Police used Taser on pregnant driver

[lunaslide]

You will respect my AUTHORITY!

That's exactly what this is about. The attitude of the police here is "How DARE you say no to me!"

For a refresher course on how Seattle cops deal with problems, search on the WTO protests from a couple years ago that the police escalated into a riot. For all I care, those hippies can go suck a lemon. But one thing they were not wrong about was that the police deliberately attacked protesters to provoke a response.

The fact of the matter is that a lot of police no longer consider themselves part of the community, but rather think themselves above it. Instead of really talking to people and being involved in ways other than enforcement of laws, they view people not in uniform simply as potential criminals. This type of disconnect invariably leads to the type of actions we're talking about. Instead of seeing an irrational, uncooperative pregnant woman who broke a traffic law, this cop saw her as a threat to his authority and used a level of force that was uncalled for in bringing that threat into submission.

The primary reason that a military force should not be used as a police force, especially for it's own country's citizens, is that a disconnect and a seperate culture must be maintained for it to be effective in it's job of killing or supressing an enemy. Such a disconnect for a police force is unhealthy, because the wider that gap becomes, the more likely that police force will treat the people as mere chattel. In turn, the people will come to fear and loathe the police force, and rather than help it function in keeping law breakers out of the community, it will actively subvert their efforts, viewing them as a bigger enemy than the criminals around them.

 

[outfieldjack]

I am willing to bet that those who say it is fine would be the first to complain if it was their daughter or wife who for some reason did this and got tazed.

My wife would have ENOUGH SENSE to sign the ticket, instead of being a dumba$$.

 

[Mongo the Mutterer]

Almost all the posts assume that the officer knew this woman was pregnant. I got news guys, if she was a "big" woman, she could have been pregnant and not shown it. Remember Dave Barry's rule, unless you actually see a baby coming out of a woman, don't assume she is pregnant.

Seems to me both sides are at fault. There is more than the paper reports. I would be willing to be that this lady got very mouthy with the officer, and the officer overreacted. No excuse, he should have had better control of the situation.

 

[kbheiner7]

Are you guys reading what you are typing? It doesn't matter that she was pregnant? Boy, I'd hate to live in your world. Do you enjoy kicking puppies and spitting on children too?

Yeah, the lady, for whatever reason, didn't do the ideal thing. To me, that's not the issue.

She committed a very minor offense that was responded to with excessive force. I kinda think the taser was used because the officers weren't very well trained. How can two grown men not extract a pregnant woman from a car? "She wouldn't let go of the steering wheel!" What kind of candy-*** excuse is that?

This was not a drug dealer or gang-banger mouthing off or trying to cover up evidence from a suspicious officer.

A very important aspect of an LEOs job is to analyze risk. As someone mentioned earlier, there wasn't a lot of risk here except to the little officer's ego. If the lady failed to show for court, a warrant could have been issued. No big deal, no violence.

I really wish some cops would adhere to the old "protect and serve" creed that used to be painted on so many department cruisers. LEOs play an important role in law enforcement, but should remember that they themselves are not the law.

To all you good LEOs out there, please take my words with a grain of salt. They are written by a sincere, concerned citizen. I know a lot of great cops and the world is better because they serve.

Anytime we move more toward a police state, I think that's a bad thing.

I applaud the LEOs with the moral fortitude to stand up and tell the story when other cops screw up.

 

[Jeff White]

GEM,
You said;

I don't see the predicted harm if she:

1. Takes the ticket without signing it
2. Takes the ticket with signing it.

As I said earlier, I don't know what the law in Washington State is. It may be that the ticket would be invalid at the courthouse without her signature. Here I would mark the block for NOTICE TO APPEAR on the ticket and let her go on her way. If she chose to ignore it then, there would be a warrant for her arrest for Failure to Appear and her $75.00 fine would be $300 for the bond on the FTA, the original fine, plus court costs and a trip to the jail in handcuffs, which she probably would have resisted too. She would have been at least a month farther along in her pregnancy. So would you have the officer who encountered her after the FTA warrant had been issued to just backed off if she had resisted then? Perhaps we should just give offenders who are pregnant, old, have other medical problems immunity for the duration of their conditions?

