Federal Lawsuit For Being Tasered

Off Topic
1

[i]SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News ) - Who is at fault?

This may be the key question in a federal lawsuit expected to be filed soon.

Is it the Utah motorist who questioned the authority of the police or is it the police who repeatedly tasered him after a routine traffic stop?

Early one morning in May, on north Redwood Road, Bruce Harper was stopped by a Davis County Sheriff’s Deputy.

Harper was pulled over because his front license plate wasn’t hanging properly.

“Stay in your car, stay in your car.”

This what the sheriffâ??s deputy yelled at Harper.

But Harper didn’t stay in the car.

The officer then drew his gun and suddenly it was on.

In fact, more than sixty times, the officer told Harper to turn around.

And more than a dozen times, Harper asked the Davis County Sheriff’s Deputy why he was being stopped.

At one point, Harper even asked, "Are you going to shoot me?

Harper was tasered once with shooting electrodes.

Then, reportedly, according to testimony at his trial, Harper was tasered at least five or six more times with the taser held directly against him.

Mark Flores: “He was certain at that point he was going to die. That his heart was just going to explode and he was going to die.”

Harper was charged with what his attorney calls “resisting arrest.”

But at trial a few weeks ago, a jury acquitted him of that charge.

His attorney now says he will file a federal lawsuit against those involved for allegedly violating Harper’s civil rights.

Mark Flores: “I still find it unbelievable that someone can get pulled over for a crooked front license plate… and somehow ends up getting tasered six times.”[/i]

Dash Cam video of incident:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=990_1257339127

I do not see how this federal lawsuit will go anywhere. I also found another story about a guy getting a lawsuit settlement(also in Utah…damn) for being tasered in similar incident by state trooper.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/695260666/Utah-to-pay-40000-in-Taser-settlement.html

Where is the line between “knowing and using your rights” and just being a fucking idiot?

2

Well technically, to my knowledge at least, the officer should have told him why he was being pulled over. The officer IMO overreacted. This is a continuing trend of the questionable use of tazers by a minority of police officers. Just listen to how much they taze (sp?) him with three officers on him. To my knowledge there isn’t much resisting while having that much voltage go through you.

3

Hmm, I’m pretty sure getting out of your vehicle at a traffic stop is considered some type of threat by police. The guy probably should’ve just stayed in his car until the cop came up, THEN started asking questions since by getting out of the car the cop has no idea if this guy has a weapon or is going to come at him or what.

4

dumbass shouldn’t have gotten out of his car.

I mean really.

Cops have to deal with total scumbags, how are they to know that a guy who isn’t following orders isn’t a nut job.

5

It’s funny how the cops chased him past his car so the camera couldn’t catch anything. This may have been by coincidence tho.

6

Boss, you already know what is going to happen, and quite honestly this clown deserved it.

I mean, he was told over and over to turn around and get in his car, but he didn’t. The cop might start to think he is on drugs or hiding something. I don’t blame police for being nervous when dealing with someone like this.

The lawsuit will either be thrown out, or should it go the distance, the police will be viewed as innocent. I mean, how stupid can you be to act like a fool with a cop who has weapons and the authority to use them. I swear, is a simple traffic ticket worth getting arrested and tased?

7

[quote]PaddyM wrote:
Well technically, to my knowledge at least, the officer should have told him why he was being pulled over. The officer IMO overreacted. This is a continuing trend of the questionable use of tazers by a minority of police officers. Just listen to how much they taze (sp?) him with three officers on him. To my knowledge there isn’t much resisting while having that much voltage go through you.[/quote]

The guy pretty much fucked himself in finding out when he decided to get out his car with his hands in his pocket.

An officer is going to take any threatening and uncalled for behavior as a threat. The driver was responsible for turning this “routine” stop into something much more.

It’s also possible that he could have been resisting…as it looks as if the taser probes didn’t get a good spread through his sweatshirt. Because if it did,he wouldn’t have been standing…nor walking.

Also,having the taser placed on your skin doesn’t keep you from moving…it’s pain compliance. Being shot with the probes is what shuts you down.

8

The guy’s body language suggests that he posed no threat, and the cop overreacted from the get go. How does the cop expect the man to comply to his “orders” when the man doesn’t know what, if anything, he’s done wrong.

I usually err on the side of law enforcement due to the demands and dangers of the job, but in this case I’m inclined to err on the side of the civilian. The cop should be able to judge whether or not the civilian is hostile before resorting to barking orders and pulling weapons. Initially the civilian seemed to pose no threat and sounded reasonable in his request for the infraction. I understand the cop needs to be cautious but he was overly aggressive and unreasonable given the circumstances.

