Military police at the Eielson Air Force Base are facing questions of the need to taser Glen M. Wilcox, an 81-year-old Episcopalian priest. Wilcox was caught allegedly going 11 miles over the speed limit.
The officers with the 354th Security Forces Squadron said that they pulled Wilcox over just after 1 p.m. and that Wilcox refused to accept the documents. They allege he then took off down the highway.
Wilcox insists that he only left when the officers waved at him and “I thought that meant I could go on.”
The officers notified the Alaska State Troopers and treated the matter as a “high-risk traffic stop” when they stopped Wilcox again. They say that he initially refused to roll down his window, but eventually got out of the car. He was told to put his hands behind his back but Wilcox says that he is unable to physically do that and tried to show them that he could not physically comply.
The officers said that Wilcox used profanity and shifted as they tried to cuff him, but Wilcox insists that they had already thrown him to the ground when they tasered him.
What is interesting is that, while the officers charged him with fourth-degree misdemeanor assault, prosecutors dropped the charge. We discussed today how the Mercury News has found a common use of assault or resisting arrest charges in cases involving questionable use of force, here.
We also saw recently another tasering of a motorist for failing to obey an officer, here.
Wilcox later pleaded guilty to a reduced count of disorderly conduct and a misdemeanor count of failure to stop at the direction of a peace officer.
Notably, other departments are able to handle octogenarians without the use of tasers — even when they pull guns, here.
For the full story, click here.
Kudos to one of our anonymous readers from Barrow, Alaska.
This is interesting that the MP is giving tickets off premises at Eielson Air Force Base. Something is truly amiss, more like F***ed Up. The only authority that the MP’s have over civilians is for acts committed ON BASE. They can have authority over civilians off base for offenses committed against persons who are in the military.
Therefore the minister would have to be tried in Federal Court for the Traffic Stop to be legal for an offense that occurred on base. This does not include Highways that surround the base perimeter. I am not saying that they cannot be stopped and detained by the MPs and wait until a trooper arrives to then issue the civil infraction based upon the superior word of some “LEO” wanta be.
This is the lead Memo unless it has been changed and applies to all military installations unless excepted out .
“AUTHORITY FOR MLITARY POLICE TO ISSUE TRAFFIC CITATIONS TO MOTORISTS ON BOLLING AIR FORCE BASE”
Military Police have the authority to issue citations, enforceable in federal court, to motorists who violate traffic laws on Bolling Air Force Base.
http://www.justice.gov/olc/bolling_final.htm
Anonymously Yours,
The OLC opinion to which you have linked does not address the issue presented here. The OLC opinion only addresses the question of which entity — DoD or GSA — has authority to enforce traffic laws on Federal military installations. It does not address the question of whether DoD has authority to enforce traffic laws on the territory surrounding a Federal military installation.
On this issue, and the issue relevant here, military authorities are generally authorized to conduct off-installation operations “for the purpose of enforcing regulations and orders pertaining to persons subject to their jurisdiction.” Army Regulation 190-24 para. 3-2(b). Generally, this means that MPs — in coordination with the local LEOs — can conduct traffic stops in the territory surrounding a Federal military installation. Where the person stopped turns out to be a servicemember, the MPs exercise jurisdiction. Where the person turns out to be a civilian, the MPs detain the individual and call in the local LEOs.
This is not to vindicate the conduct of the MPs here; while it is not clear from the article whether the MPs were acting within their jurisdiction, it does seem clear that there was no need for the level of force they used. This is simply to point out the inaccuracy of the claim that the MPs were inherently beyond their jurisdiction to act here.
Obviously this man is a highly dangerous criminal. I mean to say, 11mph over the limit – that’s double figures y’know. Can’t be taking any chances with these desperate psychopaths. These brave officers should be given awards for going in without tank and air support.
Police always charge anyone they beat with assault…
Tasers are torture devices and constitute cruel and unusual punishment…
So far I know of 129 deaths from Taser use by police…I’m sure there’s been more…
Tasers are prone to abuse, and all too often in the hands of sadists…
The stop was made on a part of the Richardson Hwy that is the jurisdiction of the military base.
Any officer who is authorized to use a Taser must first complete a certification process in which he/she is actually Tasered. The Taser isn’t a torture device, it’s a way to get a combative subject to comply. A way to keep the individual and officers from getting hurt.
I’ve read several articles that focus on the fact that the man was 81, a minister, etc. Yes, the man was 81, but he actively resisting arrest. Alaska has loose gun laws, how were the officers to know whether he carried a weapon or not? Yes, he’s a minister. Ministers are not above the law. Ministers still have scandals that rock the news on a regular basis for things such as fraud and abuse. I think you have to take this into perspective and realize that no matter who he was, the law is the law. If you flee an officer, you’ll be arrested, even for going 11 over the speed limit.
Also, he was offered medical assistance after the arrest and refused it. Guess his arm didn’t hurt that bad.
I don’t see this as an exceptional act by a rogue cop, but just one example of the far too few of these abuses we hear about. I don’t often share this viewpoint because it’s not very popular, but I’m of the opinion that the number and/or percentage of police who have a shred of concern for the public is extremely small. Most every cop I’ve ever met in my 60 years are all ego, fed by a steady supply of testosterone and being more than willing to bully and inflict pain.