The fact is, the woman resisted arrest. The officers used the force necessary to effect the arrest. Was the force they used within accepted standards for the level of resistance she gave? I don't know, but the fact that no one was disciplined for it speaks volumes that the use of force was at least within the departments guidelines.

We can't have everyone deciding what laws they will obey and which ones they won't with no consequences. I've posted this in other threads before, but in most places you have no legal right to resist an arrest even if you know the arrest to be unlawful. You resist in court. If we let everyone just refuse to comply, we might as well not have any laws or peace officers.

There doesn't seem to be any dispute with the lawfulness of the arrest. The general consensus is that if you're pregnant then the law doesn't apply to you because it would look bad if your own actions caused the police to have to use some type of force.

Jeff

 

[TRLaye]

Based on the article that started this thread you have all, unless I missed it, been arguing for nothing.

By the articles description of what occurred she was not Tasered. A stun gun was used on her.

A Taser shoots needle like darts and then the trigger is pulled to administer the shock. The models I've seen do not have prongs that an arc can be drawn against. But stun guns do. At the beginning of the shift you hit the switch and if the stun prongs are not in contact with something other than air, an arc is generated between two contacts fairly close together. If the prongs are in contact with a less resistive substance than air then the charge goes through them.

This reporter was in rectal defilade and knew not what they wrote about and thus confused the current Taser controversy with technology we started using in the 80's.

As some one said. Pregnancy was not the issue. Non-compliance with a lawfully required order was the issue.

 

[TechBrute]

A Taser shoots needle like darts and then the trigger is pulled to administer the shock. The models I've seen do not have prongs that an arc can be drawn against.

Tasers have backup contacts. Obviously, the more distance the better.

 

[GEM]

Pregnancy was not the issue. Non-compliance with a lawfully required order was the issue.

That's patently ridiculous. Why then do police break off chases if the danger seems to great?

Also, it flies in the face of the force continuum. And perhaps, we forget that one cannot use lethal force on a suspect who is fleeing unless you think they will be a grave danger if they get away.

Thus, there is clearly discretion exercised by officers based on situational risk. It is also silly to say that being pregnant or old means you can break the law. No - it means police should use their heads to miminize potential harm to the civilian in cases where there seems no danger.

I'm seeing the debate becoming one simply of police being offended. That the officers were not charged is not definitive. Police are reflexively defensive at first. We have a continuum of cover ups throughout history. Perhaps, seeing how this progresses will be more telling.

So if one takes off the 'law and order' hat, would getting her to sign the ticket be worth losing a child?

Now, somebody will say - YES, BECAUSE SHE WAS STUPID. I'm not comfortable with that as a decision principle. I would like a rationale up front why this risk may be acceptable.

If it is the case, that such instruments have no risk of bad consequences, then I'm wrong. If we don't know the risk, I'm unimpressed by simplistic law and order answers.

 

[Vernal45]

Anyone could be pregnant, how is a cop always to know.

SO, you are saying a trained police officer cant spot a lady that is 8 months pregnant? Wow, I bet an investigators job will be in his future.

So if a pregnant woman comes out her door and starts firing a gun at the officer in his patrol car is he suppose to treat her different than anyone else? Hell no.

So, now we are comparing apples to oranges. This woman did not use a gun, she just challenged the authority, did not respect the officer and hurt his tender little feelings. hmmm.

 

[Vernal45]

Not the first time this has happened.


http://www.nbc4.tv/news/3768716/detail.html
Police Accused Of Firing Taser At Pregnant Bride

NBC 4 | October 25, 2004

EVERGREEN PARK, Ill. -- A man and his daughter have filed a lawsuit alleging a couple of Evergreen Park police officers assaulted them with a Taser gun at the woman's backyard wedding reception.

Clarence Phelps, 54, and Romona Madison, 32, filed the federal civil rights lawsuit Tuesday against two officers and the Village of Evergreen Park.

According to the lawsuit, a black female officer on Sept. 18 told Phelps outside his home at 9124 S. Francisco Ave. that the police department had received a noise complaint after 11 p.m. and that he should turn down the music at his daughter's wedding reception, NBC5's Renee Ferguson reported.

Phelps, who is also black, said he turned off the music, but the officer did not leave, according to the lawsuit. When Phelps approached the officer to ask why she was still on his premises, she demanded his identification and called for backup, the lawsuit states.

