# Shot while cuffed and prone - justification? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 7, 2009, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234 "2009-01-07T16:53:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/141 "2009-01-08T20:38:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yeah, I think that’s the most probable answer at this point. > > As a citizen he’s entitled to not have to incriminate himself, and since he has a job that requires him to take the risk of being in positions where he has to decide to use deadly force, he’s entitled to some leeway… but he has to justify that leeway by explaining himself. Since he has chosen not to, as is his right, the system should go forward and treat this case as it appears to be: a negligent discharge that caused death. The cop needs to be indicted. I get a version of the Oakland paper. It appears that an internal interview as a BART policeman is considered confidential and not admissible, so they can use the threat of firing to get him to talk. It appears that he was advised to resign by his union lawyer to not fall under this any more. There are now three investigations - BART, the Alameda county district attorney, and the Oakland police. The latter was staying out of it, but began just yesterday or this morning as a result of the protests last night. I wonder if the union attorney still can represent him now that he has resigned from the BART police. I have no idea of why there has been no arrest as of yet, especially considering that BART stations are being shut down from time to time due to protests. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/142 "2009-01-08T20:39:55Z")
> [@omgzebras](#): > > He was facedown on the ground with the knee of a large officer planted in his back. There was another officer above him to deal with his hands. Unless he pulled a weapon, which I’m pretty sure we would have heard about by now (what with the minor rioting and all) what could he have possibly done that called for a taser? I don’t think you’re supposed to tase somebody because they’re lying on the ground being squirmy or because they’re begging you “Please don’t tase me.” The articles in my paper (which is from the same owner as the Oakland paper) explicitly say that he was unarmed, just to put that possibility to rest. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/143 "2009-01-08T20:52:27Z")
> [@omgzebras](#): > > Unless he pulled a weapon, which I’m pretty sure we would have heard about by now (what with the minor rioting and all) what could he have possibly done that called for a taser? Spat on the officer. Threatened the officer with immediate bodily harm. Kneed the officer in the groin. In other words, _assaulted_ the officer. And, yes, it is very possible to do so while being held down. After all, they apparently _needed_ several officers to deal with him. ---
**Author:** ![Apex\_Rogers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@Apex\_Rogers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apex_Rogers)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/144 "2009-01-08T21:12:21Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Spat on the officer. Threatened the officer with immediate bodily harm. Kneed the officer in the groin. In other words, _assaulted_ the officer. > And, yes, it is very possible to do so while being held down. After all, they apparently _needed_ several officers to deal with him. He was well-restrained and face down, so let’s keep that in mind as we examine your suppositions: **Spat on the officer:** Unless he issued a magic lugie of _Seinfeld_ proportions this is not possible. Regardless, does someone who is spitting at an officer justify tasering or shooting them? I doubt it. **Threatened the officer with immediate bodily harm:** This is impossibly vague. What threat could he have posed? Be specific. **Kneed the officer in the groin:** Again, he was face down. I don’t think we need to reference an anatomy chart to show that his knees would have been against the ground and unable to strike the officer. Perhaps you are picturing him flailing his legs or executing a mule kick or something, but as stated, he could not have possibly kneed the officer. What threat did he pose? What you’ve posted here is not very convincing. ---
**Author:** ![EasyPhil](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@EasyPhil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EasyPhil)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/145 "2009-01-08T21:12:52Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Spat on the officer. Threatened the officer with immediate bodily harm. Kneed the officer in the groin. In other words, _assaulted_ the officer. > And, yes, it is very possible to do so while being held down. After all, they apparently _needed_ several officers to deal with him. You’re right and that’s why once they had him down they had to kill him, it’s the only logical thing to do. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/146 "2009-01-08T21:14:20Z")
> [@EasyPhil](#): > > You’re right and that’s why once they had him down they had to kill him, it’s the only logical thing to do. Oh come on now, I specifically said that was wrong. But since we weren’t there, his actions could have called for being tasered. ---
**Author:** ![Apex\_Rogers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@Apex\_Rogers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apex_Rogers)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/147 "2009-01-08T21:14:45Z")
> [@omgzebras](#): > > On a related note, if he was trying to tase the guy, wouldn’t the jolt have incapacitated the other officer as well, since he was in contact with the guy on the ground? Or do they not work like that? I was wondering the same thing. Even the supposed “meant-to-taser” excuse does not make much sense to me. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/148 "2009-01-08T21:15:12Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > It’s amazing how much leeway and benefit of the doubt people are willing to give someone just becase they have a blue uniform and a badge. Perhaps, but I don’t see anyone in this thread adopting that stance. Rather, they’re giving him the benefit of the doubt because it’s entirely possible that this discharge occured accidentally, and because some of the video evidence supports that hypothesis. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/149 "2009-01-08T21:16:52Z")
