In the spirit of “context” that has been floating around this week, I would really like to know what happened before the tape. The fact that he got rehired says something (although I’m not sure what), because if a PD got rid of someone due to flagrant misuse of force, that person would be blacklisted around the state.
As far as tasers go, this is another example of why they suck. When they first came out, we were told they would only be used for situations where a gun would be used, but there was a chance for the less-than-lethal to be used. A bunch of lefty weenies all whined enough about lethal force, so they became standard equipment. Now they get used regularly, and people still get shot. That road to hell really is paved with good intentions.
That’s pretty much exactly what I was thinking - based on just the one minute video, yeah, this appears to be terrible, but we have nowhere near all the information of what happened here. That the cops were fired afterwards also indicates that they acted very badly (but apparently not criminally, if they were not charged), but again, we don’t have the whole story.
It also seems to me that if you’re going to encourage a culture of cops being above the law (not informing on each other, not giving each other tickets when laws were obviously broken), then cops feeling they have a carte blanche is going to be the downside of that.
According to her and the Friend, she called 911 because she thought there was a prowler outside. After she called 911, she called The Friend over to stay with her until the police arrived.
According to Cop 1, the 911 call was about an “unwanted guest” not a prowler. When he arrived and found a man in the house with her, he assumed that her and The Friend were having an affair while The Lady’s husband was out of town. The Friend was probably beating on her, and hence she called 911 hoping that the police would throw the guy out. Between her making the 911 call and Cop 1 arriving, The Friend had talked her into hiding this truth and instead saying that the 911 call had been about a “prowler”.
Cop 1 asks The Friend some information, but before he can ask his name, The Friend skedaddles. Since Cop 1 thinks that The Friend has been beating up The Lady, he decides to get The Friend’s name and address from her, so that he can look the guy up later. She decides that she won’t help the police with this, and refuses to give any information. Cop 1 says that he is legally obligated to get information about someone suspected of beating on women and if she doesn’t give him the information, then he is going to arrest her and take her in. Rather than giving him the information, instead she runs for her house. The officer pursues, apprehends, and continues to struggle with her, eventually using a tazer to get her to submit to the arrest.
Cop 2 shows up, sees that she is still not in the vehicle and is still resisting, and tazes her as well.
Given Sage Rats description, I’d say the woman behaved pretty darn poorly. Its NOT a good idea to not cooperate with the police. And if they say they are going to arrest you certainly don’t run. And if they catch you, you probably shouldnt resist.
Just goes to show you though. Reading the OP title my first thought was “fucker cops” (my worst experiences by far have been with rural Georgia cops). Now, its more along the lines of “maybe, MAYBE, the tazing/pepper spray was over the line, but you DO NOT fight the cops”
The beginning of this part of your mostly excellent summation is slightly off; here’s direct from the AJC story linked above:
So, the guy didn’t “skedaddle” exactly. He was questioned by the officer and then allowed to leave.
I like that he could always arrest him later “since he lived nearby”. If he knows where the guy lives, why doesn’t he know the guy’s name? Oh that’s right, sloppy police work; he never asked the guy for his name. But now, if he needs the guy’s name, wouldn’t it be easier to go ask the guy for it than to chase and tase an old lady in the dark?
I’d really like to know where the garble in the reason for the 911 call came from. Did the dispatcher fuck it up or did the responding officer? Because that expectation of a DV situation, as opposed to a potential burglar, is the impetus for this whole thing, it seems to me.
Is it not possible that she lied about “The Friend”? Perhaps he comes over, they had a bad breakup, she is scared hubby will have a fit if he finds out she had to call the cops to her home, so she says a prowler is outside in hopes that a police car appearing will get Romeo to leave. Cop appears, asks for basic information, and she refuses. Several things make the cop believe that there may have been more to this story, and he can tell she is lying. The fight is on at that point.
Again, that was excessive force, tasers should not have widespread use, and I am not defending the cops…It’s just that something in this makes me feel that she is not as clean as the wind driven snow.
So the first cop claims he tried to arrest her, pepper-sprayed her, and tazed her to save her from being a potential victim of domestic violence? Sounds like “We had to destroy the village in order to save it”.
Regardless of whether he was dispatched for a prowler or a domestic violence call (and we would have to check the 911 tapes to see what actually happened with the call), surely the officer’s response should not involve physical violence to the apparent victim.
Even if she is lying, and the cop knows she is lying, there is no justification for tasering. That’s essentially using torture to get information out of her.
A woman calls the police because there is a prowler outside the house, right now, as she is making the call. And her friend from ten miles away gets to her place before the cops do?
Like nearly ALL the other cops did wrong threads, it boils down to this. When a COP TELLS you to do something, you DO IT. If you don’t do, he is pretty much required to FORCE you to comply. To allow otherwise would defeat the very concept of a cop.
She didnt get tazed because she was lying. She got tazed because she ran and was resisting.
DO WHAT the cop says, take a ride ride downtown. Behave yourself. And if you think the whole thing was a crock of shit get hold of a lawyer, or the ACLU, the local paper, or Al Sharpton or something.
I thought tazing was meant to be equivalent to deadly force, like a gun. If you wouldn’t shoot someone for resisting arrest, especially when they haven’t even shown themselves to be dangerous, why would you taze them?
It’s not like we’re talking about a dangerous criminal who’s resisting arrest. This is someone who’s either an innocent person calling about a prowler or someone who may have lied but who is still a domestic abuse victim. She hasn’t harmed anyone. She isn’t about to. It sounds like running away was out of fear. And frankly, considering their reaction, it doesn’t sound like this fear was unwarranted.