But, according to a statement from the Evergreen Park Police Department, the officer called for backup after Phelps called the officer an expletive.

Another officer arrived and tried to arrest Phelps, who police claim pushed the officer. That's when Phelps was shot with a Taser gun. According to Phelps' attorney, the officer used the stun gun without provocation.

Phelps, who is a part-time state police officer and truck driver, was then taken into custody, Ferguson reported.

In court documents, Madison states she saw what happened to her father, screamed, and asked the officer to stop. The officer allegedly turned the Taser gun toward her and threatened the bride with it, according to the lawsuit.

Madison ran into the home, and one of the officers followed. That officer then allegedly shot Madison with the Taser gun twice in the abdomen, despite being told by witnesses that she was pregnant.

A prong from the stun gun reportedly became lodged in Madison's stomach and had to be removed by paramedics, Ferguson said.

A third officer allegedly held a gun to Madison's head as she was being arrested.

After being released from custody, Madison sought medical care and doctors told her the unborn child's vital signs were weak and that tests would show whether she would lose the baby, according to a news release from the law firm of Richardson, Stasko, Boyd & Mack.

"It is unclear, the condition of the baby, but we hope for the best," said Elliott Richardson, the woman's attorney.

The lawsuit accuses the defendants of excessive force, assault and battery, negligence and failure to provide timely medical attention.

No court date was set for the lawsuit, which seeks unstated damages.

Police admit using the Taser gun on Madison's abdomen. According to their statement, an officer found Madison hiding in a closet inside the home. When she refused to come out, police said two officers used the stun gun on the woman.

Phelps was charged with resisting arrest, battery to a police officer and keeping a disorderly house, while Madison was charged with battery to a police officer and resisting arrest, according to police and attorneys.

Phelps was scheduled for a preliminary hearing at 1:30 p.m. Oct. 19 in Bridgeview Court, according to court records.

Court information was not immediately available for Madison.

 

[Blackburn]

I am going to start a public webpage which lists the names and addresses of officers who do things like taze pregnant women and hold guns to their heads.

 

[Vernal45]

I guess Seattle PD ignores there own policy:

Seattle Police tighten Taser policy


SEATTLE -- Seattle police have tightened their policies on the use of stun guns called Tasers.

Under new directives that were announced over the weekend, officers must be especially careful before using the electric shock devices on those who are sick, pregnant, especially young or especially old.

In those cases, the new policy specifies that a need to stop criminal or risky behavior "should clearly justify" the additional risks of using a Taser.

In addition, the 220 officers who carry the devices must call a supervisor to the scene whenever a Taser is used three or more times on a person. Tasers have not officially been blamed for any deaths, but about 74 people have died after being jolted with the devices in the United States and Canada.

That includes deaths in Silverdale, Auburn and Olympia. Taser International insists the stun guns have been proven safe.

http://www.kptv.com/Global/story.asp?S=3164312

 

[duckslayer]

Phelps was charged with ... keeping a disorderly house

Does anyone else find this very disturbing?

 

[AK-74me]

Vernal45

You just don't get it!

Whether he knew she was pregnant or not is not the issue. So what if he knew this woman was pregnant. I don't know if he did or not. Maybe he couldn't see her belly, she was sitting in a car. I bet that 25% of the hogs we have in the country look almost identical pregnant or on their normal McDonalds and Starbucks diet. So there goes your argument on that front.


Not apples to oranges....

And why should anyone in whatever state they are be treated differently, it is you the individual responsibility to know if you should be more cautious for whatever reason.

That is like these idiots you see in these chases with police while there 2 yr old son is in the back seat. It is not the Cops responsibility to know that there is a child in the back. If the pursuing officer performs a PIT manuver and the child ends up dying in the ensuing accident I guess you would want to bring up the cop on manslaughter charges too huh?

It is the same thing.

 

[kbheiner7]

The last report I heard was that over 100 people have died within a week after being hit with a taser. That's way too many people to die after "non-lethal force" is used against them.

Regarding the second story, why on earth did the officer chase the young bride into the home? Because she ran? The office that ran into the home is darn lucky to be alive.

I'm starting to think cops shouldn't have tasers at all. It's like a new toy that some officers just have to try out.

Once again, I feel the need to apologize to the good LEOs out there. I hope at least some of you understand that these situations from a private citizens' perspective. You guys are fighting a losing battle and it'd be nice if you had as many of us on your side as possible.

