Cops Taze Unarmed Naked Man to Death for "Walking Toward Them'

Originally posted by loner007
OMFG some of these posts are way out of line. The man was naked anyone but a BLIND man could see he wasnt armed. ARE you seriously telling me no officer could take him down to subdue him???????? you guys are bloody crazy. I can take any man down and subdue him if I had to, not to mention pepper spray which should have been used in the first place. Most police officers at least in the UK are trained to take people down when they are convinced enough that they are unarmed.

Seems to me the US police are letting anyone be a police officer these days and obviously not getting any police training either.

I more and more get the impression that the police officers in the USA are not what we in Europe would call police officers, but rather brutal thugs.

Anyone that doesnt believe that cops are getting very out of control with tasers, have to be in denial.
Theres the one cop that tased a 10 year old girl because her mom called the cops because she wouldnt take a shower. wtf, since when are cops supposed to supplement parenting? (he was eventually fired for not taping the incident)
Then another cop tasing yet another pre-teen just the other day, I forgot the details but its not relevant because these were KIDS and any cop that cant restrain a KID should NOT be a cop at all. Both of these incidents were in a 10-14 day period of time.

These days, cops are being conditioned to treat everyone as an enemy and any type of dissent is treated quickly and usually harshly, the era in which cops were considered (peacemakers) is long gone and the motto "to serve and protect) has become a joke.

My dad, who was a cop for over 3 decades used to tell me that you had to have several abilities, diplomat, social worker, marriage counselor and when needed, Enforcer.
Now its straight to Enforcer and he told me that day was upon us, long before i realized it.

Hmm, this is a bit different than a ten year old boy.

This is a full grown man having a psychotic episode. Reality doesn't exist. He obviously poses some sort of threat, or his wife would not have called the police in the first place.

Knowing that he was in full swing of a psychotic episode, the taser really is a first line choice by a single officer.

Have any of you encountered anyone in a psychotic episode? The strength they can possess is seemingly unlimited. I've been in situations that have taken 7 officers and 4 fireman to subdue a woman having some sort of mental break down. Pepper spray was dispatched and the officers involved were suffering the effects more than the female.

Police aren't doctors. Psychotic episodes can happen for a myriad of reasons. They can be incredibly dangerous situations. In fact, the unpredictability is very unsettling.

And they all play out differently. Given the information and the situation, muscular dysfunction via taser seems like an appropriate response. When the officer pulls a taser, they are under the impression that it IS non lethal force. It controls a situation without having to be too close to the danger. In many instances.

If he intended to kill the individual, he would have pulled his side arm and dispatched the individual. There would be NO question of his intent.

Yes, sadly, some people die from the taser being used. Some people have also died from chemical sprays, (which also have effects on the officers as well) Too close to the situation.

I definitely agree that tasers are being WAY overused in a lot of situations. But in my opinion, I don't agree that it wasn't a proper response here.

His wife called the police for help. Remember when the police were here to HELP people.

The cops, obviously were either afraid of getting dirty, or just believe that they can electrocute anyone at anytime, for any reason, is now acceptable.

Yes, his wife called the police for help, and they killed him.






[edit on 7-12-2009 by Rhetoric]

Originally posted by Rhetoric
His wife called the police for help. Remember when the police were here to HELP people.

The cops, obviously were either afraid of getting dirty, or just believe that they can electrocute anyone at anytime, for any reason, is now acceptable.

Yes, his wife called the police for help, and they killed him.
[edit on 7-12-2009 by Rhetoric]

Fair enough. That is the just of it, yep.

What did she want them to help with? She wanted to police to stop him from getting hurt, or hurting others. Because she is unable to control the individual. That is the belief of any officer responding to a call for help.

Either way this can play out ugly. A lot of times a woman will call for help, because her spouse is beating the crap out of her. When officers arrive, and attempt to subdue the individual, the woman becomes hostile as well. This could have played out very similarly. There are many responses and situational outcomes that have to be pondered before arriving at a situation.