Another video from today of a “cop” (legal criminal) blatantly and repeatedly tasering a man with both hands flat on the hood of the patrol car.
http://wcco.com/video?id=69634@wcco.dayport.com
SometimesY,
who are you kidding? “the law is the law”
This explains it all, the officers had him under the radar and probably were waiting for him. Nah this was 11 years ago.
FAIRBANKS — An 81-year-old man was Tasered during a traffic stop last week.
It is the second time since 1998 that police have had to make a show of force during a traffic stop to arrest Glen M. Wilcox, a Fairbanks-based Episcopalian priest and real estate agent.
Link: http://newsminer.com/pages/full_story/push?article-81-year-old+Tasered+by+Eielson+Air+Force+Base+police%20&id=4253637-81-year-old+Tasered+by+Eielson+Air+Force+Base+police&instance=home_news_window
What I am concern with is the DOD turning to a civilian corp of police. Is this mot what the founder of the constitution warned of us? Is this not what we fought the Russians over?
AY,
I am with you on this one. There is no way that these officers could not have controlled this octogenarian without resorting to tazing him. The Tazer has become a toy for police to use and abuse at their whim.
‘SometimesY’ wrote: “Any officer who is authorized to use a Taser must first complete a certification process in which he/she is actually Tasered. The Taser isn’t a torture device, it’s a way to get a combative subject to comply. A way to keep the individual and officers from getting hurt.’
Let’s go through the errors one by one.
1) The so-called certification process is more-or-less controlled by Taser International and amounts to brainwashing. The trainees are taught the worldview of Taser International. They are not told (for example) that the American Medical Association has concluded that tasers can occasionally kill, and I quote: “directly or indirectly”.
2) The painful tasering to the trainee’s back, always the back, is effectively an indoctrination ritual of the sort used by cults. Invoke some serious pain, and you can instill insane loyalty.
3) The taser training is always fired into the back, never the chest. Taser International continues to claim the tasers are cardiac safe, but now also recommend that police “avoid the chest”.
4) The taser training cartridges have darts that are about 40% shorter than normal. And many sessions use clip-on wires. Both would tend to keep the taser current more towards the surface than the full-length darts.
5) Taser so-called NMI only occurs well past and beyond pain. You have to instill extreme pain, calculated to be about 2000 times “intense” pain to reach NMI. To discount the pain because the taser goes past it is insane logic.
6) If the taser is used for pain compliance, by an officer, for purposes of coercion (‘force’ as the verb), then it seems to meet the exact definition of “torture” as legally defined. If you’re not sure I’m right, then ask yourself if the police could use the glowing end of a lit cigarette to achieve the same purpose (minus the risk of sudden cardiac death). If using a glowing cigarette to force (verb) compliance is not acceptable, then why dressing up a torture device as high-tech makes it acceptable?
7) Getting hurt. The issue isn’t “getting hurt.” There are more important issue to address before getting down to injuries. Let’s start with DEATH. Use of tasers carries risks, and those risks include risk of death. Other forms of force may have slightly higher injury rates, but much lower death rates. And even the injury rates depends on excluding taser dart injuries. Why not exclude baton-related injuries as well, by the same logic as excluding the burnt flesh and dart holes left by tasers?
The above 7-point response is just to one of your paragraphs. Geesh. My blog has about 1400 posts which systematically shred all pro-taser arguments.
Cheers.
E-D:
Thank you your site is excellent, keep the truth coming.
Most police are military trained.
These folks are educated at a military war college if they were officers in the military.
Current military doctrine dictates that they are taught to use “overwhelming force” as a tactic.
Sometimes they forget where they learned that ideology.
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/09/intellectual-war-monger.html
This elderly man was stopped on the Richardson Highway which is a public right of way. This is a major highway in the Alaska interior which eventualy connects to the Alcan Highway that goes from Alaska to the lower 48 states. I have lived here in the Alaska interior all of my 54 years and have literally driven the Richardson Highway thousands of times. I have not once seen a military police officer pull anyone over. I believe this military police officer was way beyond his assigned duties and custimary and accepted enforcement practices. The Army and the Air Force have a very good relationship with us and I would hope this is resolved. Such a terrable event to happen to one of our elderly citizens.
Follow up from Air Force Times:
How many airmen does it take to arrest an 81-year-old preacher?
Four, apparently — plus a Taser.
Airmen from the 354th Security Forces Squadron at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, used a Taser on an elderly man on Oct. 29 after the man allegedly resisted arrest and assaulted one of the airmen during a routine traffic stop…
But:
“The [airmen] involved … responded with a minimum use of force required to apprehend the subject after he resisted arrest and assaulted an officer,” Stewart said. “According to the Air Force’s use-of-force manual, Tasers may be utilized when the subject is actively resisting or is noncompliant and demonstrating willingness and the ability to harm themselves or others.”
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/11/airforce_eielson_taser_110409w/
The airmen will not be disciplined, he said