Officer tasers woman twice..for driving on a suspended license

The BBQ Pit
81

Here you go, control-z, since you are already living in fucking fantasy land. I thought I’d rewrite you an ending that appeals to your sensitivity:

McNevin: “Ma’am, you are under arrest. Now, extinguish your cigarette, turn off your cell phone and step out of the car.”

Goodwin: “No, I’m calling somebody.”

McNevin: “Ma’am, I’m serious. It’s time to get off the phone. Now!”

Goodwin: “Shush! I’m ON THE PHONE!”

McNevin: “Well, I… uh… hurry it up. We’re on the shoulder here and it’s dangerous.”

Goodwin: “Hush fool! I’m using my minutes.”

McNevin: “Ma’am, seriously. This is highly irregular. I must insist–”

Goodwin: “…Says he’s gonna arrest me. Yeah, I know. I feel like Rosa Parks up in this mother fucker!”

McNevin: “Ma’am, I see no direct connection between this situation and that fateful bus ride in–”

Goodwin: “Well, not a literal connection, but… wait. Was I talking to you?”

McNevin: “Well, no, but–”

Goodwin: “Then shut it. I’m talking to my brother.”

McNevin: “Ma’am, there are cars zipping by and the city is short staffed for patrol officers today. I have to ask again, firmly this time, please disconnect the phone conversation and–”

Goodwin: “…Jus’ set the timer on the oven to 45 minutes Billy. You’re only heating up a frozen dinner for cryin’ out loud.”

McNevin: “Ma’am?”

Goodwin: “Stouffer’s, right? 'cause I hate that other kind you always buy.”

McNevin: “Ma’am?”

Goodwin: “Hold on, I can’t hear you.” Begins rolling up the window.

McNevin: “Ma’am, DO NOT ROLL UP THAT WINDOW! MA’AM! I’M SERIOUS! THIS IS SERIOUS BUSINESS HERE! MA’AM!”

Goodwin: “Well just put what you don’t eat in the ice box, Billy, it ain’t rocket science.”

McNevin: “Ma’am, I’m begging you… Please step out of the car. Or could you at least back up a bit out of the road.”

Goodwin: Rolling down the window. “Did you just call me a black bitch?”

McNevin: “What?!”

Goodwin into cell phone: “He just called me a black bitch. I can’t believe this mother f–”

McNevin: "Ma’am, no. I said Back up a bit, as in out of the road.

Goodwin: “Racist motherfuck just called me a black bitch, Billy. I’m gonna have his badge, damn straight.”

Anyone want to take it from here?

82

You would be amazed how unreasonable people can be, especially when you want to take them to arrest them, have their car impounded, and take them to jail.

How much you want to bet this would have gone down perectly peacefully if not for her attitude toward the police. If she had been polite and complied they might not have even arrested her unless her warrants were for more than several thousand dollars in fines. Several ex-coworkers of mine had warrants for minor traffic tickets they never paid, the cops who pulled them over would tell them “you really need to take care of this or it will eventually become a major problem”

83

The concerns that Amnesty International has are valid ones: they are worried that people with health problems could be killed by the voltage. It’s a legitimate concern, but no method is 100% safe. I don’t agree with their call for a moratorium becuae I think that they’re more concerned about the potential for harm to a suspect than they are for the very real risks that police officers face.

The problem is a lack of other alternatives. To subdue a crazed or violent person, you have to cause them enough discomfort to make them want to stop fighting, or find a way to interrupt their ability to do so. There’s simply no “safe” way to do those things. Even pepper spray can kill if the right health issues are involved.

Secondly, there are funding issues. Not every jurisdiction has less-than-lethal weapons. In a lot of cases, cops have to chose between whether to use their nightsticks or their guns. I’d rather they had a middle-of-the-road option like a taser.

I wish that you could have the experience of walking the streets with a cop one evening, and try to “reason” with a crazed drug addict. Apparently, you have this notion that criminals are nice people who just need a bit of communication in order to come around.

Tasers do not amount to toture. My Hubby has been voluntarily shocked with one of them. He’s also been hit with “chemical munitions” such as pepper spray and its more-severe cousins like C-4. It was part of his training. Was he “tortured”?

Apparently, you don’t understand what torture is. Torture is the desire to cause as much pain to another person as possible. Officers who use tasers are using them to subdue suspects. As soon as the suspect is compliant, they stop. If they continued just for the hell of it, then you could call it torture.

84

This is AMERICA, where the “authority figures” don’t get to use force just because you’re slow to react or are a smartass. Tasers are to protect the officer, who had no reaon to think he was in any danger. The proper thing for him to do was to call a Sgt. Clearly, he got angry because a “mere civilian” didn’t immediatly kow-tow to him.

