Cops getting sued for tasing a guy in his home.

[Daeglan]

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news%2Flocal%2Fnorth_bay&id=7639987

I think the cops are gonna lose this one. What do you guys think?

[Matt G]

STOP RESISTING, STOP RESITING!!  Are you fricking kidding me??  I am not, nor do I claim to be in LE however from what I saw it was a shady taze.  The media definitly crafted a sympathetic story.

Matt G

[Chris]

Interesting. But, like most news stories, there is a lot of information missing. (1) The LEOs were obviously called to the residence... they didn't just happen to be driving by and decide to stop. Who called them? (2) The info the LEOs had was that the subject was "suicidal"... who gave them that information? If it was tha Paramedics who treated him, were they acting under SOP in accordance with CA law and their procedures. If so, the LEOs may have had the right to move in. The news story omits all the above data. (3) Subject, in the news story, makes a tacit admission that he did make a statement RE: suicide. Story is unclear, but it indicates he did tell that to the LEOs. Don't know what SOP is now in Marin County, but in my day if you had a "suicidal" subject you restrained him ASAP. (4) Knowing what I know about Marin County, I'm wondering about the subject and his attitude. What was the charity even he was returning from ... a "Friends Of Earth " rally... a MoveOn rally?... was he some kind of radical? It's fairly obvious from the story that he was antagonistic to the LEOs (since we don't have the LEO side we don't really know if his attitude was warranted or not... but if his wife pleaded for five minutes for the LEOs not to tase him you can bet there was a long and drawn out exchange where the LEOs did show a level of restraint.... one that could have been avoided just by his complying). (5) Tasing three times does seem a bit excessive... but we don't know what went on during that five minute exchange with the LEOs... or what his state of mind/physical response was. There isn't enough info here for me to form a definitive opinion one way of the other. But, knowing what I know about Marin County I tend to think that the county deputies are not storm troopers. That is one of the most liberal places in America and that Sheriff has to get re-elected. Just a thought.
Chris Christian

[SirBrass]

I'd think the "storm trooper" mentality would be far less tolerated in more conservative counties as well, Chris.  People whether conservative or liberal (let's leave of the radicals at both ends here for convenience's sake) want enforcement of the law, not the pressure of a jackboot.

[Chris]

NS2
Your point is an excellent one! The training given to LEOs today is, IMHO, just enough to keep the dept from being sued... by meeting standards that were set by some bureaucrat... and thus carved into the public conscious as "the best". I have little experience with current conflict resolution training (I was a "door kicker"... resolution in my mind was the subject in hooks, and none of my guys injured), but I have a fair amount of experience with current firearms proficiency training... which I, IMHO, find to be minimal. As should be evident from my original post on this subject, I won't second guess the officers either. But, I'm still interested in the subject's mind set (affiliations). Five minutes of conversation with two LEOs and he gets tased multiple times indicates to me that his attitude as not helpful. Was he looking for some kind of confrontation when the situation presented itself? It does it indicate that the officers were not overly aggressive?... five minutes of negotiation before definitive action? Yeah, I think they weren't in a storm trooper mentality. More info would be helpful.
Chris Christian   

[Uninformed Opinion]

I'm not sure how to feel about this one. I think there are issues on both parts. I think the LEO's did show lack of judgment for the situation. responding to the scene it should have been clear to them that this guy was just with the paramedics for an injury. Pain is not conducive for a good mood. On top of that, almost anyone is going to be affronted by someone showing up at their house uninvited and then telling them they are going to the hospital against their will "for their own good." Really, how many people here are pissed off on a daily basis for being told that by people that know nothing of us or the situation we are in? Authority position aside, these guys, from the little I've seen, just acted like shitty human beings. Sometimes as LEO's they have to, it's part of their job. But one injured old man does not warrant the reaction they used.

As for the old mans side of things, while I understand his point of view, I get really pissy when I injure myself, he should have refrained from the use of profanity at the cops. I always make a point, even when I'm in a bad mood, of being polite to the cops. Instead of cursing them out he should have simply asked them to produce a warrant or leave. Falling down is not probable cause for anything other then clumsiness.

