Taser's ok to force complience, dna collectin, signatures.

[Bob Hubbard]

Some stories

Texas cop uses Taser on 72-year-old great grandmother

A Travis County Constable used his Taser gun on a 72-year-old great grandmother after she refused to sign a speeding ticket. The cop claims he was forced to defend himself because Kathryn Winkfein “got violent” in her refusal to sign the ticket.
The cop said she also used profanity, making him fear for his life.

Wow. Texas cops are afraid of granny's with potty mouths.

Ruling allowing Taser use to get DNA may be nation’s first

LOCKPORT — It is legally permissible for police to zap a suspect with a Taser to obtain a DNA sample, as long as it’s not done “maliciously, or to an excessive extent, or with resulting injury,” a county judge has ruled in the first case of its kind in New York State, and possibly the nation.

What ever happened to just wiping the spit off and using that?


Utah settles lawsuit over motorist jolted with Taser

SALT LAKE CITY -- A stubborn motorist who became an Internet celebrity after video of him being stunned with a Taser by a Utah Highway Patrolman appeared on YouTube will receive $40,000 as part of a lawsuit settlement with the state, the Utah attorney general's office said Monday.
...
On Nov. 30, Gardner's superiors cleared his use of the stun gun. They said Gardner felt threatened when Massey turned his back on the trooper and put a hand in his pocket while stepping back toward his vehicle.


But officials also said the trooper could have explained to Massey that he risked being arrested for refusing to sign a speeding ticket.


The signature isn't a legal requirement in Utah, but troopers make a practice of obtaining it as a motorist's pledge to appear in court.

Ok, turning your back on a cop and shoving a hand in a pocket is pretty stupid. But zapping someone for not doing something they don't have to do, that's just wrong. Of the 3 stories, this one seems the most 'justified'.

 

[celtic_crippler]

Sigh... I've had enough insanity for one week. Perhaps I'll get back to this later.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

My weeks been pure hell so far.

This is just old stuff, ya'know?

I don't have a problem with a leo tazering someone who is a legit threat, either to the leo, others, or themselves. I do take issue with it being used because someone swore at you, refused to sign some papers, or to collect dna (that was already on file).

But, I've got more important matters right now to focus on, so am bowing out.

:asian:

 

[Archangel M]

Well since we LEO's seem to get questioned here if we don't comment on other LEO's using questionable force ("why is it that no LEO's here are saying anything...?") I will say this. The first one sounds unreasonable, except for the lack of details about the incident, age alone isnt exemption from having to use force on someone..I recall dealing with an 80+ yo man who was damn strong.

The second...you could just as easily kept the subject locked up until he decided to provide a sample. Which is the way these situations are typically handled. I believe the cops recieved a court order to force a sample in this case..if true, i think this falls on the judge rather than the cops.

In the last case..IMO its the state just paying off the complainant rather than fighting. I think the cop was justified. You are not allowed to just walk away from me and get back into your vehicle (while on a car stop) until I allow it. He could have been intending to drive off or get a weapon....the "he could have told him he could be arrested.." thing. While he "could have"...you dont "have to" tell someone they are being arrested. When the taser was pointed at him and he decided to walk away...well...He was being arrested.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Personally, I like seeing the LEO's perspective in these things as the reports are often limited, and skewed.

 

[tellner]

There used to be a principle that evidence obtained by coercion was inadmissible. The Brave New Post-9/11 World has changed all that. Police can now keep inflicting pain until suspects give over the desired evidence.

From the very first Abu Ghraib photos I predicted this would happen.

Look for "enhanced interrogation" warrants coming soon. But only for the most serious crimes, of course.

Look for the list to expand and the need for warrants to disappear.

Look for the exclusionary rule to go away soon after.

 

[Sukerkin]

Aye, it's a long stretch but history shows that the slippery slope doesn't have to be steep to be real.

 

[Archangel M]

Eh..a county judges ruling is hardly proof of a conspiracy. Im betting this goes up the judicial chain.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

And, I'm thinkin' Granny had it coming, the little minx...you ever see what these old bitties can do with a knitting needle? Vicious, I tell you...vicious.

**shudders in fear of little old ladies**

I dunno about you guys, but if I were on the force with that guy, I'd be teasing the shot out of him every single day, relentlessly. In fear for your life? C'mahn....thicken your skin and quit being such a wussy.

 

[jks9199]

Well since we LEO's seem to get questioned here if we don't comment on other LEO's using questionable force ("why is it that no LEO's here are saying anything...?") I will say this. The first one sounds unreasonable, except for the lack of details about the incident, age alone isnt exemption from having to use force on someone..I recall dealing with an 80+ yo man who was damn strong.