What exactly is a “lawful order”? Clearly the Police may give you an order if there is a clear and present danger to the public safety “Stop, do not go down that road, there is an accident”.

I am not going to get into some weird stretches such as orders which are clearly illegal- such “give me all you money” or “suck my dick”. Those are clearly illegal.

But can a police officer ask you to “drop and give him 50”? Some of the things in a field sobriety test aren’t far from that. Maybe you haven’t had a drop to drink- can the police officer still order you to walk lines, say the alphabet backwards (which I can’t do cold sober) and touch your nose?

In this case- the woman was being unreasonable. However, there was no “clear and present danger”- the cop certainly had plenty of time to consider other options besides force. Why not call in a Sgt, and see maybe if he can get her to cooperate without using force? What’s there to lose? Too many cops now are getting very “badge heavy”- this is a clear case of it. Yes- the woman was an idiot also. But the cop used force because he got mad- and that’s just plain not right.

85

This person was NOT a crazed drug addict. She was NOT a violent offender at all. How exactly was she a danger? She was seated in the driver’s seat and the other cop was standing at the passenger door. The first officer said she took a swing at the second one, but how much of a swing can you take while you’re seated? Are these two good-sized grown men frightened of a normal-sized 22 year old woman? The cops had to struggle with her to cuff her anyway, so why was the tasering necessary? Probably because they were tired of hearing her mouth.

I have no issues with cops, like I said, I have cops in my family that I have great respect for. It just wasn’t warranted in this case.

86

The woman was just a fool, not a “crazed drug addict”. Many people *voluntarily * subject themselves to pain- what makes it not torture is the “voluntary part”. Some dudes get themselves branded by hot irons- and they pay good money to get it done, but no one thinks that being tied up and having hot branding irons applied to you when you don’t want it- isn’t torture. In fact, the old “red hot iron” thing is a classic torture. Hell, you couldn’t pay me to have someone repeatedly stab me with needles- and if you had been tied down and were asking me questions while you did it, any court would rule that “torture”- but dudes pay good money to have tat’s every day. Some dudes pay good $$ to get whipped- another classic torture- but it’s OK as it was voluntary.

The point here is that this suspect wasn’t a suspect of any crime (most traffic violations aren’t “crimes” they are “infractions”) and she didn’t need to be subdued.

87

Um…OK, right. :rolleyes:

88

I don’t agree that wasting time on trying to talk a belligerent suspect out of their car is the proper thing to do. The policy is that an officer orders you to comply, and if you don’t he warns you of the consequences. If you still don’t obey, he uses the method his department has chosen. If you don’t comply, whatever happens to you is your fault.

Yeah, this is America, but we still have to obey law enforcement officers. They don’t have to stand there and listen to you argue. Christ almighty, if cops have no authority to make you obey their commands, what good are they in law enforcement?

The road sobriety tests are not unreasonable requests. If the officer suspects you’re dunk, the fact that YOU know you’re not doesn’t excuse you from having to comply. After all, you could be lying when you say you haven’t had anything to drink.

What do they have to lose? Time, money, and potentially, the officer’s safety. Call in a sergent? Jesus! Do you imagine that they don’t have anything else to do other than go down to the scene of an arrest and try to coax a suspect into complying? Do you really think she would have listened to the sergent? No-- she would have sat there arguing all night.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with the use of force in this case. You don’t have a right to disobey the cops.

89

Why do I get the feeling that no argument presented here or anywhere else will make a dent in your opinion?

90

Well, that’s the way it turned out, but how were they to know she wasn’t high, or armed? How were they to know she wouldn’t bite or scratch them? Are they supposed to wait until the suspect hurts them before taking protective measures?

She could have driven away, hitting an officer, or causing an accident during a high-speed chase. There’s a hundred bad things that could have happened.

Again, how hard are you suggesting that you be allowed to hit a cop before it’s bad? It’s legally assault whether it was a punch or a “swat.”

Well, it if took two men to subdue her, apparently she was strong and willing to struggle violently. That’s all I need to know to say that tasering her was the right thing to do.

No. It was because she was refusing to comply. That she was an asshole is not important. If she had obeyed their commands, she could have cussed them until she was blue in the face and they wouldn’t have done a thing about it. (Many folks don’t exercise the right to be silent.)

91

She was non-compliant, and thus she DID need to be subdued-- end of story.

92

How about something like “Turn off the cell phone, and get out of the car”?

Because it would be a stupid waste of everyone’s timec.

Come on, this is just idiotic. You need to call back up because some mouthy bitch doesn’t respond to “pretty please with cream and sugar”?

The progression of “get out of the car” to “get out of the car NOW” to “get out of the car or I will remove you” followed by removing the dim-bulb twat is an entirely reasonable one.