[Chris]

I think a key point that is being overlooked here is... who called the deputies and told them that the subject was suicidal? If the Paramedics did it, is there a "duty to respond/resolve" on the part of the deputiies under CA law and their Dept policy? If that is the case (and I can't imagine that the "suicidal" report the deputies had was transmitted to them by anyone other than the Paramedics) then what options did the deputies have? They were called to the scene on what they thought was a legitimate call,  and they can't leave with the situation unresolved. Maybe they could talk to the individual and determine that the Paramedic report was unwarranted. But, if they do... and they are not medical professionals able to make that type of judgement call... what legal liability do they have if the guy offs himself five minutes after the deputies walk out of the house and leave the scene? How would the Press have delt with that?  I can understand a Grumpy Old Fart (I am one) being pissed at two LEOs in his house whom he did not call. However, I cannot understand (and no information on the incident that I have clarifies this issue) why the GOF (Grumpy Old Fart)  was unable to convince the deputies, or why he didn't just say... 'What the hell... I'll go... Mabel... follow me down to the hospital and will get this sh*t resolved".
That is what I don't understand. Why the stand off with the deputies? Wouldn't that just convince the deputies more that the call was legit? And, that they had to do something to resolve the issue? Another thought... I don't know if Marin County runs two man squad cars, or if they run L units (old terminology indicating a one man unit). If two deputies showed up... in that county... what kind of assets were being tied up? How many deputies does Marin County have on the streets and how many were tied up here? Were two untits tied up? Don't know, and the "news article" does not elaborate.
Chris Christian 

[SirBrass]

NS2, I have to wonder how many of those 31 accidents were due NOT to over worked and under trained, but simply over-demanded.  A cop has more distractions that a 16 year old with her 3 best girlfriends in the car all texting each other while listening to the latest teenage heart-throb.... and one of them is driving.

The military often uses 2-man arrangements for fighters with advanced weapon delivery systems.  Same with choppers.  One guy flies, the other guy watches the radar and operates the rest, or the weapon systems.  I bet it's b/c the operation of all those other gadgets would be too distracting to the main guy behind the stick.

If you're going to have an operating laptop AND radios AND expect the driver to be alert, safe, and able to see trouble on the street, then give him a parter in the passenger-side who can handle working the gadgets on the dash.  Let the driver simply operate the vehicle and watch the road and the streets.  He can then simply get his information on the other things via his partner.  Humans:  the most efficient information collators known to themselves.  We can take in all that data and then spit it out to the guy behind the wheel in sentences that he can understand through his ears, and not distract his eyes or his mind.

If they're going to run one man units, then the understanding MUST be that the officer has a duty to operate his vehicle safely first and foremost, not to be distracted by the laptop AND the radio.  If he must get information from one and talk through the other, then he needs to quickly find a place to pull into and work it before getting back on the road.

[Chris]

Sir Brass,
+1 to everything you said... and it works well in theory. The drawback is that theory & reality sometimes don't mesh on the streets. Imagine a situation where one shift officer is out sick, one on personal leave business, one on light duty (squad room duty due to injury) one testifying in court, and another gone for whatever reason. The shift is short handed. You're in the L car, vaguely listening to radio chatter... keeping abreast...  and then suddenly the dispatcher calls your unit #, in your sector, and says "211 in progress... yadda yadda". Ya gotta go. It comes with the territory. You can try to monitor what back up assets may be available (and when they can expect to arrive)... but ya still gotta go. Regardless of what else is happening. And, once ya get there ya gotta do "something"... regardless of who on your side may be around to help. The buck does stop, and a lot of distractions can happen while it stops.... including the dumbass who doesn't see/hear your Code 3 response and decides to cross the intersection you're blasting through. Stuff happens... and it's not always the officer's fault. Increased training is great... teamwork is great... but it doesn't always happen. But, ya still gotta answer the call.
Chris Christian

[SirBrass]

I'd agree with that.  Yeah, murphy does seem to LOOOOVE LEOs way too much.  I just think that one must first try and mitigate whatever chaos is going on around them first.  Basically, don't invite more trouble than was already sent formal invitations.

In that situation, a cop versed in filtering out all that input would be more likely to avoid trouble than a cop who is trying to monitor all at once.

I'm not trying to say that the theory is possible in reality all the time, but just b/c the theory isn't always workable doesn't mean it should be considered merely "optional" by the department when they are in a position to make improvements.  Basically, just b/c a cop with all those distractions can still operate as a lone officer in his car doesn't mean that should be the status quo, even though it happens more often than folks would like.