Killing him was NOT their intent. They serviced what they believed is a non lethal device to control a dangerous situation.

[edit on 7-12-2009 by Demoncreeper]

reply to post by Demoncreeper


This is the problem. Tasers are not non-lethal they are LESS lethal. Anyone trained in taser use knows that they potentially can kill someone, especially if they are tased near the heart.

Again I will ask, what would a pre-taser LEO have done in this situation?

This IS NOT "less than Lethal".

And it's not appropriate unless you have exhausted other means of subduing a suspect, or in this case, a man in trouble.

Amnesty International says that between 2001 and August 2008, 334 Americans died after Taser shocks. The stun gun was deemed to have caused or contributed to at least 50 of those deaths, Amnesty says, citing medical examiners and coroners. Most suspects were unarmed, and many were subjected to repeated or prolonged shocks, according to Amnesty.

The human rights group has called for governments to limit the use of stun guns or suspend their use. In November 2007, the UN Committee Against Torture released a statement saying "use of Taser X26 weapons, provoking extreme pain, constituted a form of torture, and… in certain cases, it could also cause death."

That doesn't sound like a device that should be a replacement for, or the immediate answer to someone who doesn't, or can't listen to the initial commands given by police.

Tazer info

reply to post by Demoncreeper

mm, this is a bit different than a ten year old boy. This is a full grown man having a psychotic episode. Reality doesn't exist. He obviously poses some sort of threat, or his wife would not have called the police in the first place. Knowing that he was in full swing of a psychotic episode, the taser really is a first line choice by a single officer.

I agree that its a different situation and its possible that the cop did it with the very best intentions. But didnt the OP say that the chief responded as well? Im sure two guys couldve done something, \maybe he was ordered by the chief to take action because the chief didnt want to dirty his cleaned and pressed uniform to assist the officer in taking the guy down or maybe they did try something but giving that they were only there for 42 seconds, tells me other wise.

Btw, i didnt even read the article until just now, so i didnt realize that the writer already mentioned the 10 year old in the story but that was the first thing that came to mind when i read this piece.

Dont misunderstand me, im not a cop hater ( I wanted to follow in my Dads footsteps, so bad for so long) but I do hate what they are becoming.
I was actually this (-) close to becoming a Waco Cop in around 1997 or so but some youthful activities caught up with me during the pre-polygraph interview.
I was heartbroken at being turned down (then) but now, in retrospect, im very glad and ironically enough, so was my dad.


Theyre also coming up with new, improved and even deadlier tasers that can hit you from over 170' away and deliver an electrical jolt for up to three minutes at a time, instead of the normal "seconds" that the current ones deliver.

A new electroshock weapon being developed by Taser could zap people up to 175 feet away — and keep on applying pain for as long as three minutes in a row. Which is pretty tough to take, since it only takes a second or two of shocks to make most people cry out in agony. The new 40mm projectile resembles a super-sized version of the shotgun-fired XREP Taser projectile. And like the XREP, it will attach itself to the target and incapacitate him or her with a series of electric jolts. But this one will have some notable differences — from how far it flies to the dangers it might pose. (I describe the project in New Scientist magazine.)

Source

And then there was the guy who was threatening suicide by jumping off of a bridge.
The ignorant cop tazed him to "save his life" and something completely surprising happened after he was hit with a jolt of electricity, he FELL to his death.

[edit on 12/7/2009 by Kr0n0s]

reply to post by Gargamel


Oh, I can answer that.

haha. I agree that tasers cause WAY more problems than they are worth.

With the advent of tech to assist officers in their job, yeah tactical communication and the likes are all but forgotten.

I come from a long line of Law Enforcement. Multiple officers, medics etc, would have attempted to subdue the individual by muscular dysfunction via baton, sitting on him, restraining with now "illegal" holds because they also can cause death, and risked personal injury, disease etc etc etc.

