Fortunately, I have a great "Taser" legal case to read, addressed in the San Diego Bee, and published by the Court, was announced on December 29, 2009, by the 9°th Circuit Court of Appeals, with direct legal effect in California, Alaska, Washington, Montana, Oregon, Idaho, Arizona, Hawaii and Guam, and influential in other parts of the country.
Plaintiff Bryan was stopped police twice in one day, and on the second stop he was shocked twice with a Taser device, falling face down in the roadway and "fracturing" four teeth in addition to facial injuries. The shocking officer said that even though Bryan was twenty feet away and there were no other cars or persons on the road, the officer testified that he was afraid of a man who was dressed only in boxer shorts and tennis shoes while yelling at himself between the car door and the car, twenty or twenty-one feet away. Bryan, the plaintiff had been stopped by the officer only to enforce a seat belt law.
The 9°th Circuit Court of Appeals Court found that:
. . . in the light most favorable to Bryan, Officer McPherson’s use of the taser was unconstitutionally excessive and a violation of Bryan’s clearly established rights.
( . . . )Opponents of taser use should read the entire case, since it is chock full of the arguments we've made over the last two years. It also addresses the continuum of force question, without using that specific term, and it makes application of appropriate and measured use of force a matter of law, rather than a mere matter of whether police followed their own lax guidelines or not.
Bryan sued Officer McPherson and the Coronado Police
Department, its police chief, and the City of Coronado for
excessive force in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, assault and
battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, a violation
of California Civil Code § 52.1, as well as failure to train and
related causes of action.
( . . . )
Allegations of excessive force are examined under the
Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable seizures.
16738 BRYAN v. MCPHERSON
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 394 (1989); Deorle v. Rutherford,
272 F.3d 1272, 1279 (9th Cir. 2001). We ask “whether
the officers’ actions are ‘objectively reasonable’ in light of the
facts and circumstances confronting them.” Graham, 490 U.S.
at 397. We must balance “ ‘the nature and quality of the intrusion
on the individual’s Fourth Amendment interests’ against
the countervailing governmental interests at stake.” Id. at 396
(quoting Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, 8 (1985)); see also
Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 383 (2007). Stated another way,
we must “balance the amount of force applied against the
need for that force.” Meredith v. Erath, 342 F.3d 1057, 1061
(9th Cir. 2003).
( . . . )
Officer McPherson’s use of the X26 physically
injured Bryan. As a result of the taser, Bryan lost muscular
control and fell, uncontrolled, face first into the pavement.
This fall shattered four of his front teeth and caused facial
abrasions and swelling. Additionally, a barbed probe lodged
in his flesh, requiring hospitalization so that a doctor could
remove the probe with a scalpel. A reasonable police officer
with Officer McPherson’s training on the X26 would have
foreseen these physical injuries when confronting a shirtless
individual standing on asphalt.
( . . . )
We, along with our sister circuits, have held that tasers
and stun guns fall into the category of non-lethal force.6 See,
e.g., Lewis, 581 F.3d at 476; United States v. Fore, 507 F.3d
412, 413 (6th Cir. 2007); San Jose Charter of Hells Angels
Motorcycle Club v. City of San Jose, 402 F.3d 962, 969 n.8
(9th Cir. 2005).7 Non-lethal, however, is not synonymous with
non-excessive; all force—lethal and non-lethal—must be justified
by the need for the specific level of force employed.
Graham, 490 U.S. at 395; see also Deorle, 272 F.3d at 1285
(“Less than deadly force, like deadly force, may not be used
without sufficient reason; rather, it is subject to the Graham
balancing test.”). Nor is “non-lethal” a monolithic category of
force.
( . . . )
We similarly reject any contention that, because the taser results only
in the “temporary” infliction of pain, it constitutes a nonintrusive
level of force. The pain is intense, is felt throughout
the body, and is administered by effectively commandeering
the victim’s muscles and nerves. Beyond the experience of
pain, tasers result in “immobilization, disorientation, loss of
balance, and weakness,” even after the electrical current has
ended. Matta-Ballesteros v. Henman, 896 F.2d 255, 256 n.2
(7th Cir. 1990); see also Beaver v. City of Federal Way, 507
F. Supp. 2d 1137, 1144 (W.D. Wash. 2007) (“[A]fter being
tased, a suspect may be dazed, disoriented, and experience
vertigo.”). Moreover, tasering a person may result in serious
injuries when intense pain and loss of muscle control cause a
sudden and uncontrolled fall.[5]
The X26 thus intrudes upon the victim’s physiological
functions and physical integrity in a way that other non-lethal
uses of force do not.
