Indiana lawsuit stimulates debate on Taser training

[BloodEclipse]

April 9, 2009




[FONT=Times New Roman, Serif]Suit filed by fired officer who declined shock draws divided reactions
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
By Robert Annis
robert.annis@indystar.com [/FONT]Should a sheriff be able to reassign an officer to a different, less desirable position if the officer refuses to undergo a training exercise?
What if that training exercise required the officer to receive a shock from a Taser?
And what if that officer had a note from his doctor advising against it?
Those are among the provocative questions at the center of a lawsuit filed this week by Ray F. Robert against the Hamilton County Sheriff's Department.


And how those questions are answered depends greatly on whom is being asked.
Robert, who spoke with The Indianapolis Star on Wednesday, said he can't fathom being fired for basically taking his doctor's advice.
"I'd been in law enforcement for more than 31 years, and (when I was terminated), it felt like it was all for nothing," Robert, 54, said. "Just because I can't be Tased doesn't mean I can't do my job."
Robert said two doctors -- including a physician chosen by the Sheriff's Department -- advised him against being Tased. He feared the electrical jolt and ensuing muscle spasms could further injure a damaged vertebra and a metal plate in his back.
"What happens if I become paralyzed? How long is the county going to pay me?" he asked. "What would I be able to do with my life if that happens?"
But Hamilton County Sheriff Doug Carter said other officers, including a 73-year-old employee and another officer with severe back problems, each received a two-second Taser jolt with no ill effects.
"Every single person who underwent the training found value in the exposure," Carter said. "I would never put one of my officers in danger. The vast majority of Taser injuries come from falls, which is why we have the training on a mat with people holding the person (getting Tased)."
Both sides agree that after Robert refused to be shocked in December, the department offered to create a position for him at the Hamilton County Jail.
But Robert's attorney, Daniel Lapointe Kent, called the gesture inadequate.
"They offered another position with a substantial reduction in the overall compensation package, with not as many benefits," he said. "He would have to work weekends and holidays and no longer have use of a squad car."
After Robert refused the position in the jail, Carter said he had no alternative but to fire him.
The issue drew divided reaction Wednesday.
Dalia Hashad, a policy director with human rights watchdog Amnesty International, praised Robert for his refusal and chastised the sheriff's decision.
"It seems they (the Sheriff's Department) lack a strong understanding how dangerous a Taser really is," Hashad said. "Given his medical history and the two doctor's notes, it's obvious he wasn't an appropriate person to be Tased. With that attitude, I'm curious how they're using the weapon on the street. Is there anyone they think shouldn't be Tased?"
Amnesty International is a longtime critic of Taser use. The organization attributes 335 deaths from July 2001 to August 2008 to the device.
But Noblesville Police Lt. Bruce Barnes said that if an officer can't be Tased, it may raise other questions.
"You have to question if someone is fit for duty if they say they can't train for a situation that might occur in real life," said Barnes, whose department is among several in Central Indiana, including Indianapolis police, that require such training. "What happens if you're wrestling with a suspect, and he grabs your Taser (and shoots you)? If you can't perform your duties, you're putting everyone else at risk."
Lapointe Kent said Robert didn't need a Taser because he had other weapons at his disposal, such as a nightstick and his firearm. Carter, however, said Tasers have become integral tools in police officers' nonlethal arsenals.
"The presence of Tasers has quickly de-escalated many violent situations," Carter said. "In five seconds, the situation is brought under control with no injury to the person or the officer. (If you were a suspect,) would you rather be hit in the head with a nightstick or stunned with a Taser with no injuries afterward?"
Tasers temporarily incapacitate suspects by delivering five seconds of 50,000 volts of low-amperage electricity through two barbs shot into the body from up to 21 feet away.
Most training programs give officers the choice of being shot with the barbs or receiving a shorter jolt through a pair of alligator clips attached to a pant leg.
Many agencies believe it is imperative for officers to understand what a Taser shock feels like, in part so they will show restraint before using the device.
In a written statement, Taser company spokesman Steve Tuttle said fewer than 100 injuries have occurred during more than 625,000 training exposures.
Greenwood Police Chief Joe Pitcher said he has had a couple of officers with heart issues who were cleared by their doctors to be Tased.
"Their doctors told them there was no evidence that it would be harmful, so to go ahead and do it," Pitcher said. The training "gives us a good lesson that if we do have to resort to these instruments, we know how painful they are to the people we have to use them on."
"Tasers are very painful but not lethal," he said. "They are subject to abuse if you are not familiar with how painful they are."
Robert's suit, filed in federal court, alleges his constitutional rights were violated and seeks reinstatement, back wages and punitive damages.