Basically, in a nutshell, "Just b/c the situation is far from ideal doesn't mean that the mediocre circumstances should be allowed to lapse into SOP."

[Chris]

SirBrass
The newspaper article posted (from an ABC affiliate in San Fransisco... does the term liberal have any meaning here!) gives up no more info than the wife pleaded for five minutes for the officers not to tase her husband. As a former LEO I will surmise that the five minutes of tasing negotiations were a smaller portion of the overall negotiations than is being reported. How much longer I don't know. But you don't break out the taser when you walk in the door after being called by medical professionals for a possibly sucicidal subject... talk, calm, discuss first. Subject refuses to cooperate?... OK, after a certain period of time you "gotta do something". As has been noted in above posts, the officers had a statute/policy/legal responsibility to act. How long did the "polite talk" go on before the word "taser"... which seems, according to the news report... to have started the five minute clock that has been talked about, and seems to be an important point in the article. How much time did these deputies actually spend with this guy? They're radio call logs might shed some light on that, and I'm sure that total time frame will come out in the litigation. Let's see what actually happened, instead of relying on a poorly written news report from an organization that enthusiastically endorsed Nancy Polosi.
Chris Christian

[SirBrass]

I agree with your conclusions, Chris, as that actually SOUNDS reasonable to my ears (disregard that I'm reading this with my eyes and mixing my metaphors).

It was more a tangential issue that I had intended to engage.

[Devereaux]

SB-

I've ridden on enough squads and ambulances/fire trucks to know that John Q Public is the most heaaring impared dipstick on the planet. Can't tell you HOW many times I have almost been a MVC victim while in the squad, with wailing siren is almost broadsided - by cross-street drivers, by oncoming trying to turn left, by same direction that pull out infront of you. You would expect there is simply a complete population of deaf people in the city.

That said, I know enough coppers to also say they tend to be a collection of relatively bad drivers. Add to that the fact that most city cops do NOT use their seatbelts because it seriously hampers their ability to exit the squad with all their paraphernalia and not get hung up in the belt.

As for getting shot, there is a long history of cops not being nearly as alert to their circumstances as they ought to. Kind of like walking patrol all day, day in and day out. You end up not keeping interval as well as you should. Happens. There would certainly be better policing IF the departments had enough additional officers to staff ALL two man cars, including days off, going to court, etc. Considering our welfare oriented cities, that isn't going to happen any time in my life. And it's too bad, because it should; that IS a legitimate function of government. Go around writing a lot fewer tickets and more warnings, there would also be better relations with the populace, which views most LEO's as tax-collecting boobs. Truth be told, in my neighborhood, we waste a lot of tax money on cops we really have little need for. We would better spend the cash to contract out the policing duty to the county and spend more on firefighters, who might actually be able to SAVE a home in case of a fire. Meanwhile our "police" spend most of their time harassing kids and being as unhelpful as they can figure out to be. And I have a neighboring village to compare to, and the difference in attitude is simply amazing.

[Chris]

Dev,
You hit it on the head when you noted that police response is a legitimate function of Gov't. Now, let's see if we can get our elected officials to fund that legitimate function of Gov't to the point where we don't have overworked/outnumbered officers trying to carry out that legitimate Gov't function. And, if there are enough of them to do the job, let's get some money to the firefighters and paramedics.... another legitimate function of Gov't. I note that you mentioned that in your neighborhood you have more cops than you have need for. How do you know that? Have you ever called the police and seen more officers show up than you thought were required? Do you know any neighbors who said ' Geez, I called the cops because there were Bad Guys breaking into my house, but they sent too many cops". How many is too many when you need help?
Chris Christian

[Daeglan]

I really would like to get the Government out of doing charity work and back to doing things like police, fire, roads and military....

I don't think the government really needs to do much more than that. Well ok building standards. But that's about it.

Take all the money spent on welfare etc. and spend it on police and fire.

And I am not talking about canceling things like unemployment insurance. that was paid for out of my paycheck. But Welfare...lets send that back to charity organizations. They actually care unlike the guy on the government paycheck.

[Chemsoldier]

Had the homeowner been drinking?  Charity event...they often have booze.  While a head injury from the fall might have caused aberrant behavior it looks a lot like being intoxicated.  While that does not in and of itself justify tasing someone it goes a long way towards explaining his actions.

