will be willing to opine on this apparently maddening turn of events for quite some time, at least until the inevitable lawsuit is settled.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Two police officers in Martinsville, Indiana have been placed on administrative leave after they were accused of assaulting and then TASERing a badly-behaving 10-year-old boy at a local daycare center.
"The release said that the officers, trying to prevent the child from hurting other children, staff members and himself, slapped the boy and then used a Taser to subdue him."
"We had to hurt the child to stop him from hurting himself". What doublespeak lunacy.
It's a sad day when two adults who are professionally trained in subduing large criminal suspects can't manage to restrain a small child without resorting to (and misusing) their favorite compliance tool.
Unless, of course, they never even bothered to try, and merely lit the poor kid up right out of the gate.
The results of this internal investigation should be quite illuminating.
"The release said that the officers, trying to prevent the child from hurting other children, staff members and himself, slapped the boy and then used a Taser to subdue him."
"We had to hurt the child to stop him from hurting himself". What doublespeak lunacy.
It's a sad day when two adults who are professionally trained in subduing large criminal suspects can't manage to restrain a small child without resorting to (and misusing) their favorite compliance tool.
Unless, of course, they never even bothered to try, and merely lit the poor kid up right out of the gate.
The results of this internal investigation should be quite illuminating.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Kankakee, Illinois police officer Lonnie Netzel apparently thought it would be a capital idea to TASER some junior high students who were part of a special-needs class as some kind of twisted "demonstration", as the microcephalic cop is accused of actually doing this very act on Tuesday.
Netzel has now (thankfully) been put on administrative leave (with pay, no doubt), and the parents of two of the students have today (naturally, and in this case quite rightly) filed a federal lawsuit against him, the school district and the city of Kankakee, as well as the two teachers who apparently stood by and watched Netzel perform his little experiment on their charges.
"The Netzel [sic] allegedly Tased a few students in the finger a week earlier, and allegedly has a history of intimidation."
What a "shocker". Another bully with a badge who probably should have been bounced years ago, but most likely thanks to his union and his fellow officers who overlooked his claimed "intimidating" behavior for 19 years is still around to do breathtakingly stupid stuff such as this. That's just the sort of valued "professional" who should be working as a school-resource officer, isn't it?
"In one of the more gruesome incidents detailed in the lawsuit, Netzel allegedly laid out sheets of newspaper and asked a boy to sit on it before being Tased, in case he defecated or urinated."
Oh, what a lovely spectacle. We're ill just imagining such a scene.
It's absolutely unbelievable that a two-decade veteran cop actually thought that this was a good idea, and imagined that his decision to low-level electrocute some vulnerable kids would somehow end well.
Hopefully the people of Kankakee, after having to pay out what will almost certainly be a multi-million dollar judgment against their city, police department and school district, will insist that "Officer" Netzel never again wear a badge.
Netzel has now (thankfully) been put on administrative leave (with pay, no doubt), and the parents of two of the students have today (naturally, and in this case quite rightly) filed a federal lawsuit against him, the school district and the city of Kankakee, as well as the two teachers who apparently stood by and watched Netzel perform his little experiment on their charges.
"The Netzel [sic] allegedly Tased a few students in the finger a week earlier, and allegedly has a history of intimidation."
What a "shocker". Another bully with a badge who probably should have been bounced years ago, but most likely thanks to his union and his fellow officers who overlooked his claimed "intimidating" behavior for 19 years is still around to do breathtakingly stupid stuff such as this. That's just the sort of valued "professional" who should be working as a school-resource officer, isn't it?
"In one of the more gruesome incidents detailed in the lawsuit, Netzel allegedly laid out sheets of newspaper and asked a boy to sit on it before being Tased, in case he defecated or urinated."
Oh, what a lovely spectacle. We're ill just imagining such a scene.
It's absolutely unbelievable that a two-decade veteran cop actually thought that this was a good idea, and imagined that his decision to low-level electrocute some vulnerable kids would somehow end well.
Hopefully the people of Kankakee, after having to pay out what will almost certainly be a multi-million dollar judgment against their city, police department and school district, will insist that "Officer" Netzel never again wear a badge.