( . . . )
In light of these facts, we agree with the Fourth and Eighth
Circuit’s characterization of a taser shot as a “painful and
frightening blow.” Orem v. Rephann, 523 F.3d 442, 448 (4th
Cir. 2008) (quoting Hickey, 12 F.3d at 757). We therefore
conclude that tasers like the X26 constitute an “intermediate
or medium, though not insignificant, quantum of force,”
Sanders v. City of Fresno, 551 F. Supp. 2d 1149, 1168 (E.D.
16742 BRYAN v. MCPHERSON
Cal. 2008); Beaver, 507 F. Supp. 2d at 1144 (“[T]he Court
first finds that the use of a Taser constituted significant
force.”).
( . . . )
The “most important” factor under Graham is whether
the suspect posed an “immediate threat to the safety of the
officers or others.” Smith v. City of Hemet, 394 F.3d 689, 702
(9th Cir. 2005) (en banc) (quoting Chew, 27 F.3d at 1441). “A
simple statement by an officer that he fears for his safety or
the safety of others is not enough; there must be objective factors
to justify such a concern.” Deorle, 272 F.3d at 1281. The
district court correctly concluded that Bryan’s volatile, erratic
conduct could lead an officer to be wary. While Bryan’s
behavior created something of an unusual situation, this does
not, by itself, justify the use of significant force. “A desire to
resolve quickly a potentially dangerous situation is not the
type of governmental interest that, standing alone, justifies the
use of force that may cause serious injury.” Id. Rather, the
objective facts must indicate that the suspect poses an immediate
threat to the officer or a member of the public.
( . . . )
The severity of Bryan’s purported offenses “provide[ ]
little, if any, basis for [Officer McPherson’s] use of physical
force.” Smith, 394 F.3d at 702. It is undisputed that Bryan’s
initial “crime” was a mere traffic infraction—failing to wear
a seatbelt—punishable by a fine. Traffic violations generally
will not support the use of a significant level of force. See
Deville v. Marcantel, 567 F.3d 156, 167 (5th Cir. 2009)
(“Deville was stopped for a minor traffic violation . . . making
the need for force substantially lower than if she had been
suspected of a serious crime.”).
MacK
December 10th, 2009 at 2:41 PM
Many pretty sickening to watch and even worse to see nothing down to cops on many. I went with the Oscar Grant video even though it does appear something is being done so far. It takes unbelievable hubris to shoot a man point blank with that many cameras pointed at you. Number 2 was a close second, but I could not go with it because shoving a person is not usually as deadly as a bullet.
Juliet
December 10th, 2009 at 3:39 PM
these videos make me so sick and so sad. i do NOT understand-how is it possible that almost ALL of these officers saw NO disciplinary action whatsoever?? and if they did, half of it was paid??i understand that cops as a brotherhood are capable of getting away with murder, but when there is a FILMED VIDEO of what happened, how is this possible?? WHY IS THIS SLIPPING THROUGH THE CRACKS–what can we do to make sure that all acts of violence and unnecessary force that have physical evidence, aka video, are fully punished as thy would be with ANY NORMAL CITIZEN??? what can i do, as a person? please help me understand how we can right these wrongs, i am so disgusted!!!!
Packratt
December 10th, 2009 at 3:50 PM
Mack,
Yes, they’re all bad, as are the cases we never see or never even know about.
Juliet,
Thank you for asking… It’s pretty complex and depends on what the situation is in the area that you live in.
In some places, departments have little leeway in how they can discipline officers due to state laws so pressure needs to be put on state lawmakers to change the way things are done on that level to address the problem.
In others, the problems stem from leaders unwilling to discipline officers due to any number of reasons, and yet other departments are controlled by government officials who prefer to cover up abuses to prevent liability instead of address the problems to prevent liability.