This, on the other hand,

shows that you are merely talking like a complete idiot. “Giving them a chance to listen”, you drooling dolt? They did that, and the stupid bitch said NO.

It is a waste of time to argue with some people. This stupid-ass bitch is one of them. control-z is another.

Regards,
Shodan

93

According to your link, the incident went as follows:

1.- Police stops car because it’s speeding, has broken tail-light and a broken windshield
2.- On verification of the driver’s papers (license) it turns out it’s lapsed
3.- Police tells the driver she’s under arrest and she should step out of the car

Now, if they had tasered her BEFORE point number 2, I’d agree, there would have been evidence of excessive force. However, if you are placed under arrest, you HAVE to comply with the authority. And, IMHO, it’s their DUTY to make sure you comply.

94

Actually, it is very different. A Terry stop means you are free to continue on and there isn’t a damn thing the officer can do to stop you. However, if the officer has reasonable cause to stop you, it becomes an entirely different situation.

Clearly, in this case, the woman was being detained and as such the authority of the police in what they could require her to do was greatly increased.

For those suggesting that a Sgt. or some other negotiator be brought in, are you out of your minds? Seriously. You really think the police have the time or manpower to bargain with every nitwit that wants to sit in their car and ignore them? And what happens when she still refuses to get out? Eventually she is going to need a bathroom. Should we call a “time out” and let her use a restroom and then get back in her car. You know, because making someone hold it is cruel and unusual and it wouldn’t be fair if she had to get out just for that!

Finally, for those that say this woman assaulted the officer give me a fucking break. She took a swipe (maybe) at an officer’s hand who was trying to reach for her phone. I’m not saying she wasn’t a dumbass for doing that, but to call it assault is just… stretching that word to extremes. Yeah, technically it is assault, but the connotation is far different than the denotation and I think we should recognize that.

95

I agree with Shodan.

:eek:

Wait, let me take another hit off these smelling salts. :wink:

Yeh, the one who escalated this needlessly was the driver. Given her behavior, especially the histrionic yowling, the possibility she was strung out on drugs was one of the first things that sprang to my mind.

Anyone who thinks it would be easy for two guys to control someone, even a slender young woman or an old guy, on drugs who freaks out has never had to try it. The officers had no way to know for sure she wasn’t high and her behavior from the git-go didn’t argue for sobriety.

96

That’s exactly right. Once a cop knows a suspect is belligerent, then I suspect that even the SMALLEST wrong move on that person’s part is legal justification for the tasering. The cop does not know how fast the behavior will escalate, and he doesn’t know if she has a real weapon or not. It may have been a move not visible on the video, but totally visible to the cop.

I think any movement towards the officer may be justification…forget about whether you make contact or not.

Me too.

97

I can say the same about everyone who still thinks this tasering was justified.

98

A fuckin’ MEN
I live in LA and I see tons on videos of suspects going after cops, pushing them, refusing to get down, etc. then the outcry is about those mean cops putting a beatdown on them.

Here’s a Nobel Prize winning idea - you don’t want to be beaten or tazed or maced? Do what the nice man in blue tells you to do!

99

My police officer friend, in Lakewood Ohio, tells me that the ACLU recently issued their position that the first response after verbal warnings should be the taser, apparently that is preferable to nightstick or submission holds and the like.

Again, that’s 2nd hand information.

100

It is a shame that someone with (assuming here) only a record of a non-violent crime (such as driving on a suspended license) got tasered.
The fault, however, does not lie with the officer. Yeah, maybe he could have tried another 30sec to get her out of the car before “stepping it up”. However, from what I can tell, he was following procedure. If the dumb woman had responded to the officer (complied by putting down the phone and getting out) and the officer had still tasered her, I would be one of the first to come in with a rant against the officer. However, I would also point out, that she was telling someone the location of her stop. Who was she telling? How did the cop not know she was calling for someone to come to the scene and endanger them? Immediate restraint is necessary (in this case) for non-complience.

OTOH, I do think the second taser shot was possibly out of line. Granted, she was still non-complient, but I would be willing to bet that officer #2 could have very easily just restrained her arms. I don’t think that this was so out of line to warrant any disciplinary action, just someone older and wiser should tell the arresting officer that there was another option that would have solved the problem without wasting anymore charges from the taser. OTOOH, I’m not going to second guess this officer’s decision; as EddyTeddyFreddy points out, she could have easily been off her rocker. As someone who was one of TEN people restraining ONE person strung out, I can tell you for sure that drugs is bad, man, and people on drugs are dangerous.

control-z, you may have seen me argue (vehemently) elsewhere against cops behaving badly. This officer was right. I think you need to re-evaluate the situation.