University of Florida student Tasered at John Kerry speech

[drewkitty]

Here's a verbal transcript.

The two Florida cops contact the student from behind (which is not bright) on the direction of a man wearing a suit. Suit-wearer sees the camera and steps out. Then Suit dashes back in to take the mike.

Once the officers have gone hands-on, and he resists, it's ON. The power-drive to get him to the back of the auditorium is good. This is what police sergeants are for. :)

The student tries to break contact (which is unlawful!) and says repeatedly, "I'm being arrested! What did I do? What did I do?"

Finally one of the officers states briefly, "You're under arrest."

Them are the magic words. Further resistance is now highly illegal.

He is told to put his hands behind his back and that he will be Tased if he does not comply. I heard two warnings, one male voice, one female. Not only does he fail to comply with the command, arguing that he did not do anything, but he continues to physically resist and turns around in the grip of the four (!) officers on him. He says, "Don't tase me, man." He is then Tased.

Once they cuff and perp-walk him, they have to issue "Stay back!" commands to the increasingly upset crowd.


So we've got the good news and the bad news. Once police make contact, the use of force is reasonable and proper and lawful -- assuming that they had a good reason to go hands-on.

The bad news is that the police officers have no cause, nor have they articulated a cause, to take any action towards him whatsoever. They went straight to hands-on without verbal commands or an explanation of their actions.

For the record, it is well within police authority to remove a disorderly person or a trespasser from a public gathering. But first you have to tell him to leave!

No one told this young man to leave.

So I count two charges of simple battery with a Federal enhancement of unlawful use of force under color of authority, with intent to violate civil rights (a felony). I'd also like to know Mr. Suit, because if he's a Federal officer I'd like to wipe my ass with his badge.

A clearer use-of-force free speech case has yet to be argued.

Comments

[paradox-puree.livejournal.com]

Yeesh.

[urox.livejournal.com]

The warning that he will be tased is against taser usage policy. It is threat and then use of retaliation for non-compliance.
The officers clearly had him under control despite his continued resistance. Use of the taser was thus excessive force.
Depending on if he was tased before or after being handcuffed is also important. It can only be under very rare consequences that authorize taser usage while a suspect is handcuffed.

On the opposite side, it has been reported that this man burst into the talk with the police on his tail. So he was being disorderly already.

[drewkitty.livejournal.com]

Maybe your agency's policies. What agency, by the way?

If you're going to use a Taser as a compliance tool, it's perfectly appropriate to give a verbal warning first. Of course, if your policies say that you can't use a Taser for compliance, there you go -- but then, why carry one?

What do you think police do? They achieve compliance. Verbal commands are a technique. So is the Taser. I have been Tased and it sucks. Pain is a great compliance technique.

The officers did not have him under control. They had him held down, but they did not have handcuffs on him. He disobeyed lawful orders and twisted around in their grasp to face them. As long as he's got his hands free, there is that outside chance of him pulling a weapon -- or more likely, taking one off an officer.

I don't think this was handled as cleanly as it could have been, but the Taser usage was not nearly as much of a problem to me as the mere fact that police dragged away someone engaged in free speech. The use of force was proper, IF it had hinged upon an unlawful act.

[urox.livejournal.com]

http://www.less-lethal.org/docs/35/UOD_SOP6.pdf
I'm not an officer, but this is for Tulsa, Oklahoma.

A Taser should be used for non-lethal subduing of "dangerous or violent subjects". It's better than using a gun in most instances (except where it has lead to death, of course). Subject has sword (or other weapon)? Clear need to taser. The student had his hands visible almost the entire time save when the police grabbed onto his arms.

It looked clear to me that he was complying to get on his stomach so they could handcuff him. It also looked like there was more than enough physical force there to subdue him without the need for a taser. Aikido teaches several ways to bend the body (or pressure points even for knees on the back and arm alone) to where it must go places.

I am concerned about the elevated use of tasers where unnecessary as well as that the side effects are rather unstudied.

[drewkitty.livejournal.com]

I share your concerns about unneeded use. I have been Tased myself. It is a lifesaving device that is going to be lost to police due to overuse. I disagree with Tulsa and with calling it a "less lethal" device.

Taser has been extensively studied, not only by the vendor but by Force Science Institute and a number of academic institutions.

[drewkitty.livejournal.com]

Subject came up in academy class tonight. Instructor said it was a classic "under color of authority" case and that the "$64K Question" would be whether he was asked to leave prior to being 'handled.' He was clearly engaged in protected Constitutional activity.

[chucklemagne.livejournal.com]

A lot probably hinges on what happened before the cameras started capturing the scene. He may have been verbally requested to leave prior to that point.

It also appears from some descriptions that the Q&A portion of the event was over when he took the stage and grabbed the mike. So he may have been disturbing the assembly from the get-go. Again, this is before the cameras started capturing the scene.

[drewkitty.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen all the video tapes, but I did see three of them.