1 more quick LEO story, and I'll drop the issue.

My first real run in with an LEO came when I was 10 or 11. I was shooting my pellet gun in my back yard when a concerned neighbor must have called the police.

While the officers did not come to the house with sirens blazing, they did whip into the drive way hard enough to screech the tires.

Two city officers walked around to the back yard where my friend and I were shooting cans and dirt clods.

The officers asked us to put the gun down and walk over and talk to them. We promptly did so.

The senior officer proceeded to tell me that it was illegal to discharge a firearm within the city limits. I said "No problem, this isn't a firearm, it's an airgun." He then changed his story and said that it was illegal to launch a projectile of any kind within the city limits. I knew this wasn't the case because my father had checked the regulations and they stipulated "firearm." I proceeded to ask if it was OK to play baseball, football and other dangerous projectile launching games within city limits. That set him off, but my friend and I were laughing by then. He tried telling me that my pellet gun was as dangerous as his sidearm at close range and shouldn't be used by kids. He left saying that if I was caught shooting my pellet gun again, my dad and I would get a ticket.

I retold the whole story to my dad that night and he was ticked. He reverified the ordinance about firearms and gave me free run of the back yard with my gun.

I think that experience really soured my original thoughts about LEOs. Thankfully, only a few years later I came to know a few guys that were great men and good cops that had more important things to do than make up ficticious laws about kids and BB guns.

 

[kbheiner7]

AK-74me:

If the officer in your scenario could see the kid in the suspects back seat, don't you think he/she would have a responsibility to act differently?

I suspect that if the pursuit car had a dash camera showing the kid and LEOs still chased the suspect causing a wreck and killing the kid that the case would go to trial the the cops would lose BIG.

There was a case several years ago where an LEO chased a stolen vehicle through a residential area. The suspect hit a kid in that neighborhood during the chase. Know who got sued and lost? It wasn't the guy in the stolen car. The officer, department and taxpayer lost - bigtime.

 

[AK-74me]

Just because in that case the police department lost, doesn't mean it is just. I am aware that cops will stop chases when they feel too many people are in danger. I however don't agree with the police dept. getting blamed in cases such as the one you describe. We all know how messed up the Justice system in the country is so no those kind of cases don't change my mind.

Like I said, in the inital story we were talking about here. Had that woman been my wife or mother or anyone in my family I would expect them to have the sense, pregnant or not, agreeing with the officer or not, to do what the cop said and tried to fight it in court. I have no sympathy for people in these kind of situations no matter who they are.

Hoe about we start treating, O I don't know, something arbitrary, like people who have a termnially ill child at home different too.

 

[romulus]

What the heck, 32 in a 20 mph school zone isn't all that serious..it's only 12 mph over the limit and chances are some kid wouldn't run out in the street in front of her anyway.....what's a fatal car/pedestrian accidnet in the greater scheme of things,

Am I wrong to assume the car was traveling at zero miles per hour when the taser was applied? No one said it was unreasonable to stop the vehicle, which would have been free to continue on its merry way post sig.

The State's got everything it needs to bring the lady in if she failed to appear. This is ab-surd...

 

[shoot870p]

so now we have a speeder (in a school zone) not willing to accept the ticket that she appears to have won for safe driving and we may want to spend a little time sending LEO to her home to inform her that she did not attend court. seems a waste of resources to me. she takes the ticket and we all move on. also better than 50% overage in speed allowed (70 mph on interstate allows "overage" of 35 so we allow a 105 speed?)

 

[kujo929]

first off a taser operates as a stun gun if you remove the air cartridge. This is obviously what the officer used. As a contact device (ie. without the cartridge) the taser is much less effective and comes down to being a pain compliance device only.

Personally I do not plan to ever use a taser on a woman. This does not mean I feel they shouldn't be used but simply because of the way it sounds when the story is twisted to the public.

