On this video, a Utah officer appears to taser a him for a traffic ticket simply because he does not immediately obey the officer’s demands. Watch how the officer immediately pulls out his taser when the man is simply refusing to sign the ticket.
The officer tasers the man in front of his pregnant wife and then threatens the wife when she gets out of the truck. The officer states that the man was tasered for not obeying him. We can see other such uses of the tasers as a corrective punishment for citizens not obeying officers, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
I fail to see the justification in the use of force here. The man could well sue for the tasering. While he was not responding immediately to the officer, he was primarily contesting that there was a speed sign as claimed by the officer. The entire disagreement was over his refusal to sign the ticket. The officer does not attempt to call back up or insist on the man signing the ticket before he can leave. Instead of continuing to speak to the man, he orders the man out of the truck, pulls out his taser, and shoots him. While the man turns back toward his truck, it should not result in such a sudden escalation of force.
14 thoughts on “Shock Video: Utah Officer Tasers Man for Traffic Ticket in Front of Pregnant Wife”
I remember this video from about a year ago. I’m with the cop on this one. I have been ticketed dozens of times, maybe I’m just good at it. Don’t argue with cops. Don’t admit guilt, be polite, sign the ticket, and say goodbye. That’s it. This guy did everything wrong. Situations like this can have tragic endings.
In that situation, why would one “sign” the ticket? I would be very reluctant to “sign” something without it being reviewed by my lawyer. How would a citizen know that signing the ticket isn’t an admission of guilt or otherwise reduce his/her recourse to defend against the ticket?
Also, I now know to lay down on the ground when an officer pulls out a taser. Falling out of control from a standing position looks like it could easily result in broken bones and/or a head injury.
Eventually, a pregnant woman is going to get tasered – I wonder if that makes the taser manufacturers sweat a little?
He didnt sign the ticket, he was under arrest, he did not comply to the police officer’s orders. –anon
I seem to recall somewhere (another post) JT saying that it is NOT illegal for someone pulled over to NOT sign the ticket.
Will the remedial communications training Trooper Gardner participated in instruct when the taser ride is warranted?
The Supreme Court has defined the “objective reasonableness” standard as a balance between the rights of the person being arrested and the government interests that allow the use of force.
As rafflaw points out darn hard to balance the use of deadly force (we know tasers kill)when behaving stupid at a traffic stop.
Discussing the validity of a ticket is not grounds to be tazed. Not signing the ticket is not grounds for being tazed, even if it is illegal. Being stupid does not constitute grounds to be tazed. Even arguing with a police officer is not grounds to be attacked with a deadly weapon.
There is a process by which you contest the validity of a ticket. That process does not include arguing with a police officer or refusing to sign the ticket.
It’s a good thing that this driver was not an African-American. If he had been, this stop would be a clear-cut case of driving while black.
“I did not know that it was offense to not sign the ticket.”
It is. You can be placed under arrest for not signing the ticket. He didnt sign the ticket, he was under arrest, he did not comply to the police officer’s orders. He was tased and not seriously hurt. OMG POLICE BRUTALITY PREGNANT BABY THINK OF THE CHILDREN.
That was an amazing video. This officer should be removed from the force immediately. I did not know that it was offense to not sign the ticket. This taser is being used now for anything that doesn’t go the officer’s way. I also want to know what he was looking for under the driver’s seat after he spoke to the wife. Does a stop for a traffic ticket give him probable cause to search the car? His handling was beyond reasonableness and I hope the police department has a good insurance policy because they are going to need it.
Do you think that the state of Utah does as extensive of a mental health evaluation as the CIA or most DOJ’s? It does not appear that this Officer has been trained so well.
You should submit your application to the UHP.
Looked justifiable to me
The following excerpt from the ABA is important. So called Cop/lawyer TV shows do a disservice to citizens by embellishing claims that are often inaccurate and/or misleading. There are abundances of myths about citizens’ rights, such as Miranda warning requirements.
[ “What procedures must the police follow while making an arrest?
The police do not have to tell you the crime for which they are arresting you, though they probably will. They are not permitted to use excessive force or brutality when arresting you. If you resist arrest or act violently, however, the police are allowed to use reasonable force to make the arrest or keep you from injuring yourself.
While the police are arresting you, they might read you your Miranda rights. However, they do not have to read you these rights if they do not intend to interrogate you.” ]
If you really want to be pissed off, read this:
“UHP Sgt. Jeff Nigbur said in a telephone interview Monday evening that the agency had concluded its internal affairs investigation, which confirmed the findings from a preliminary review of the incident that Gardner’s actions were justifiable.”
Der Fuhrer would be happy with such fine “Jack-Booted Thugs” in The SS. The definition of such is a derogatory term used to describe an overly oppressive and authoritarian individual or group, often denotes violent tendencies. Thugs, thus described, are those in the service of an oppressive authoritarian, usually employing violence to achieve his/her/their master’s goals.A Jack
Google up the Wehrmacht or Himmler’s SS and see what I mean.
Interesting that after “the war” at the Nuremberg Trials, the Waffen-SS was condemned as a criminal organization due to its essential connection to the Nazi Party and its involvement in war crimes, while not being a part of the army.
If correct after WWI Germany was limited to a certain number of army and navy personnel. They used Russia to get around these unreasonable restrictions.
Have things really changed? Blackwater, KBR etc…..
In History the Dutch are touted as being a world power. Is the Dutch Empire the equivalent of Dell Computers today? They have a presence and you know about them but you just don’t see them around as much?
Comments are closed.