Did the Police Officer over-react...?

Question

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH_qVJfaYZA&eurl=http://news.aol.com/story/_a/trooper-tasers-alleged-highway-speeder/20071122122409990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001

Answer 1

Several cops who post here regularly answered this question the other day and said it was reasonable for the cop to do that because the driver was unruly and didnt immediately respond to the cop's demands. The cops I'm talking about...the names escape me...seem to be pretty good guys and they offer very insightful opinions about being on the job. I respect their answers, but I disagree with this.

EDIT: Trooper 3 is one of the guys I was talking about. Hey trooper, sorry man. I have to respectfully disagree with you here!!!

I understand a cop's need to feel safe in a stop situation. We all know that far too many of them are killed on routine stops. But I feel this cop was helping to escalate a benign situation into one that "required" an arrest. Even if you believe that an arrest was proper, using a tazer was just not necessary. There was backup on the way. This "doer" was obviously a whimp who was not going to pose a physical danger to the cop. He could easily have been restrained. He was just a wise a&&. The cop is obviously a deranged power freak in my opinion.

The problem with tazers is that it is fast becoming the first line of defense for cops. Non lethal to most people, it is excessive force unless there is a true threat. Tazing this driver was completely unecessary. In front of his wife and kid or not. When this kind of reaction by the cops becomes routine...and it has...there is no way they stop. And there is no way it doesnt graduate to some other form of excessive force. Now I'm not saying there is never a reason for a cop to use force to protect themself. Quite the contrary. When a cop is in danger, he or she should do whatever it takes to make sure they are not injured. But there is a time and place for everything. This officer should be reprimanded for reacting the way he did. I didnt see any indication of a clear and present danger. Just some loudmouth who was not acting in a threatening way. And a cop who probably needs to think about a new career.

Answer 2

What a flaming horse's patoot that driver is. He has seen entirely too many episodes of Law & Order.

When he turned to walk back to his car I would assume he is getting a weapon. He got tazed a good one and even for just for being an azzhole he deserved it.

There are so many myths in the many demands the driver made of the trooper it is impossible to cover them all here. The bottom line here is the person would not sign the citation which is NOT an admission of guilt. The citation or ticket is merely an option and is used in many offenses such as shop-lifting or minor possession.

At the officer's discretion, he may arrest someone or issue them a ticket. The ticket is an agreement that the offender will take care of the issue; i.e. pay the fine or challenge it in court on the date listed. Some times a court appearance is required. In any case, if the person refuses to promise to take care of it (won't sign) the officer must arrest them.

This idiot argues, refused to comply and then tried to return to his car. Tazer him. The wife is lucky she didn't end up looking down the barrel of a service weapon. Especially when she went back to the car and then came back.

The trooper probably should have moved him to his cruiser or at least off the road but then again he was probably wondering what the wife was loading up.

Most people don't realize that someone that uncooperative is almost always hiding something, especially when it is over a minor speeding ticket.

And P.S. the Trooper does not have to read the man his rights before, during, or after his arrest. Only before questioning AFTER being arrested.

This guy is a jerk and got what he asked for.

Answer 3

Not at all.
The driver was uncooperative almost from the start. Listen to the tape. There is discussion regarding the drivers license long before the driver got out of the car. The driver challenges the officer's authority. The driver refused to sign the citation which then REQUIRED his physical arrest. The officer gave directions multiple times which the driver refused to obey, again challenging the officer's authority. The driver resisted arrest, plain & simple. The driver would have been back in the car before backup could arrive.The officer did well not to let him re-enter the car which is where the driver was headed.
The officer was faced with a couple options; 1. A hands on approach to stop the driver, gain compliance, & place the driver into custody or 2. The tazer which resulted in no violence (come on folks - the guy screams from the initial shock but is coherent & more cooperative within seconds even to the point he is threatening to sue the officer). The officer chose the less dangerous.
Would the driver have been tazed had he complied? If he had not resisted arrest? If he had simply signed the citation & argued his defense in court? The driver had several opportunities to quickly settle the situation & be on his way. He chose to ignore each opportunity & in fact, argue.
The tazer is a police tool specifically designed to gain compliance without requiring a hand-ons physical confrontation. That is EXACTLY how it was used in this situation.

I do agree the officer coulda/shoulda verbalized to the suspect that he would be tazed if he continued to resist arrest.

Answer 4

Looks odd somehow. It escalates quite fast..

Now, I'm not a big fan of the police in general, traffic situations aside (those stops I deserve). And I absolutely hate the expectation of total compliance and respect. Still, I can't say the officer over-reacted.

I don't quite understand the signing thing tho, in my country they just hand you the ticket. Anyways, there's a single officer, two other people, so he's at a psychological disadvantage. Especially after one of the people is outside the car, and other remains inside (possibility of a weapon). He's looking to control the situation quickly, and the guy just refuses to coopearate.