So based on a stupid comment like this:

"What happens if you're wrestling with a suspect, and he grabs your Taser (and shoots you)? If you can't perform your duties, you're putting everyone else at risk."

I'm guessing every officer should be shot with their duty weapon as well because what if........

What a load of crap. The officer is fully capable of doing his job without being tased.

 

[jeremy]

Interesting can not wait to see the outcome...

 

[bigg cheese]

I'd read before that they require this for the sole purpose of making sure that the officers know that if they are confronted with a taser, they are not to hesitate in the slightest. I agree that it's a necessity for officers. Not that I really want to do it, but if my local department were to offer something along those lines to citizens, I might do it for the same reason stated above.

I've seen some PD's require the same of pepper spray. Neither as deadly as a gun, but they will incapacitate anyone, and then you are at the mercy of the assailant.

 

[cordex]

So based on a stupid comment like this:

I'm guessing every officer should be shot with their duty weapon as well because what if........

I've never been supportive of the use of tasers as compliance tools, but for whatever their drawbacks they are relatively safe devices. If you really don't see a difference between being shot with a pistol and being hit with a taser, pepper spray or a baton in training, I'd say you probably want to rethink the situation.

What a load of crap. The officer is fully capable of doing his job without being tased.

You sure about that? If the muscle spasms from a taser hit is likely to result in long-term damage to the officer's spine, is he in any shape to wrestle with a non-compliant perp?

 

[BloodEclipse]

I'd read before that they require this for the sole purpose of making sure that the officers know that if they are confronted with a taser, they are not to hesitate in the slightest. I agree that it's a necessity for officers. Not that I really want to do it, but if my local department were to offer something along those lines to citizens, I might do it for the same reason stated above.

I've seen some PD's require the same of pepper spray. Neither as deadly as a gun, but they will incapacitate anyone, and then you are at the mercy of the assailant.

I don't think you have to be hit with one to understand the potential it has. There have been many deaths with tasers. Just google taser in the news and you will be amazed. I had to really hunt to find this because I forgot where I first read it. Again any officer is going to know if someone pulls anything that looks like a gun, that they must act.

 

[Biggdogg]

Does anyone else see the irony in the fact that our LEA's routinely hold this type of training (and on a 73 yo man, no less also in this case), but waterboarding in considered "torture"?

 

[bigg cheese]

Does anyone else see the irony in the fact that our LEA's routinely hold this type of training (and on a 73 yo man, no less also in this case), but waterboarding in considered "torture"?

That's actually a really good point!

repped

 

[Fletch]

I've never been supportive of the use of tasers as compliance tools, but for whatever their drawbacks they are relatively safe devices.

I'm inclined to agree that they're relatively safe, and also that I don't support their use. I believe the perception of relative safety creates a more relaxed attitude toward using them inappropriately. If something causes "no permanent damage" (ignoring for the moment the cases where they have), there is going to be less inhibition about using it compared to say, a sidearm.

 

[cordex]

I'm inclined to agree that they're relatively safe, and also that I don't support their use. I believe the perception of relative safety creates a more relaxed attitude toward using them inappropriately. If something causes "no permanent damage" (ignoring for the moment the cases where they have), there is going to be less inhibition about using it compared to say, a sidearm.

Keep in mind I said: "I don't support their use as a compliance tool." not I don't support their use in general. I firmly believe that the use of tasers has saved lives in cases where previously the police would have resorted to lethal force.

Don't get me wrong, I hate when they are abused, but they're a tool I'm glad that police have. I, for one, would greatly prefer to be tased than be shot or have someone go at me with a baton.

 

[Fletch]

Keep in mind I said: "I don't support their use as a compliance tool." not I don't support their use in general. I firmly believe that the use of tasers has saved lives in cases where previously the police would have resorted to lethal force.

Don't get me wrong, I hate when they are abused, but they're a tool I'm glad that police have. I, for one, would greatly prefer to be tased than be shot or have someone go at me with a baton.

Fair enough.

 

[TRWXXA]

The "deadly" effect of Tasers is WAY overblown. The electrical energy put out by even the most powerful Taser is about 1/20th the amount needed to cause death, and about 1/7th the amount needed to interfere with electronic cardiac devices.

The fact is that these people who die during the deployment of a Taser die from positional asphyxia or exertional asphyxia (both are similar). A BG works himself into a state of respiratory distress, doing the thing that gets him Tasered -- fleeing, fighting, etc.. Now he's Tasered and is put face down on the ground, or held down by several officers while still struggling, and breathing is restricted. This position, plus the respiratory distress can quickly lead to respiratory arrest, and eventually to cardiac arrest. This sequence of events can happen very fast (under a minute), especially in people who have a stressed heart -- like that caused by habitual drug use (getting the picture?).