There are two questions at work here.  Should the officers have utilized the degree of force that they did?  Should I have an ounce of sympathy for the person tased?  Most times officers are wrong, the "victim" is still a sh*thead. It doesnt justify their actions if they are wrong, but my sympathy may be limited based on what comes out of this fact wise.

+2 million to "what are the local procedures?" If EMS called with the suicidal bit they may have had to remove him one way or the other and tussling with unruly men, even old ones is not good for the back and they would probably be sued anyway for having to take him down physically.  For instance there are counties where if a domestic is called in someone is going to jail (if not both parties) even if they are never charged with anything.  I have been on calls where we have taken people in, and they were never charged, had someone pick them up, signed a release stating they would not go home for 24 hours and out of county lock-up after 30 minutes.

-Chem

[SirBrass]

SB-

I've ridden on enough squads and ambulances/fire trucks to know that John Q Public is the most heaaring impared dipstick on the planet. Can't tell you HOW many times I have almost been a MVC victim while in the squad, with wailing siren is almost broadsided - by cross-street drivers, by oncoming trying to turn left, by same direction that pull out infront of you. You would expect there is simply a complete population of deaf people in the city.

I could've also told you this as I see it on a regular occassion from other drivers.

I'll give you a classic example where I was nearly crushed between the barrier wall of a freeway-to-freeway onramp and a Yukon.

The onramp is dual lane, so at a certain point the dashed white line becomes solid then disappears as the onramp funnels down to a single lane.  I had passed this yukon right after the solid white line had disappeared (I had the room ahead and the current speed difference to do this safely), essentially jockeyed into position.  As the funnel narrows, folks will naturally stagger up while there's still technically room for 2 cars, but people essentially get into position to smoothly merge.

Well, I had done this and had staggered up.  It wasn't jammed traffic on the freeway I was merging ONTO, so the line was progressing smoothly at only a slightly reduced speed from the limit.  Well.... I did a glance into my driver's side side mirror to check to see if I was far enough ahead of the massive yukon I'd shadily passed (yes it technically was a moving violation, I know.... but it was still done by choice because of the conditions of traffic.... not a maneuver pulled recklessly).  Well, I'm glad I checked, b/c suddenly here up right on my bumper and accelerating was that Yukon, and we were only seconds away from the full merge where the barrier walls condense to force traffic into a single lane.  It was either pile on the torque and hope my turbo'd H4 had enough power at that speed to haul on past the rapidly accelerating Yukon (which I couldn't, not fast enough, as it takes a second to clutch in and drop to 3rd and clutch out and pile on the gas... just under a second I'd say if I was quick on the reaction, but I'd been surprised).  It was either stand on the breaks and clutch or have my WRX give its life for me.  Brakes and clutch it was.  Then horn.

The idiot didn't even give me the courtesy of a shocked expression.  He nearly made me the center contents of an SUV/barrier wall sandwich.  Me?  I'd done nothing to him, really.  I didn't force him to slam on his brakes with my maneuver earlier or reduce his speed at all.  I had just had the velocity and conditions to move past him when I did and chose to do so instead of killing loads of nice, fun speed as he lumbered on into the merge stack.  Him?  He nearly killed me and I don't think he gave a second thought to it.

I've also seen folks on the road not give a second thought to a passing cop whose lights and sirens are blazing.  Me?  If it's not a median-divided road and he's coming from the other direction, I pull over.  That is, if I can.  Sometimes the lanes are just jammed full and no one can actually move.  I think that's actually safer for the cop, as everyone realizes "passing emergency vehicle" and "I can't maneuver"  and most do what everyone else is "I'll just sit here till after he passes on the shoulder."  I HAVE seen lines of cop cars on the freeway fly down the shoulder or the HOV lane in jam-packed traffic.  Sometimes that is the only way they can get through.

John Q Public (or more likely Susie Q Teenager or Debbie Q Distracted-Housewife.... either one chatting on the cellphone or attending to baby or brat in the back) is distracted by choice.  That is their own crime.