This is obviously not about an officers ego and anyone who believes that has never worked in law enforcement. The officer tried to explain the situation to her, when that didn't work another officer tried to explain it. The officers then took the time to call their supervisor and their supervisor made the decision for the female to be arrested. This obviously took all discretion away from the 2 officers involved. Disobeying a direct order from a supervisor is grounds for termination from every department I know of. The Officers then told the subject she was being arrested and she resisted arrest. It sounds like the officers did everything to talk the woman out and then tried to physically remove her gently. (Obviously they were concerned for her safety by the simple fact they didn't just rip her out of the car). The Officer shows her the taser and demonstrates it for her. Now if you believe her when she says she didn't know what it was then there is no point even trying to reason with You.

My department had a situation where a pregnant woman was tased. Officers attempted to arrest a family member and when he resisted multiple family members attacked the police to keep them from arresting the subject. One subject tried to take an officers gun and the pregnant female attempted to take the other officers taser. Do you anti-police people think that would deserve getting tased? By most department policies this would qualify for lethal force not just tasing.

The female in my situation was not visibly pregnant. I also know you can not always tell if someone is pregnant as everyone is built different and I routinely can not tell until they say they are.

What do you believe could really harm the fetus more, the mother being tased and taken into custody without further struggle. Or the mother engaging in an argument and physical fight with police officers?

Like I said earlier I consider my taser as a last resort before my firearm but that is just me and that is not the use police departments intend for the taser. Keep in mind there has not been a single death that was accounted soley from a taser regardless of what the media tries to claim.

Patience and people skills are probably the most important attributes for an Officer but when all is said and done you still have to do your job. When dealing with people who hate the police verbal requests usually don't go very far. Fortunately this incident was probably audio and video recorded so I don't expect there will be any lawsuits when the tape is shown of what actually occurred in a court.

It drives me crazy that our country allows people to act like a maniac and break whatever laws they choose and then turn around and blame the outcome on the police and sue.

 

[kujo929]

OH by the way I call BS on the story of the Officer going to prison for kidnapping in the incident mentioned about pursing and arresting a subject across state lines. If that officer was charged there are obviously alot of details you left out.

crossing state lines does not make you immune from arrest. However if you run from police across state lines you will be turned over to that jurisiction your are in until you are extradited back to the state of the offense. The police are not required to stop at the state line.

 

[Combat-wombat]

This woman was obviously having a bad day. She acted quite stupidly in her confrontation with the officer, but we all make mistakes once in a while. I'm not supporting what she did at all though. However,
TASERS ARE NOT A COMPLIANCE TOOL.

When we see so many incidents of this where the police use them as such, that IS an indication of a police state. It's equivalent to torture.

Tasers should only be used as a gun substitute- and that's the argument for them ("it'll save lives because officers won't have to use their guns"). Would the officer have shot the woman? Of course not. The argument for less-lethal weapons becomes less valid when there's incident after incident of tasers being used to gain compliance.

 

[TechBrute]

so now we have a speeder (in a school zone) not willing to accept the ticket that she appears to have won for safe driving and we may want to spend a little time sending LEO to her home to inform her that she did not attend court. seems a waste of resources to me. she takes the ticket and we all move on.

Brooks, in her testimony, said she believed she could accept a ticket without signing for it, which she had done once before.

"I said, 'Well, I'll take the ticket, but I won't sign it,' " Brooks testified.

also better than 50% overage in speed allowed (70 mph on interstate allows "overage" of 35 so we allow a 105 speed?)

Are you for real? :banghead: Who thinks that percentages is how we get overages? :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

35 is likely the normal speed limit in that zone outside of school hours.

 

[coylh]

I didn't read the whole thread... but I'm curious to find out if they finally got the lady to give a urine sample?

 

[Old Dog]

I dunno ... I just caught an interview with the suspect on one of Seattle's network newscasts and she didn't come across as too credible; additionally, SPD (a department currently run by a well-known ex-FBI politician and notorious for hanging its officers out to dry) issued another statement standing by the use of the Taser, so I'm thinking SPD is being political by not issuing countercharges (i.e., the suspect acted violently) while the woman is setting up her lawsuit ...
Tasers not compliance tools? Negative, Ghostrider ... As long as they're out there, that's how they're going to be used.

When we see so many incidents of this where the police use them as such, that IS an indication of a police state. It's equivalent to torture.

Ah, every good cop-bash ... er, critiqueing thread must contain contain the phrase "police state." I feel quite qualified to state (living in close proximity to Seattle and spending beaucoup spare time there) that it just doesn't come close to producing the anxiety in me I felt while traveling around in real police states.