If this were a 6’4", 250lb. 25 year old man who was yelling and throwing punches at the officers, then I could see strong force being used. No problem.
But this is an obviously drunk, 45 year old, thin woman who is merely struggling and protesting.
Why does every arrest need to involve handcuffs? I know; because it is procedure…
Maybe it’s procedure because after experience arresting hundreds of thousands of people over the years police have determined it is the safest thing to do for all concerned.
Or, maybe you know more than they do about the best way to handle arrestees. Tough call.
Does anyone have an actual fact in their possession regarding this case? Or is this thread simply one more point/counterpoint of Recreational Outrage that would do better in the BBQ Pit (even if it has already been done there at least once)?
[ /Moderating ]
Bingo! Has her family spoken to that?
I’m not sure if you’re confused or I am . . . if your doctor thought you *should *have been in a coma, then that’s not exactly a great argument, now is it? It’s an indication that something is seriously, seriously wrong with your chemistry as a result of your alcohol abuse, not that this woman should have been able to do the same thing you can.
A person with a long history of alcohol abuse develops a tolerance to the intoxicant effects, and is therefore functional at much higher BAL than a ‘normal’ person. Two people have a BAL of 0.5; the eighth grader drinking for the first time will be in a coma but the longterm alcoholic may be up walking and talking. That this woman had a BAL of 0.28 does not tell you anything about how intoxicated she was in a functional sense. For a doctor to say that TM should have been in a coma is a bit of hyperbole, and not a quantitative diagnosis.
I see.
However, the fact that she strangled herself with handcuffs does seem to say something about how intoxicated she was in a functional sense, doesn’t it? Not exactly the act of a sober, rational person.
Isn’t there a legal term for the responsibilities that law enforcement and The System have when they take someone into custody? I keep thinking in loco parentis, but that’s schools and students… Anyway, my impression was that they are supposed to do all reasonable things (and sometimes unreasonable, like taking away shoelaces and toothbrushes) things to keep people in custody safe, even from themselves. Why couldn’t someone have sat in the room with her while she was handcuffed until they were ready to take her someplace more secure?
I mean, I get that this was a freak accident, and I’m not ready to bring out the pitchforks here. It just seems really stupid to leave a raving drunk* alone while you’re responsible for her welfare.
*and we do know they thought at the time she was a raving drunk - that’s why they wouldn’t let her on the plane.
Yes. Yes it does make handcuffs a “Good Thing”.
It may make handcuffs a Useful Thing or The Best Thing We Have Right Now, but I think reasonable people would agree that if we can develop some sort of inexpensive, easy to use restraint device that doesn’t cause circulatory problems to people wearing it peaceably or strangulation hazards to raving drunks, then that might be A Better Thing.
Heck, why not two pairs of handcuffs, one around each wrist and around a secure part of a bench? Looks medieval, sure, but more secure with less pain and suffering. And, y’know, death.
I’d hope these are the sorts of things that get discussed in the “review”.
I’m a criminal-loving, cop-hating, Body Count-listening civil libertarian. I’ve got “FUCK THA POLICE” tattooed on my forehead.* From my admittedly limited knowledge of the incident, I don’t think the 5-0 did anything wrong.
It’s one thing when the police negligently and callously let a prisoner in dire need of medical attention die in a cell (as happened a few years ago at my local county lockup). It’s another thing entirely when some idiot drunk, left alone for a handful of minutes, manages to asphyxiate herself while attempting to pull a Houdini.
My question is why was someone in such an obviously fragile mental state permitted by her family to travel cross-country alone?
It seems to me that with the large amount of raving drunks getting arrested there would be more than one case of note where self strangulation has occurred if handcuffs were truly a hazard. I’m guessing that it took an unusual set of circumstances for her to harm herself. Was she double jointed? I can’t imagine how she even got the handcuffs near her throat.
She was shackled to a bench. With the handcuffs? Leg restraints? Did she flip around and end up with her head wedged under an arm rest? Grip your hands behind your back and then try getting them anywhere near your throat.
There is a lot we don’t know about the specifics of the case.
The ony questionable thing for me in this whole affair is why the airport holding room didn’t have a window or closed circuit monitoring system in place. Given that it’s a temporary use facility, I could see why it doesn’t (I bet it does now). Otherwise, I think the police handled it appropriately. I’m sure they thought leaving her alone for a few minutes would calm her down (boy did it ever), so I see now fault in that. If they had stayed in the room with her, she would’ve remained a stark raving lunatic.
The fact that Gotbaum managed to strangle herself even after she was restrained and chained to the the wall is her own damn fault, and the fault of her delusional family for letting such an obviously unstable person travel alone, to a rehab facility nonetheless.
It doesn’ t strike me as unreasonable to place handcuffs of individuals you’re taking into custody. A blanket policy avoids accusations of discrimination (why did you cuff me and not her?) and avoids a situation where someone who should have been cuffed ends up hurting an officer or someone else.
Did anyone else read the title of this thread and think it was going to be about BDSM?
Marc
How many screaming, out-of-control drunks get arrested in the average year in this country? How many of them manage to strangle themselves with their own cuffs while sitting in a holding cell? What happened to this woman was a freak accident brought about entirely because of her own actions.
I’m also skeptical that one could come up with a way of securing prisoners as effectively as cuffs do without causing the same circulatory problems. It seems to me to be a necessary side-effect of restraining someone. A device that didn’t cause circulatory problems would probably also be a device that was not as secure as regular handcuffs.
First of all, putting handcuffs on a person isn’t “strong force.” Beating them down with a billy club is “strong force.” Handcuffing someone you’re arresting is minimal force, at best. If the suspect cooperates, it’s not even force at all. Secondly, a thin 45 year old woman can still cause a lot of physical damage. Particularly if she’s got sharp fingernails, or is a biter. Lastly, the size of a suspect becomes a lot less important if they manage to get their hands on one of the arresting officers’ guns. There’s a reason that cuffing suspects is part of procedure, and that’s because it’s safer for everyone involved, cops and suspects together. Freak accidents like the OP not withstanding.
She wasn’t rational or sober, true, but the former is never expected of anyone the cops arrest and the latter is uncommon. ( 
) However, it takes serious work to strange yourself.
I agree with you on both points. But I think it’s still worth talking about - that is, holding a formal review and whatnot. I don’t think anyone should lose their job over this, but I do think enough officers should be aware of the problem that they go, “Yes, we really would like a better designed restraint,” if some guy’s got an idea for one.
I’d be interested to know your relative assessment of who is most responsible for her death of the three parties concerned, namely the woman herself, the police and her family who decided not to accompany her.
This may not be possible.
I am reminded of what a park ranger said about the difficulties of designing a garbage can that was usable and bear-proof. He said it was not possible to design one that was both, “because of the large overlap in intelligence between the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists.”
Somewhat like this. Someone drunk enough to strangle herself cannot be safely restrained. You could try face-down, four-point restraint, and she would find a way to kill herself there as well. Or, perhaps, dislocate her own effing shoulder and then sue.
Being pig-ass drunk is dangerous, not only because of the direct physical consequences but because it both produces, and demonstrates, exceptional stupidity.
Too bad, but there it is.
Regards,
Shodan
Has it been clearly explained anywhere how exactly she ended up strangled? She was cuffed to a bench, and the article says something like “When she was found, the handcuffs, which were originally behind her beck, were around her neck area.”
So, I assume she had both hands cuffed behind her, with the cuffs around some solid part of a bench. I know i’m not the most flexible person, but I’m having difficulty figuring out how you end up strangling yourself from that position unless you are either quite flexible or you dislocate one or both shoulders.