> [@Apex\_Rogers](#): > > **Threatened the officer with immediate bodily harm:** This is impossibly vague. What threat could he have posed? Be specific. > > **Kneed the officer in the groin:** Again, he was face down. I don’t think we need to reference an anatomy chart to show that his knees would have been against the ground and unable to strike the officer. Perhaps you are picturing him flailing his legs or executing a mule kick or something, but as stated, he could not have possibly kneed the officer. > > . “When I get up, I’m gonna kill you!” You can kick backwards with your lower legs when being held down. Also his hands were’t 100% secure, maybe he got in a quick punch. Yes, I suppose it’s “kicked” not “kneed” but come on.:rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/150 "2009-01-08T21:30:00Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > “When I get up, I’m gonna kill you!” > > You can kick backwards with your lower legs when being held down. Also his hands were’t 100% secure, maybe he got in a quick punch. Yes, I suppose it’s “kicked” not “kneed” but come on.:rolleyes: I saw an interview with a Berkeley law professor this morning. He said that in these cases, any evidence of a threat by the victim to officers is very effective in winning an acquittal, since juries definitely give the benefit of the doubt to the police. However he looked at blown up and enhanced versions of the video, and saw absolutely no threat that could be used to justify the action. I think the fact that the perp didn’t even want to be interviewed by his own department is rather telling. Sure, if the victim was Hannibal Lector the cop might have feared for his nose, but there does not appear to be any evidence for your excuses. ---
**Author:** ![Apex\_Rogers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@Apex\_Rogers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apex_Rogers)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/151 "2009-01-08T21:32:31Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > “When I get up, I’m gonna kill you!” The man can say all he wants as he’s being restrained; it’s an empty threat if the officers are doing their job properly. Why didn’t the officer place him in handcuffs and be done with it? From what I saw in the video, the officer let go of the suspect’s hands and stood back before drawing his gun. If the suspect was indeed such a threat why would he lessen his restraint and allow the suspect use of his hands? > [@](#): > > You can kick backwards with your lower legs when being held down. Also his hands were’t 100% secure, maybe he got in a quick punch. Yes, I suppose it’s “kicked” not “kneed” but come on.:rolleyes: I did mention the backwards kicking possibility (“mule kick” as I called it); however this is entirely different from kneeing someone. I shouldn’t have to guess what you’re talking about when you use imprecise terminology. Let’s say that the man was kicking backwards with his legs and this was the reason the officer stood up and drew his weapon. Let’s also assume that he meant to draw the taser instead of the gun. Shouldn’t he have warned the other officer that he was about to fire the taser into the suspect? Had it been a taser shot and not a bullet, the other officer would have gotten jolted as well. None of this adds up to a coherent response to the suspects actions. Throw in the fact that the bullet could have ricocheted into the officer and it enters into complete negligence of duty. ---
**Author:** ![Terraplane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/74df32/32.png) [@Terraplane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terraplane)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/152 "2009-01-08T21:37:00Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Spat on the officer. Threatened the officer with immediate bodily harm. Kneed the officer in the groin. In other words, _assaulted_ the officer. > And, yes, it is very possible to do so while being held down. After all, they apparently _needed_ several officers to deal with him. He couldn’t have spat on the officer with the way he was lying and the only witness statement I’ve heard had the guy begging “Please don’t tase me, I have a daughter,” which I wouldn’t think somebody would follow up with “I’m gonna kick your ass.” Maybe he was kicking or punching, I guess it’s possible, but again it doesn’t really mesh with what witnesses report the man saying. Even if the guy _was_ struggling, I’d hope that two police with a suspect pinned could handle something like that without resorting to less-lethal weaponry. I also don’t think the fact that they had multiple officers dealing with the guy in any way proves that they _needed_ two officers dealing with the guy. It’s possible but often cops choose to err on the side of caution in order to protect their safety. I can’t blame them for it, but I wish this guy had extended that same care to the man in his custody. ---
**Author:** ![fifty-six](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@fifty-six](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fifty-six)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/153 "2009-01-08T21:53:50Z")
Watching the videos sever times I noticed that the Bart Officer got up to shoot. Why? Why not just keep restraining and finish handcuffing? Tazer or Gun, was that other officer a bit close to fire fire any type of weapon or even mace? If it was a Tazar wouldn’t the other restraining officer get shocked as well? (I do not know how these operate fully.) And as I understand it, what killed the man was a ricochet off the concrete floor after it passed through his back and returned into the victim puncturing his lung. Could it have ricocheted off the ground and into the other officers heart or head? What would we be talking about in that scenario? That other officer seemed mighty close to the gun or potential Tazer. I know it does not seem a time for jokes but damn it would have been funny and more fortunate to see that officer Tazer the other officer by accident. I would love to know the measurement of how close he was to that bullet wound. Did this officer put the other officers and surrounding passengers in needless danger? ---