As far as the staffing needs.... what about making more use of reserve officers for filling in the gaps?  Maybe even do something of a part-time thing for those in the reserve who want to be more active, yet still in a "fill in the gaps" capacity.  From what I understand, reserve officers get the same academy training as full time officers do.  I mean, this is essentially what volunteer sheriff posses are and they seem to work well (here in Maricopa County, our own sheriff joe just announced that he's working on putting together a program for an armed, trained posse for use in taking on the more dangerous of the drug and human smugglers passing through the county).

Chem- is what you're describing when its a legitimate domestic, or whenever a domestic CALL has been made, even if its just an overly sensitive neighbor who thinks all men are toads and calls the cops whenever the couple has a knock-down-drag-out verbal fight that MOST normal, stable, happily married couples have now and again?

[Miggy]

Time for me to add the two cents.

What I saw is probably bad training captured on video. You have an individual just like us who is in pain, embarrassed, in his house and has just been called a loony by some public worker. His mood is not going to be the best one (I know mine wouldn't) and here comes somebody else who starts ordering him around like a 4 year old and pointing a device at him threatening to use it unless he takes a trip to a place he does not want to go in the first place. ANYONE OF US will react negatively to this circumstance.
As for the officer, I am willing to bet that he received more training on the magic properties of the Taser and how is a cure-all for anything from warts to old farts giving him lip than in non-confrontational conflict resolution. I am willing to bet you cash money (maybe $5) that if the officer would have not deployed the taser and instead talked with the guy (instead of talking to him), he would have convinced him that a bump in the head is something that should not be sneezed at and it required more in deep and immediate medical care. Maybe even throw a ride in the patrol car as a bonus with lights and siren going to add to the cool factor. Instead what we have is county monies going to waste into defending the actions of an officer in a lawsuit, monies that could have been used in other things like more training or another officer or two on patrol.

I have seen police officers talk individuals down and I swear they used to be carnies in a past life so good they were at it. And I also seen poorly trained officers complicate almost resolved situations into major cases because of bad training and poor attitude. In this case nobody is coming out the winner, nor the old guy, not the officer and certainly not the community.

[Daeglan]

Time for me to add the two cents.

What I saw is probably bad training captured on video. You have an individual just like us who is in pain, embarrassed, in his house and has just been called a loony by some public worker. His mood is not going to be the best one (I know mine wouldn't) and here comes somebody else who starts ordering him around like a 4 year old and pointing a device at him threatening to use it unless he takes a trip to a place he does not want to go in the first place. ANYONE OF US will react negatively to this circumstance.
As for the officer, I am willing to bet that he received more training on the magic properties of the Taser and how is a cure-all for anything from warts to old farts giving him lip than in non-confrontational conflict resolution. I am willing to bet you cash money (maybe $5) that if the officer would have not deployed the taser and instead talked with the guy (instead of talking to him), he would have convinced him that a bump in the head is something that should not be sneezed at and it required more in deep and immediate medical care. Maybe even throw a ride in the patrol car as a bonus with lights and siren going to add to the cool factor. Instead what we have is county monies going to waste into defending the actions of an officer in a lawsuit, monies that could have been used in other things like more training or another officer or two on patrol.

I have seen police officers talk individuals down and I swear they used to be carnies in a past life so good they were at it. And I also seen poorly trained officers complicate almost resolved situations into major cases because of bad training and poor attitude. In this case nobody is coming out the winner, nor the old guy, not the officer and certainly not the community.

I think a lot more training should be given to officers in how to talk to people. A big part of which is put yourself in the other guys shoes. Sometimes i think cops develop a sense of everyones a bad guy and behave that way.

[Miggy]

I think there might be some of the Us v. Them mentality, but I don't think is that deep otherwise they wouldn't be doing the job they do.
And the officer does not necessarily has to put himself in the guy's shoes but learn how to "disarm" a situation or avoid escalating it.

I went through TIPS (Training for Intervention ProcedureS) which is basically how to deal with intoxicated guests. It is oriented for the hospitality, bar & restaurant people and part of it teaches how to address an individual who is way way drunk and wants some more or wants to leave the premises which makes you liable for what may happen to him. Basically you BS and charm the hell out of the person if necessary and only you take extreme measures if you use all the tricks and nothing works. For us was the guest wanting to drive out on his own and then we warned him that we were bound to call PD, give all the info about them so an arrest for DUI could be made....our only available version of tasering 
Only once I had to call PD on a guest and she spent the remaining of her vacation visiting the least know parts of South Florida's jails.