Like I said, if he was just a normal dude, hopefully a bit different approach would have been used. Like reason, or some other tactical communication.

This was a guy in a full psychotic episode.

Taser usage is restricted a lot more in Canada, and only certain members carry them. However, no matter how this subject was subdued, it would have been with appropriate force. And when they are psychotic, what is appropriate for him would be excessive for you.

What is your opinion on what should have been done, and I would happily assess your idea, and give you answers on why it would or would not work.

Its always about the least amount of personal injury to both people and officers.
I have stepped out of the peace officer realm at the moment, but am still working in the environment. I personally like to mix it up a bit, but not with people experiencing psychotic episodes.

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
reply to post by Gargamel

 

What is your opinion on what should have been done, and I would happily assess your idea, and give you answers on why it would or would not work.

How about since police officers are supposed to be trained at hand-to hand combat, perhaps they could have say...had four officers surround him, then use their old fashion take-down tactics and have him handcuffed and sent to a mental hospital? The guy was NAKED, so unless he had a gun or a knife shoved up his bum, I don't think deadly force was warranted at all.

reply to post by Demoncreeper

Have any of you encountered anyone in a psychotic episode? The strength they can possess is seemingly unlimited. I've been in situations that have taken 7 officers and 4 fireman to subdue a woman having some sort of mental break down. Pepper spray was dispatched and the officers involved were suffering the effects more than the female..

The reason for your description of "7 officers and 4 fireman to subdue a woman" is because they are poorly trained!

It usually takes two people to subdue an psychotic episode, I have a friend who works with mental health and mental retardation... THEY DON'T TASER THEM...... period. I would suspect MHMR employees are more trained in submissive techniques than cops.

Police aren't doctors. Psychotic episodes can happen for a myriad of reasons. They can be incredibly dangerous situations. In fact, the unpredictability is very unsettling..

Everything and everyone is unpredictable, but that is no reason to use a Taser, cops should be trained for the unpredictable, they should use a cool head, not a happy trigger finger.

they are under the impression that it IS non lethal force. It controls a situation without having to be too close to the danger. In many instances..

Cops are probably the most hard headed and brained washed individuals that anyone can meet, to think "it IS non lethal" . To be a cop you have to be close to danger, if not then what is the point for being a cop? Your thinking is twisted, I hope your not a cop and I hope most cops don't think this way... but I suspect most do....

If he intended to kill the individual, he would have pulled his side arm and dispatched the individual. There would be NO question of his intent..

There is intent to kill if he knows the deadly facts about Taser.... I would bet most cops mentally block the facts out....

Yes, sadly, some people die from the taser being used. Some people have also died from chemical sprays, (which also have effects on the officers as well) Too close to the situation..

Again, to close to the situation! > what is the point of being a cop if one can not get to close to the situation.... Ah! a sniper taser rifle would be perfect and clean...... those lazy cops would love this....

I definitely agree that tasers are being WAY overused in a lot of situations. But in my opinion, I don't agree that it wasn't a proper response here.

The proper response would be to band all Taser's from cops, they don't have the mentality to carry a Taser.


[edit on 7-12-2009 by imitator]

reply to post by Gargamel

Again I will ask, what would a pre-taser LEO have done in this situation?

I believe they would have probably taken a few minutes to speak to the man (longer than 42 seconds at least) and tried to give his meds a little time to work, while also allowing his wife to speak with him a bit more.
Now, if he was in traffic and action needed to be taken a bit quicker, then get a little more physical, maybe grab a blanket (if available) from the trunk or from his his and his wifes car and the TWO officers restrain him.
The article only mentioned that he was un-cooperative, nothing about him being combative or violent,
I will admit though, the author of the story did seem a bit biased and could have conveniently left out any mention of physical resistance on his part.

Originally posted by Rhetoric
This IS NOT "less than Lethal".

