We have previously discussed the increasing use of tasers by police in circumstances where other avenues were available, including cases involving young children (here and here and here and here and here and here) or the elderly (here and here and here and here). Now we have a case where two Indiana police officers tasered a 10-year-old, 94-pound boy at the Tender Teddies Day Care in Martinsville.
The officers from the Martinsville Police Department responded to a report of an unruly child at a home day care location. Such calls are not uncommon, particularly with so many children with emotional or developmental problems. However, after the police arrived, they introduced tasers at Tender Teddies Day Care as witnesses watched in horror. Even the Martinsville Police Chief Jon Davis has acknowledged that his officers could have avoided using a stun gun on a child and has put the two officers on administrative leave pending investigation.
It seems a prototypical case on the expansion of the use of tasers and stun guns. At one time, police would have restrained the child physically. Now, police seem to use tasers as a first response. Despite these controversies, police around the country seem to view the taser as a weapon to use in the face of people who disobey their orders or represent any type of physical threat, even a child. In some of these cases, the taser appears like an virtual punishment tool when citizens do not comply. There appears little interest in politicians to look at this question and curtailing the use of tasers in the country. The result is a fear from many citizens that they could be tasered if they challenge an officer’s orders or question his authority.
Officers do not taser a child at day care unless they have been trained or convinced that such weapons can be used whenever there is a potential for physical contact. The attitude shown in past controversies reflects a casual and arbitrary use of the weapons — a reflection of the view that such use of force is entirely discretionary with the officer. When lawsuits are brought in even the most egregious cases, citizens often find courts that are entirely unsympathetic or unwilling to review such conduct. The abuse of tasers is part of an expansion of police powers in the United States that is worrisome and threatens to create a general intimidation of the public. That threatens not just to change the relationship of citizens to their government but to create a chilling effect on those challenging police abuse.
Source: NY Daily News
Kudos: Michael Blott
The cops will be exonerated, the child will be “charged” as an adult, and sentenced to a long Time Out.
Child will be charged with resisting arrest and disturbing the peace. You have to justify the Tasering. He will do time in juvie.
I find it very unconvincing there was a good reason to light up a ten year, 94 lb child. If he had weapon or something to that significance I could understand the Taser being used but two officers not being able to control him? Something is wrong with this picture.
I don’t see this as being evident as being part of a growing police state in the US, there are certainly other indications — instead I see it as over-reliance on the Taser as a matter of convenience rather than utilizing other uses of force.
On face value I would rather see it used than someone getting seriously hurt otherwise. Some officers are quick to draw the Taser. There are certainly times it is the best choice but some use it more than others. Something is to be said about what Seamus commented on his observation of older officers. They tended to use the Taser less than officers who are newer. I’ve lit up a few people at work, but rarely needed to. Plus, from a practical point of view each time a Taser cartridge was used it cost the department $25.00 to replace and it meant having to write up a use of force report that was avoided if you used ordinary means to just wrestle the person into cuffs.
On another note, I carried an ASP Expandable Baton on my equipment belt starting around 1990 and I never used it once in hitting someone with it in the extended position.
I think that someone who uses a Taser more often than others needs to have an evaluation as to why they are doing so.
seamus, That is one of the most informative comments I’ve ever read here. It is great that we have some folks here w/ real world experience. Thanks.
I had a case about a year ago wherein my client had been Tasered and ended up in the hospital charged with battery of a police officer (the officer had no injuries). The whole case was bulls**t, and began after racial slurs were aimed at my client and my client responded (stupidly) by inviting the officer to have unnatural relations with the officer’s mother. Anyway, one day while chatting with a judge friend about an unrelated matter, my partner was informed that the Chicago Police had cameras on their Tasers. A couple of “Huh!?” ‘s later (done in the voice of Scoobie-Doo) we were on the phone with the Taser Corporation. They were super helpful, gave us information about the order of Taser cameras CPD had ordered, and directed us to a promotional video promoting the cameras. They automatically activated when the Tasers were drawn and were marketed as a way for police departments to avoid frivolous law suits brought by those who were Tased. We subpoenaed information from the CPD, on how the cameras were used (I seem to recall they bought 100). And were informed that it was just a trial program that lasted a month after which all of the cameras were removed from the Tasers. The manufacturer seems to have their heart in the right place. They’ve invented what was supposed to be and alternative to blowing someone’s head off. They naively believe that in most cases officers would actually like to record their use of the product. Well, not in Chicago. One other fun fact we learned from the manufacturer (which lead to another subpoena) was that there is software in each gun which records (I believe down to the 10th of a second) how long it’s been deployed and whether it was fired or pressed against a subject. Our officer’s report indicated one zap, the software indicated 5 times. The aggravated battery was eventually dismissed.