Friday, January 01, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, despite their reputation as one of the most-overruled appellate bodies in the nation, has nonetheless gotten one right, shockingly enough (pun intended), and has ruled that police officers must indeed have a valid defensive reason to deploy a TASER on a person, and that merely enforcing compliance with the cops' barked orders (whether valid or not) doesn't quite fit that criteria:
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Today's TASER Travesty
Ozark, Alabama Police Officer Dustin Bradshaw apparently saw fit to TASER a ten-year-old girl, pretty much solely because the child refused to take a shower before bed:
"'Her mother told me to tase her if I needed to,' Bradshaw wrote."
"'Her mother told me to tase her if I needed to,' Bradshaw wrote."
Well, then everything's just dandy then. Tell us, Officer Bradshaw - would you have smacked the girl upside the head with your baton or worse had the "mother" asked you to do that instead of shocking her daughter senseless? Come on now, sir, you're supposed to be a voice of reason when responding to these types of domestic disturbances, and not end up becoming a participant in some sort of Redneck Games.
"The child was 'violently kicking and verbally combative' when Bradshaw tried to take her into custody"
For what? Felony tantrum-throwing and misdemeanor dirtiness?
It's bad enough that TASERs are regularly used as pain-delivery devices to force citizens to comply with police orders (whether lawful or not), instead of their designed function as less-than lethal self-defense tools for the protection of cops and other innocent people. For a cop to end up doing the exact same thing to a very young child is simply unconscionable.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Today's TASER Travesty
"At the same time Taser International is publicly telling police to avoid aiming at a suspect's chest, the company is privately telling police officers [in conference calls closed to the public and press] that there is virtually no problem aiming at a suspect's chest."
Then why did Taser bother to issue the training bulletin in the first place?
"Instead, Taser officials told police the bulletin is not about safety as much as it is about liability. By advising officers to avoid shooting at the chest, they are avoiding a potential controversy if a case ever goes to trial."
It's clear that the company's recent actions are much more about rear end-covering than a serious attempt to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries resulting from misuse of their product (cops deploying the TASER as a compliance tool rather than a less-than-lethal weapon intended for the self-defense of both police officers and innocent citizens). This latest move from the company is right in line with some of their other actions in recent years, which also tend to contradict their official statements:
"Taser maintained that no officer had ever been injured during training exercises. At the time, police across the country were reporting injuries that they blamed on Tasers.
The more we learn about Taser International and their questionable business practices, the less we think of them. We're irritated that they share our current location in Scottsdale, Arizona, because we believe that their presence reflects badly on this city.
Then why did Taser bother to issue the training bulletin in the first place?
"Instead, Taser officials told police the bulletin is not about safety as much as it is about liability. By advising officers to avoid shooting at the chest, they are avoiding a potential controversy if a case ever goes to trial."
It's clear that the company's recent actions are much more about rear end-covering than a serious attempt to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries resulting from misuse of their product (cops deploying the TASER as a compliance tool rather than a less-than-lethal weapon intended for the self-defense of both police officers and innocent citizens). This latest move from the company is right in line with some of their other actions in recent years, which also tend to contradict their official statements:
"Taser maintained that no officer had ever been injured during training exercises. At the time, police across the country were reporting injuries that they blamed on Tasers.
Taser said independent medical studies confirmed the safety of the stun gun. However, Taser officials were involved in many aspects of the studies and government researches said they did not look at stun gun safety.
Taser officials have said they welcome scientific debate about the stun gun. But the company has sued reporters, researchers, medical examiners and others who have raised questions about the stun gun's safety."
To cap things off, Robert Anglen, who authored the piece, reports that the Arizona Republic contacted Taser and openly asked to listen in on the conference call between the company and police agencies, even though the paper had been alerted to the call and was in possession of the means to monitor the conversation in secret. Taser declined:
The more we learn about Taser International and their questionable business practices, the less we think of them. We're irritated that they share our current location in Scottsdale, Arizona, because we believe that their presence reflects badly on this city.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