And it's not appropriate unless you have exhausted other means of subduing a suspect, or in this case, a man in trouble.

Yes, the man was in trouble. But he needed to be subdued. Reason obviously did not work.

They did not get out of their cars walk up and utilize the taser. If they did, then yeah, its a problem. They made an assessment, and in this case, it seems like a whole lot of people could have been subject to a dangerous situation.

A pressed uniform doesn't usually effect the judgment of the job.
If it does, than it is obviously a problem.

I'm saying, in this situation, if I was carrying a taser, I would have attempted to utilize it when appropriate. Several factors need to be assessed before it comes out. Hopefully their training of what those factors are, was sound.

I'm pretty certain force would have had to be used. Any force can kill. Tackling him, he could smash his head and bleed out on the brain, ribs can break puncturing organs and veins causing death, carotid restraint could have been applied, (also COULD cause death), pepper spray, can cause choking AND or allergic reactions, impact weapons can cause broken blood vessels, internal bleeding. All these things could happen. All of those things are "LESS LETHAL FORCE"

You seem to think their intent WAS to kill him.
The fact they used the taser instead of the sidearm proves their intent was NOT to kill him. Maybe they are ill trained. Maybe they don't have the physical combat experience needed for it. Not all officers are trained extensively in jiu jitsu. They are trained to effect a cause.

reply to post by imitator

they don't have the mentality to carry a Taser.

The crux of the matter, sadly.

Originally posted by imitator
reply to post by Demoncreeper

 

Have any of you encountered anyone in a psychotic episode? The strength they can possess is seemingly unlimited. I've been in situations that have taken 7 officers and 4 fireman to subdue a woman having some sort of mental break down. Pepper spray was dispatched and the officers involved were suffering the effects more than the female..

The reason for your description of "7 officers and 4 fireman to subdue a woman" is because they are poorly trained!

It usually takes two people to subdue an psychotic episode, I have a friend who works with mental health and mental retardation... THEY DON'T TASER THEM...... period. I would suspect MHMR employees are more trained in submissive techniques than cops.

Police aren't doctors. Psychotic episodes can happen for a myriad of reasons. They can be incredibly dangerous situations. In fact, the unpredictability is very unsettling..

Everything and everyone is unpredictable, but that is no reason to use a Taser, cops should be trained for the unpredictable, they should use a cool head, not a happy trigger finger.

they are under the impression that it IS non lethal force. It controls a situation without having to be too close to the danger. In many instances..

Cops are probably the most hard headed and brained washed individuals that anyone can meet, to think "it IS non lethal"

. To be a cop you have to be close to danger, if not then what is the point for being a cop? Your thinking is twisted, I hope your not a cop and I hope most cops don't think this way... but I suspect most do....

If he intended to kill the individual, he would have pulled his side arm and dispatched the individual. There would be NO question of his intent..

There is intent to kill if he knows the deadly facts about Taser.... I would bet most cops mentally block the facts out....

Yes, sadly, some people die from the taser being used. Some people have also died from chemical sprays, (which also have effects on the officers as well) Too close to the situation..

Again, to close to the situation! > what is the point of being a cop if one can not get to close to the situation.... Ah! a sniper taser rifle would be perfect and clean...... those lazy cops would love this....

I definitely agree that tasers are being WAY overused in a lot of situations. But in my opinion, I don't agree that it wasn't a proper response here.

The proper response would be to band all Taser's from cops, they don't have the mentality to carry a Taser.


[edit on 7-12-2009 by imitator]

You assume/bet too much.
Lazy cops need tools to protect YOU.
They aren't perfect, no. Perhaps you can offer solutions rather than assumptions and friends who work with mental retardation. Not the same.


[edit on 7-12-2009 by Demoncreeper]

I think a lot of the problem lies with cop attitudes and their extremely short attention spans. Anything that takes more than a minute or so freaks them out, perhaps it's sugar depletion or something.