20 years ago when I started as a defense attorney, and most of the cops were older than I was, there was a lot less of this nonsense (even by the street-monster cops in Chicago). I used to work in a branch court downtown that handled all the chaos from the Loop to Cabrini Green, and the police were regularly dealing with bat-shit crazy homeless people and drug addicts. They got attacked (and bitten) a lot. But there was a recognition by these older cops of who they were dealing with, a recognition that these people were nuts. The main concern of the police was that the suspects got HIV and Hep-C tests. They didn’t take it personally or act like victims. Those days are gone.
Al Z.,
“… subpoena the Chief’s child in and the Chief’s 80 year old mother.”
That is simultaneously a completely childish notion and a stunningly (pun intended) powerful image.
I can’t decide whether to berate or congratulate you.
It used to be that cops knew part of the job was wrestling w/ angry people and cuffing them. Now, the mindset for many is, “Hell, I’ll just taser the guy.” It has ALWAYS been befuddling to me since I started working in the law enforcement world[never a cop], why ALL cops aren’t required to be black belts in karate, That would solve a myriad of problems.
God sends down lightening bolts. Cops kill with tasers.
Here is the cite for an A.L.R. article on cops and tasers and Section 1983 liability.
American Law Reports
ALR6th
The ALR databases are made current by the weekly addition of relevant new cases.
When Does Use of Taser Constitute Violation of Constitutional Rights
Jay M. Zitter, J.D.
The media likes to make fun of tasers and their role in police and jailhouse killings. “Dont Tase me Bro!” is commonly quoted and all laught. Here is a case that is no longer funny to the tax payers of a town that tased and this article explains a bit about this case which settled for 2.5Million:
Taser Case Settled for $2,250,000; Township Policy Revised
Columbus, Ohio January 29, 2014 – A case arising from the application of a Perry Township, Ohio Taser policy and Matthew Hook, a fleeing property crime suspect, has been resolved. On August 8, 2010, Matthew Hook was wanted for property crimes and was fleeing from police. During his flight, he climbed a fence despite officer’s orders to stop. The Perry Township police officer deployed his Taser causing neuromuscular incapacitation which led to Matthew falling from the fence and sustaining a traumatic brain injury. As a result of the fall, Matthew suffers seizures, is emotionally unstable and requires constant monitoring. Mr. Hook, his parents and daughter filed suit asserting that the tasing was excessive force and that Perry Township had a deficient Taser policy. The officer and Perry Township denied liability and asserted that the force used was appropriate and that the Taser policy was consistent with legal requirements. The medical expenses and life care plan totaled millions of dollars.
Perry Township lost its motion for summary judgment in the district court and the case was settled while pending on appeal in the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals when a $2,250,000 settlement was reached. The settlement proceeds will be paid by the Township’s liability coverage and divided among Mr. Hook and the family members. No township funds were paid as part of the settlement. The Township has since amended its taser policy. And Mr. Hook has a sobering message for people who flee arrest: “I wish I had not run from the police. I would rather have my brain than the money.” Attorney Al Gerhardstein of Cincinnati, co-counsel for the Plaintiff, said, “We commend the Township for revising the Taser policy and we hope other jurisdictions will follow the Township’s example. This is a sad case for everyone involved.” Mr. Bill Lamkin and Mr. Tim Van Eman of Columbus are also co-counsel for the Plaintiffs.
CONTACT: AL GERHARDSTEIN – CELL 513.659.4765513.659.4765
—
If you are in that state and get tased you should call Al. Not me. The Al above.
This is part of an article from Amnesty Internationale:
February 15, 2012
Amnesty International Urges Stricter Limits on Police Taser Use as U.S. Death Toll Reaches 500
Contact: Suzanne Trimel, strimel@aiusa.org, 212-633-4150
(New York) — Two days after the death of a Georgia man who was shocked with a police Taser — raising the known death toll from tasers to 500 in the United States — Amnesty International today repeated its call for tighter limits on police use of the weapons.
According to data collected by Amnesty International, at least 500 people in the United States have died since 2001 after being shocked with Tasers either during their arrest or while in jail. Amnesty International recorded the largest number of deaths following the use of Tasers in California (92), followed by Florida (65), and Texas (37). The Oklahoma City Police Department led all law enforcement agencies in deaths (7) following by Las Vegas Metropolitan Police, Harris County Sheriff’s (Tx), Phoenix, Az and San Jose, Ca., all with six deaths.
On Monday, Johnnie Kamahi Warren was the latest to die after a police officer in Dothan, Al. deployed a Taser on him at least twice. The 43-year-old, who was unarmed and allegedly intoxicated, reportedly stopped breathing shortly after being shocked and was pronounced dead in a hospital less than two hours later.