There are so many root causes that one single approach to solve the problem… But, in any case, the first step is just to convince people that it happens, that it can really happen to anyone, and that it’s something that they should be concerned enough to do something about it. According to the polls I’ve cited previously, a majority of Americans don’t even believe that it happens.
Thank you for being willing to see it’s a problem that needs to be addressed.
Twitted by donkeyrock
December 10th, 2009 at 8:04 PM
[...] This post was Twitted by donkeyrock [...]
Sadist cops
December 11th, 2009 at 12:14 AM
The sadistic persons threatening behavior will often escalate to interpersonal violence if he or she thinks that the person being subordinated is resisting control or is no longer intimidated.
Explosive sadistics react suddenly with verbal abuse and violence. It appears as if they reach a threshold of tolerance and then respond rapidly and violently against what they consider “safe” targets, that is, ones that cannot retaliate. Explosive sadistic types are hypersensitive to any hint of betrayal by those with whom they have relationships and they explode with rage when their feelings of shame reach intolerable levels.
In contrast spineless sadistics have predominately avoidant personality disorder features. These individuals are essentially highly insecure and they have a “strike first” attitude to counter their insecurities and feelings of powerlessness. They also hypothesize that spineless types take out their aggression and hostility on especially defenseless or helpless targets.
According to Million and Davis, the enforcing Sadistic Personality Disorder type has obsessive-compulsive features. They sublimate their hostility by enforcing rules, often in a demanding and authoritarian manner that allows no dissent or even rational objection. They may see themselves as defenders of justice or correctness, but it often is a mask to hide their basically cruel and hostile nature. They may be typified by the “hanging” judge and the “mean” cop.
Tyrannical sadistic types have depressive and paranoid personality disorder features. Million and Davis propose that they are perhaps the most frightening and pathological of all four types. Tyrannical types are cruel and absolutely inhumane. The often instigate and carry out the most verbally and physically abusive sadistic acts on other people and animals and will also direct others to carry out these acts.
Like most other personality disorders, personas with Sadistic Personality Disorder typically do not see any problems with their behavior and in fact usually see the positive outcomes of getting what they want.
http://carlosmiller.com/2009/07/23/idaho-police-sodomize-man-with-taser/
http://books.google.com/books?id=1Y0_UwGdakcC&pg=PT162&lpg=PT161&ots=ZZbG5Dfbqc&dq=cops+personality+disordered&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html
Catinthewall
December 11th, 2009 at 4:56 AM
This may seem like a minor thing, but embedding TWENTY FOUR flash videos on the front page may seem convenient for some, those without the memory to handle them all will find their browser screech to a halt, if not crash.
Packratt
December 11th, 2009 at 8:25 AM
Cat,
Hmmm…
What do you suggest as a solution to that?
Juliet
December 11th, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Packrat,
I live in Seattle, WA-which as you know has been a central area of police misconduct and unhappy citizens as of late. I’m not sure where the dealings with misconduct take place within our state system but I also simply don’t know where to find this information..
I worry that because of the recent murders of Police officers, law makers will be even more weary of putting any pressure or limitation on police behavior.
Catinthewall
December 11th, 2009 at 12:22 PM
make a few seperate pages each with 4-6 videos, Maybe even make the whole thing tournament-tree voting out of each group.
Packratt
December 11th, 2009 at 1:26 PM
Juliet,
I’ve actually discussed Seattle’s problem in depth in the past. It’s a complex problem that is primarily caused by the police union having too much influence over the way the city and department can discipline officers. This came about via a combination of the city giving the union that kind of authority in past contract negotiations. However, the city is now powerless to turn back that clock due to state laws and processes that heavily favor police officers and their unions.
So, you’re not going to convince the union to agree to reforms without paying through the nose and even when it does agree, it modifies those reforms in a way to make it so they don’t work as intended. You can convince city officials to do something about it, but they’ve found there’s little they can actually do about it other than put up a good show with a powerless civilian oversight mechanism that was neutered by the police union… so the only place to start is at the state level to decrease the influence unions have on their disciplinary processes and then go back to the city-level and argue for changes locally.