**Author:** ![Kinthalis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kinthalis/32/16084_2.png) [@Kinthalis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kinthalis)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/154 "2009-01-08T22:02:13Z")
Somehow I get the feeling that if these video’s of the event did not exist we’d be reading on the newspaper about this case, only it would be page 50 and the article would be about a completely justified shooting involving a belligerent drunk with a rap sheet. Case closed. Cameras are a double edged sword for cops, me thinks. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/155 "2009-01-08T22:06:09Z")
Out of idle curiosity, I Googled “taser regulations” and found this [document](http://www.scribd.com/doc/319245/Las-Vegas-Police-TASER-Regulations) for Las Vegas, but nothing for San Francisco. (Another article from August of last year noted that there don’t seem to be many police departments in CA that have regulations for Tasers.) The regulations state that the Taser must be “on the side opposite the duty firearm”. If San Francisco and/or BART have similar regulations, then Mehserle’s excuse carries a lot less weight. In fact, a little digging on YouTube got me this [video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caG7hG5utGM&feature=related) from a different angle and closer, which includes a number of fairly clear shots of a number of utility belts, including (I believe) Mehserle’s. I don’t know what a Taser looks like, but perhaps some of our more experienced and eagle-eyed Dopers would care to take a look and see if they can make sense of it? ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/156 "2009-01-08T22:16:08Z")
> [@omgzebras](#): > > On a related note, if he was trying to tase the guy, wouldn’t the jolt have incapacitated the other officer as well, since he was in contact with the guy on the ground? Or do they not work like that? Not necessarily. I don’t know what type of Taser the BART officers are using, but some are equipped with a [Drive Stun](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser#Drive_Stun) feature that delivers a localized shock that does not effect the central nervous system. Based on my own observations, officers can retain physical contact with a individual who is receiving a localized stun without suffering any shock transference. I would say that an assault or attempted assault on a law enforcement officer is reasonable justification for tasering, so long as that is considered by the law as an acceptable means of subduing a suspect. IMHO, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/157 "2009-01-08T22:28:46Z")
I should add, though, that the thing about the Drive Stun is it has to be contacting the suspect, so standing over the suspect is not, to my knowledge, an effective means of delivering that type of stun. Personally, I don’t know if using the cartridges is advisable at such a short range, so I can’t comment on that. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/158 "2009-01-08T22:31:01Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Spat on the officer. Threatened the officer with immediate bodily harm. Kneed the officer in the groin. In other words, _assaulted_ the officer. Here’s a [video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tmh9B8LVxM&feature=related) from right next to the incident. Would you please indicate at what points on that video Oscar Grant did any of those things? From what I can see, even when he stood up, he had his hands in a defensive position indicating he was unarmed. ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/159 "2009-01-08T22:42:24Z")
> [@fifty-six](#): > > Watching the videos sever times I noticed that the Bart Officer got up to shoot. > > Why? Why not just keep restraining and finish handcuffing? This is a very good question and one that is impossible to answer from the video alone. It does need answering, however. > [@](#): > > Tazer or Gun, was that other officer a bit close to fire fire any type of weapon or even mace? If it was a Tazar wouldn’t the other restraining officer get shocked as well? (I do not know how these operate fully.) And as I understand it, what killed the man was a ricochet off the concrete floor after it passed through his back and returned into the victim puncturing his lung. > > Could it have ricocheted off the ground and into the other officers heart or head? What would we be talking about in that scenario? > > That other officer seemed mighty close to the gun or potential Tazer. I know it does not seem a time for jokes but damn it would have been funny and more fortunate to see that officer Tazer the other officer by accident. I would love to know the measurement of how close he was to that bullet wound. > > Did this officer put the other officers and surrounding passengers in needless danger? Also, very problematic and may be one explanation as to why there is a delay in filing charges. I think the shot did put other officers at risk, and it _seems_ to me that it was either unintentional or the officer was taking reasonable precaution in firing his weapon. I lean more towards the former explanation, however. Do I have to add that if accidental discharge is proven that it in no way absolves him of responsibility of the death of this man? But, the fact of the matter is that making judgments based on several low-quality, civilian videos is reckless and serves only to agitate further. If there is any time to take a deep breath, step back, and allow some objectivity to return to this mess, now seems like a good one. ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2009, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234/160 "2009-01-08T22:45:03Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Here’s a [video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tmh9B8LVxM&feature=related) from right next to the incident. Would you please indicate at what points on that video Oscar Grant did any of those things? From what I can see, even when he stood up, he had his hands in a defensive position indicating he was unarmed. He doesn’t need to. He never claimed that Oscar Grant did any of those things and those videos are inconclusive anyway. He simply answered the question as to what specific acts could justify an officer tasering a suspect. It’s all speculation anyway as to whether the taser explanation is a viable one. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shot-while-cuffed-and-prone-justification/480234.md?page=9)