“Of the hundreds who have died following police use of Tasers in the United States, dozens and possibly scores of deaths can be traced to unnecessary force being used,” said Susan Lee, Americas program director at Amnesty International. “This is unacceptable, and stricter guidelines for their use are now imperative.”
Strict national guidelines on police use of Tasers and similar stun weapons – also known as Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs) – would effectively replace thousands of individual policies now followed by state and local agencies.
Police forces across the United States currently permit a wide use of the weapons, often in situations that do not warrant such a high level of force.
Law enforcement agencies defend the use of Tasers, saying they save lives and can be used to subdue dangerous or uncooperative suspects. But Amnesty International believes the weapons should only be used as an alternative in situations where police would otherwise consider using firearms.
In a 2008 report, USA: Stun weapons in law enforcement, Amnesty International examined data on hundreds of deaths following Taser use, including autopsy reports in 98 cases and studies on the safety of such devices.
Among the cases reviewed, 90 percent of those who died were unarmed. Many of the victims were subjected to multiple shocks.
Most of the deaths have been attributed to other causes. However, medical examiners have listed Tasers as a cause or contributing factor in more than 60 deaths, and in a number of other cases the exact cause of death is unknown.
Some studies and medical experts have found that the risk of adverse effects from Taser shocks is higher in people who suffer from a heart condition or whose systems are compromised due to drug intoxication or after a struggle.
“Even if deaths directly from Taser shocks are relatively rare, adverse effects can happen very quickly, without warning, and be impossible to reverse,” said Lee. “Given this risk, such weapons should always be used with great caution, in situations where lesser alternatives are unavailable.”
There are continuing reports of police officers using multiple or prolonged shocks, despite warnings that such usage may increase the risk of adverse effects on the heart or respiratory system.
Deaths in the past year include Allen Kephart, 43, who died in May after he was stopped by police for an alleged traffic violation in San Bernardino County, Ca. He died after three officers shocked him up to 16 times. The officers were later cleared of wrongdoing.
Last November, Roger Anthony fell off his bicycle and died after a police officer in North Carolina shot him with a stun gun. The officer reportedly shocked Anthony – who had a disability and hearing problems – because he did not respond to an order to pull over.
Neither man was armed when police shocked them.
“What is most disturbing about the police use of Tasers is that the majority of those who later died were not a serious threat when they were shocked by police,” said Lee.
Al – more people have been killed by lightening since 2001 than by Tasers.
Jonathan: You do not ever acknowledge in your articles on tasers that a taser is a lethal weapon. Lethal means it can kill. Like a gun, it does not always kill. But, it can kill. It will likely kill a human who has a heart condition or a brain condition. It will likely kill a ten year old.
The cops in this case need to be prosecuted for assault with a deadly weapon and attempted murder. Period.
The cops need to be sued. The supervisor and the Chief need to be sued. The municipality that pays the cops, the supervisor and the Chief needs to be sued. They violated the child’s civil rights by this assault with a deadly weapon. This puts it in federal court under 42 United States Code Section 1983, 1985 and 1988.
When plaintiffs counsel deposes the cops at his office he should subpoena the Chief’s child in and the Chief’s 80 year old mother. He should, after hearing that tasers are harmless, offer to tase child and granma in front of camera and court reporter while taking their deposition. I think the Chief will object.
What is with schools and daycares calling the police for everything?
One, because the police are some scary people (for the wrong reasons), and two, because these schools are supposed to be capable of handling everything short of medical emergencies and violent crime.
Reblogged this on Citizens, not serfs.
The problem with tasers is that they were supposed to be so-called less lethal force. In other words, it is safer to use a taser rather than a firearm, and so the scale of force used in some circumstances could be reduced.
But it did not work out that way. In practical terms, when use of a firearm is appropriate police will _always_ use the firearm. It is unreasonable to expect an individual to substitute a less effective device in a case where personal safety is seriously threatened.
So tasers are use in practice only in situations where a firearm is clearly inappropriate. In other words, when there is no serious safety concern. It has effectively become a weapon of convenience for the police and since it is only used when force is not necessary, the use of the taser is almost always wrong.
“When your only solution is a hammer….” We all know how that ends.
This is not just the child and his parents who are upset at this, but this has wrecked any good will the police had with the parents of the other children at the school and the parents of any children in the community. Who is going to talk to Officer Friendly if he is likely to taser you?
Officers should be dismissed and criminal charges filed.
Can you imagine the reaction of any parent whose child has been tasered?
Police are dangerous. They lack judgement, training, common sense and most importantly respect for human beings.
The two officers should have been fired and then arrested.
Tasers should be made illegal. They’re torture devices.