New training in the use of Tasers emphasises that the BG should not be left in the prone position or heavily restrained for very long. Get them upright and breathing freely as quickly as possible. Leaving them in a position that restricts breathing, even just long enough for the officers to catch their own breath, can lead to positional asphyxia.

 

[fpdshooter]

Anyone here been shocked by touching a doorknob lately?

Guess what, you have recieved a shock at around 100,000 volts. A Taser is only 50,000 volts. Anyone die from that?

I am a Taser instructor. No one has died from the Taser. Most of the suspects had injested a lethal amount of drugs. Most were overweight. Their hearts just could not handle the drugs, adreneline, and the sudden exertion of running from and fighting with the police.

They are an excellent tool. They have allowed officer to take suspects into custody using far less force than otherwise would have been required. I have taken the ride. Yes it sucks. But I would rather take the full ride everyday over pepper spray or getting hit with a baton, which causes blunt force trauma.

 

[1032JBT]

I along with fpdshooter am a Taser Instructor. To expand on what he said, the 50,000 volts that si touted by the media is only 50,000 volts for the first second or so from the time of the trigger being pulled not the time the probes make contact. After that the Taser automatically cycles down to 1200 volts. So for all of you beliving the media about the 50,000 volts.......I know this will be hard to belive, but the media is WRONG.

As far as the deaths related to the Taser, in all but a handfull 9actually I think it was only 1, but for the sake of aurgument we will say a handfull), a lot of the suspects would have died without the Taser due to medical issues while others died due to combined issues of being under the influance of drugs at the time and physical exerction ie: fighting. There is a little term that you can look up: Excited Delerium. Nuff said

For those that think we will use the Taser to a point of abuse......not saying it doesn't happen or couldn't happen because I would be lying if I said otherwise, but the Taser has safety precautions from the factory as far as documenting deployments and for how long those deployments were for.

I have been hit with the Taser more times than I would like to remember and yes, it sucks but I would still take it anyday over OC.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Recent news:
Fort Worth police chief promises thorough Taser death probe

BY MIKE LEE
mikelee@star-telegram.com




FORT WORTH -- Police Chief Jeff Halstead said Tuesday that his department will conduct a thorough investigation into the Taser death of a man in East Fort Worth on Saturday, but offered no new details.
Michael Jacobs Jr., 24, died after being stunned with a Taser in front of his house.
“It’s going to take us just a little bit of time,” to investigate, Halstead said in a brief appearance before the City Council on Tuesday. “As soon as we have the results, we’re going to extend some time to the family, to the leaders of the community and of course we’ll come back and made a report to you.”
Family members had called the police to report that Jacobs had not taken medication for his mental illness and was causing problems.
“I want to assure the Jacobs family, this council and our citizens that this matter will be fully and fairly investigated by our department and the medical examiner’s office,” he said.
Family members have said police officers used excessive force to subdue Jacobs, who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
Police were called to a house in the 6200 block of Ava Court Drive in east Fort Worth about 10:30 a.m. Saturday by Jacobs' parents who said their son was causing problems, according to a statement from police Saturday.
When they arrived, Jacobs was in the front yard and described as uncooperative.
In his statement Tuesday, Halstead described Jacobs as “hostile and combative” and said one of the officers stunned him “as trained to do in such circumstances.”
Jacobs was taken to John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, where he was pronounced dead about noon, according to the police statement.
The Taser, which delivers a 50,000-volt shock that can temporarily immobilize a suspect, has been used for years by police departments as an alternative to deadly force.
Amnesty International reported this year that 351 people have died for one reason or another after being stunned with Taser guns since June 2001.
Authorities have estimated it could be several weeks before they will release a cause of death for Jacobs.
The Tarrant County medical examiner’s office has completed an autopsy on him, but ruling on the manner and cause of death were pending an "investigation."
Their ruling also is pending toxicology results which could take 60 to 90 days, an investigator said Sunday.

While there may be many other reasons for the deaths, my argument was that you shouldn't have to be hit with a taser to be issued one. That premise escapes me really. Train on using it, know how to deploy it and under what circumstances (ROE). In a side note I think tasers are used way too often and in unjustified circumstances.

 

[1032JBT]

"While there may be many other reasons for the deaths, my argument was that you shouldn't have to be hit with a taser to be issued one. That premise escapes me really. Train on using it, know how to deploy it and under what circumstances (ROE). In a side note I think tasers are used way too often and in unjustified circumstances."

I respect your difference in opinion, but there are reasons to be required to be hit with it to carry it. I do not agree however that Police should be REQUIRED to carry it if they choose not to. But with that being said, I agree that if his medical conditions were bad enough for his doctor to say he couldn't be hit with for fear of SBI or death, then he at the very minimum needed a new medical checkup to see if he needed to be medically retired.