The second...you could just as easily kept the subject locked up until he decided to provide a sample. Which is the way these situations are typically handled. I believe the cops recieved a court order to force a sample in this case..if true, i think this falls on the judge rather than the cops.

In the last case..IMO its the state just paying off the complainant rather than fighting. I think the cop was justified. You are not allowed to just walk away from me and get back into your vehicle (while on a car stop) until I allow it. He could have been intending to drive off or get a weapon....the "he could have told him he could be arrested.." thing. While he "could have"...you dont "have to" tell someone they are being arrested. When the taser was pointed at him and he decided to walk away...well...He was being arrested.

There's not enough details to really assess the first case. I know a certain 70+ year old man (Bob -- you can probably guess exactly who I'm thinking of!) that I certainly would not want to try to go hands-on with... And I'm sure several others here can think of a few more such individuals. They're rarities -- but they're out there. That said -- this case certainly doesn't SOUND good.

The second case? They had an order to compell the sample. They could have simply sat on him, forced his mouth open, and obtained it that way. Seems like maybe the Taser might have caused fewer injuries. (And, Bob, DNA collection outside of TV-world, isn't as easy as just getting a bit of spit... It ain't hard, and it's not complicated, but it's more than swabbing the rim of a glass, too.)

The last case? I recall it (or a similar incident) being discussed previously. I don't recall any problem with the justification, though I didn't re-read the entire thread. The fact that the agency or state has settled it doesn't really say a lot; the $40000 to settle is much cheaper than trial probably would have been. And that too often drives settlement decisions.

It's really simple -- during a non-consensual encounter, the cop is in charge. If I'm on a search warrant at your house, the court says it's MY house until I'm done. If I'm on a traffic stop, and you don't comply with my directions... I'm going to make you comply. That is my job. My hope is to get voluntary compliance and cooperation... but I'll make it involuntary if I have to.

 

[rocksham]

Some stories

Texas cop uses Taser on 72-year-old great grandmother



Wow. Texas cops are afraid of granny's with potty mouths.

Ruling allowing Taser use to get DNA may be nation’s first



What ever happened to just wiping the spit off and using that?


Utah settles lawsuit over motorist jolted with Taser



Ok, turning your back on a cop and shoving a hand in a pocket is pretty stupid. But zapping someone for not doing something they don't have to do, that's just wrong. Of the 3 stories, this one seems the most 'justified'.

one more reason nuking texas, and oklahoma while yer at it

 

[Big Don]

These people could have learned from Chris Rock...

 

[Empty Hands]

one more reason nuking texas, and oklahoma while yer at it

Is it the only way to be sure?

 

[Andy Moynihan]

one more reason nuking texas, and oklahoma while yer at it

Well at least wait till I get settled and then you can make Ground Zero my "hometown" so me and my innocent kitty won't have to suffer 'cause we'll get vaped instantly, okay, tough man?

 

[MJS]

Case #1: While on the surface it would appear that a young child or an old person would be easy to control, their age and size really doesnt mean much. I would justify the use of the Taser in this case. Of course, if its a toss up between OC and a taser, can they use either?

Case #2: I'd think there're other ways to get DNA samples, so in this case, I'd say that was excessive.

Case #3: The officer stopped this person for mv violations. He was being detained at that point, so no, he can't just walk away, even though on the surface it seems that he should be able to. As it was already said, IMO, this is the state bowing down to this guy instead of fighting. Perhaps the cop should have waited until the guy turned around and pulled a weapon? Sorry, you make a sudden movement like that, I'd have done the same thing as the cop.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Let's see.... you can't waterboard someone to get life and death information, but you can taser them to make them sign their name to something.

Hmmm. That don't sound right, does it?

Deaf

 

[tellner]

You should get a long prison sentence for doing either.
Torture is evil.

 

[Archangel M]

This officer let a man on a car stop go back to his car....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5646869322100258929

 

[Bob Hubbard]

This officer let a man on a car stop go back to his car....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5646869322100258929

Puts things in perspective, sadly.

 

[Archangel M]

It fortunately/unfortunately doesn't show the first half where Dep. Dinkheller was talking to the subject at the front of his car...the whole video is used for LEO training now. I will NEVER let someone I am legally detaining on a car stop/investigation just turn around and walk back to their car until I release them. I dont care if someone wants to twist it into me being a jackboot torturing someone who refused to sign a piece of paper..thats NOT going to happen to me.