It might be just me, but doesn't it make sense that civilians usually cooperate on the spot, and the longer it takes, the bigger the chance that something isn't right?

Look at drunk driving... if you're sober, you do the test and drive off. If you're not, you start arguing and refusing tests, and whine about your rights (yes I can't stand DIUs). But you get the point? The guy was becoming more and more suspitious.

And as the officer, I would've been worried about the pocket thing... I'm sure it was the wallet or car keys the guy kept fondling... but still, you never know.

I think it was a case of miscommunication more than over-reaction. I think the driver thought they were still in the discussion phase, and the officer was already in the arrest phase. "officer I don't know what you're doing", see?

There was no shift in command intensity to warn the driver there was escalation, the officer was too calm. He should have made it clear what was happening. "Stop! I'm placing you under arrest! Show me your hands!" and tazer after that if there's no cooperation.

Answer 5

The officer could have been more firm to begin with, the driver was out of line questioning him to start with. According to the video, the driver had passed 2 40mph signs, admitted to speeding based on those signs and was refusing to sign a ticket. I don't like to see anyone get tased, but when you have a person that is non-responsive to a police officers commands, things go downhill fast. The thing about a taser is it allows an officer to control a non responsive or violent or dangerous person with minimal force and a much lower chance of injury. I have been tased before so I could carry a taser on duty and I can tell you it sucks to the first order of suckdom, but it is over and there is only some residue pain and tightness in the muscles when it is over. If an officer wrestles or throws down with someone, there is a great deal of opportunity for injury to both parties involved. The situation took place on the side of a road with a fairly steady flow of traffic which is another safety issue as well. Just my opinion...

Answer 6

I am a retired police officer. 25 years experience. I watched the tape several times. The only thing that concerns me is that I did not hear the officer tell the man he is under arrest. If he did tell him and I missed it.

I always told people that I was arresting them when I could do so safely. That way they knew what was going on and if they resisted I would be covered if I had to use more force.


I think that the officer should have told man that. Also that if he did not comply he would be tazered.

That may have averted the tazer being used.

I do not know the specific policy regarding arrest of that department. If he did it by that policy the officer actions were justified.

What I like about the tazer is that neither the officer or other man were injured in any way. A potently violent situation was stopped by the use of the tazor.

I think that all police officers in the USA should be armed with them. It would reduce officer and suspect injuries. I wish I would have had it from the start of my career. It was just coming in when I retired.

Answer 7

I am not trying to armchair quarterback but I would have tried to explain to the motorist before having him step out of the vehicle he can and will be arrested for a refusal to sign. Also, I would have told him if he does not comply, he will be tased (even though you would think the fact the taser is leveled at him he would get the idea.)
BUT The second that idiot turned around after being told he was under arrest, he was justified in using the taser. What people who are not dealing with this kind of crap everyday do not realize is the danger in allowing the suspect back to his vehicle. He could have had a weapon like a gun or a club. and don't think for a second that people don't shoot cops because they are around their family) Without using the taser the officer risked geting into an altercation alone on the side of a freeway, with a potential for his wife (again just becuase she is pregnant does not mean she won't fight too. ) to join in.

Just remember folks. Sign the damn ticket, and if you think you know the law better than the cop, DON'T resist arrest. 9.9999999 times out of ten, we will win in the end.

Answer 8

this would sound humorous yet try shifting into some heated debates along with your friends or someone close and take a check out to stay calm it is going to likely be like practice. you are able to probable actually have someone stand there and scream stuff on your face it truly is kinda like the defense force. in spite of you do try no longer to startle possibility free bystanders as they'd imagine a actual wrestle or something worse is going to ensue. I surely have a feeling the police get a minimum of a few coaching in this on condition that they take care of the overall public ask someone who's lengthy gone to police coaching camp i'm confident they hit the books to and do not do exactly actual health and capturing drills.

Answer 9

No.

The individual did NOT comply with direct clear orders from the officer. The individual approached the officers car, and, the rear of the officer. Never approach an officer while his back is turned. If you want to give a bad impression approach an officer from the rear. After further direct orders, the individual headed back to his vehicle. As though he were going back inside. He was already ordered to step to the back of his car. To many disregarded orders from the officer. This alone is taserable. This is about a ticket. Just a ticket. The driver has no respect for authority. Has no respect for the officer. And had no intention of complying with direct commands.

This is one of many instances when the public just has no idea of the rules involved when deploying a taser. And, not to mention, when one needs or is required to have his right read to him/her.

In my own opinion, for the officers the and drivers own safety, he was tased.

Answer 10

The officer gave simple instructions: the offender refused to comply. The officer repeated the simple instructions: the offender refused to comply. The officer told the offender to put his hands behind his back, the offender chose to walk away. The officer repeated the command and offender continued walking away. The officer chose to TASE instead of shoot.

The lesson for today, boys and girls: Do what the officer tells you!