Since the wife stated that it would take some time for the meds to take effect, what was wrong with just hanging out until they did? It seems the cops were in a hurry to get back to looking for "potential" problems, as that's a much easier gig than dealing with real ones.

There is absolutely no excuse for tasering him, period. If a cop fears getting hurt, get another job. What part of "protect" don't you understand? To protect means risking yourself, not the the citizens. If you fear getting hurt on the job, you're pretty useless as a "protector".

The apparently utter lack of training and interest in non-lethal means of dealing with problems should be used as a basis for class-action suits against most police departments. Perhaps it would help if instead of getting paid vacations when they commit manslaughter while the whitewash is being applied, they were put on unpaid leave until the facts were determined. If innocent, they can apply for back pay, just like a citizen can apply for return of property erroneously confiscated by the cops.

Personally, I would support the notion that any cop who kills should be retrained as an EMT and get a lifetime ban on owning firearms, even if it is justified. Back when I was a kid, farmers would kill dogs who killed a farm animal just once, in the belief that they developed a taste for killing. If you look at the stats, the likelihood of any given cop killing someone is pretty low, but the likelihood of a cop who's killed once killing again is quite high.

And anyway, if tasers are so non-lethal, why are they banned for private use in so many jurisdictions?



[edit on 7-12-2009 by apacheman]

Originally posted by Gargamel
reply to post by Conspiracy Theorist

 

No, that is not what a taser is for. The taser was introduced as a less lethal alternative to a firearm in order to cut down on fatalities. If you would not use a firearm in a situation you should not be using a taser. I'm pretty sure a broken bone or a dislocated shoulder as a result of a takedown would have been a better outcome than being killed. .

Yes, but it was also intorduced so officers dont get too close to offenders. What happened if the guy knew how to fight, or shoved the officer out in traffic? The officers have the right to have personal defence too dont they?

Its not like its your everyday American citizen pulling a handgun and firing at a burglar is it....I guess its ok for civilians to do it but not cops. No wonder I dont understand how you yanks think

reply to post by Demoncreeper

They made an assessment, and in this case, it seems like a whole lot of people could have been subject to a dangerous situation.

So cops these days are complete pansies?? Whatever happened to the police *knowing* full well when they sign up for the job to "protect and serve" that there is danger involved?? Their "assesment" was drawn because they are too afraid to actually do their job correctly, and PROTECT the obviously troubled guy. 1 naked guy vs who knows how many cops and the cops are the ones in "danger" lol, what a world we live in.



[edit on 7-12-2009 by Wookiep]

[edit on 7-12-2009 by Wookiep]

I see a lot of criticism, from people who don't offer a single answer that could help an officer do their job.

They are people, as well. Brainwashed yep, you bet. Swore an oath to protect and serve people in need of help. Man, such a sad thing to be brainwashed about.

Yes, sadly some of the outcomes aren't the end result that was wished. But something tells me, if the guy suffered bruises from being subdued and survived you'd be just as wild about use of force.


This situation wasn't totally uncalled for. The end result is sad, and very unfortunate. But It wasn't blatent misuse of a tool. There is a lot of variables that could be left out of the story that could have effected the decision to deploy a taser. Again, things I don't expect you to understand..

reply to post by apacheman

I think a lot of the problem lies with cop attitudes and their extremely short attention spans. Anything that takes more than a minute or so freaks them out, perhaps it's sugar depletion or something.

No, in my opinion it is a result of this over-diagnosing and in a lot of cases, mis-diagnosing ADD/ADHD of an entire generation, working on two generations now. Then they have had meds poured down their throats since grade school because the lazy ass parents no longer feel like parenting or they were forced to work multiple jobs and just werent home enough to raise the child properly.
Whatever the case, they have produced these dysfunctional children that have "grown up" (and i use that term loosely) to be our current police, soldiers and mercenaries.

[edit on 12/7/2009 by Kr0n0s]