But, the problem there is, as you say, the recent violence against police puts any effort to argue for reforms in a very bad position as politicians are now begging for chances to show police unions that they are siding with them in any way possible. So, for now, the best thing to do is just organize at a grass roots level so that when the climate becomes favorable for change again, after some more high-profile cases, you’ll have the support all ready to lobby for changes.
Sorry, but that’s how I see Seattle’s situation at the current moment.
Packratt
December 11th, 2009 at 1:28 PM
Cat,
I’ll see what I can do when I have some time… the problem is that there are some sites directly linking to the article at the moment and it took me a long time to format it correctly. I don’t have time to redo it now and I don’t want to break those links too quickly. So sometime this weekend I may switch it to a page with a redirect… If I get the time.
Hope that doesn’t cause too many problems, sorry for the inconvenience.
no bad cops
December 11th, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Cat, you are correct that it does make the site really slow loading even for those of us that have the memory. But it’s worth it because this is an important and interesting topic. A possible solution is in a couple of weeks maybe he can take them down and replace them with a still photo from each case?
All the videos are so bad I had a hard time trying to pick only three. Even more sickening then the videos themselves is the lack of any justice on over half of them! I just cannot believe that, I mean they’re caught on tape what more do you want!!
I guess it just goes to prove the point this site has made time and time again; that cops not only need more accountability, but ANY accountability would be a good place to start!
no bad cops
December 11th, 2009 at 2:16 PM
Make no mistake, as long as they feel they are above the law this will not only continue but it will get WORSE.
Had this site been around five years ago I think we’d already have proof of that!
Don’t get too bogged down in the details of city governments. Any progress is good progress, especially when it’s so desperately needed. Of course the laws are in their favor, nobody has ever really stood up to them. If the politicians are too cowardly to act then don’t forget that there is always strength in numbers. Just ask the cops, that’s how they work.
ANY person in a position of power who stands up against some of these cops actions CAN make a difference just by saying “your badge doesn’t allow you to do whatever you want, the buck stops here”. The domino effect of one’s persons actions could at least curb the abuse for awhile and maybe even save the next person. Which is the real goal here.
So even if the system works for the wrong people it doesn’t hurt to point that out to our ELECTED representatives . After all, we can vote them out. They should keep that in mind.
no bad cops
December 11th, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Juliet, you are absolutely correct that the police unions will exploit the senseless murder of those four cops for everything it’s worth, and then some. How pathetic that the lives of those people will be used as a bargaining chip for megalomaniac cops to get their way and cover up their misdeeds. The author of this site has pointed out some of the specific problems with Seattle but please don’t let that deter you.
Remember that the truth is not only the best defense it’s also a pretty good offence!!
The fact that some of us here who are educated on the issue are STILL shocked at the lack of accountability for these beatings speaks to the fact that ignorance of the problem is still a big part of the problem!
Get the message out to everyone you know and encourage them to do the same. I would suggest handing this one out for starters-
http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=1279
and putting it in every coffee shop, student lounge, telephone pole, anywhere you are allowed to post something. Mail it to your humanities professors and maybe they will in turn educate others.
Each incident of police abuse by itself no longer stands out —and it’s too easy for cop supporters to defend ONE isolated case— but when you take a step back and look at the whole picture you see how corrupt police as a whole truly are.
Knowledge is power, education is the key, and the game is won two points at a time.
So please everyone, forward these articles to all of your friends, family and acquaintances and encourage them to do the same. You never know, you just might be saving them from something horrible. Because think about it, some of these people probably didn’t expect THIS http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=1279 from those who are paid to protect them.
no bad cops
December 11th, 2009 at 4:37 PM
Another good one to hand out and publicize is about all of the cops who beat the hell out of and terrorize their own families:
http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=1227
Some estimates put police officer domestic violence rates at four times higher then the general population. Some “heroes” they are.
And when they’re not out beating their wives or molesting kids they are stealing from even their own organizations!, as this article points out:
http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=1313
These are the types of cases that if people read them, they WILL help change any misconceptions they have about police abuse. Because,
“If that doesn’t convince you to worry about these kinds of misconduct, then consider that if an officer can get away with theft, what else might that officer do when nobody is watching?”