9

[quote]JLu wrote:
Hmm, I’m pretty sure getting out of your vehicle at a traffic stop is considered some type of threat by police. The guy probably should’ve just stayed in his car until the cop came up, THEN started asking questions since by getting out of the car the cop has no idea if this guy has a weapon or is going to come at him or what.[/quote]

This is what should have happened. He did jump out of the car fairly fast.

Having said that, the officer should have realized that compliance would have probably happened had he just talked to the guy. Instead he felt he needed to exert his authority and was above question. Basically by repeating himself incessantly he was saying “do what I say no matter what, i don’t need to explain myself”.

Repeating himself over and over was obviously not working so why not try a different angle? He had a weapon drawn and had the upper hand if the guy tried to rush him. If the dude WAS carrying, I’m not sure he would have jumped out of his car. He KNEW he didn’t do anything wrong and was probably just pissed he was getting “harassed” by the cops.

Situation was handled less than perfectly by BOTH parties. Two hard heads testing each others will.

10

I love how everyone turns into a bitch when the taser is deployed

11

[quote]polo77j wrote:
The guy’s body language suggests that he posed no threat, and the cop overreacted from the get go. How does the cop expect the man to comply to his “orders” when the man doesn’t know what, if anything, he’s done wrong.

I usually err on the side of law enforcement due to the demands and dangers of the job, but in this case I’m inclined to err on the side of the civilian. The cop should be able to judge whether or not the civilian is hostile before resorting to barking orders and pulling weapons. Initially the civilian seemed to pose no threat and sounded reasonable in his request for the infraction. I understand the cop needs to be cautious but he was overly aggressive and unreasonable given the circumstances.
[/quote]

Come on,dude. If you truly understand the “demands and dangers” of the job…you would know that getting out of your car with hands in your pocket…BEFORE the cop even gets out of his vehicle is threatening behavior. That officer is not going to bother trying explain anything to him until whatever “threat” is dealt with. He doesn’t know that guy…he can’t see his “moral soul” and tell if he’s an honest guy with good intentions.

Why antagonize an officer…when you damn well know that he is going to approach your vehicle and EXPLAIN why you’re being stopped?? Some thing require common sense before knowing your rights.

12

Uh, yea, I also draw the line here, I mean the cops KNOW this guy is going to be a smartass and instead of beating him at his own game, telling him the infraction, diffusing the situation like they are supposed to, they chose to escelate it. Not following my orders boy, don’t you know who I am boy? BZzzzzzzzzz.

I understand that police officers put thier life on the line every day to help keep our streets safe, but they do not get a pass when they assault an innocent, unarmed civilian. This was assault, thier badge does not give them that right. Why was it so hard to tell the guy, Hey I pulled you over because your plate is not mounted correctly, now please get back in your car so I can process the ticket that I was origionally going to only give you a warning for before you got out and started being a smartass. Then write the guy a ticket and leave it at that. I mean cops have authority, they can fuck with someone and still stay well within thier rights and not have to resort to such tacticts to still fuck the guy over.

V

13

[quote]polo77j wrote:
The guy’s body language suggests that he posed no threat, and the cop overreacted from the get go. How does the cop expect the man to comply to his “orders” when the man doesn’t know what, if anything, he’s done wrong.

I usually err on the side of law enforcement due to the demands and dangers of the job, but in this case I’m inclined to err on the side of the civilian. The cop should be able to judge whether or not the civilian is hostile before resorting to barking orders and pulling weapons. Initially the civilian seemed to pose no threat and sounded reasonable in his request for the infraction. I understand the cop needs to be cautious but he was overly aggressive and unreasonable given the circumstances.
[/quote]

If a routine part of your job could get you killed, pulling over a drug dealer for example, wouldn’t you protect yourself?

We expect the police to stop criminals, but when they use self defense its abuse of power or aggression.

The cop probably overreacted, but I sure as shit would do the same thing if my life could be on the line.

The moron should have stayed in his car like everyone else and none of this would have happened.

14

I wish we could see the cop to verify he was actually speaking, as opposed to constantly hitting repeat on his Yak Bak like it sounded like he was doing.

15

I respectfully submit the following:

  • Unless Utah has a law requiring it, I’m not aware of any legal requirement to inform a driver why he is being stopped immediately upon contact. On the other hand, I personally think it’s good form to do so. It has saved me a lot of grief and arguments by simply stating why I conducted the stop.

  • On the other hand, after watching the video, I highly doubt this gentleman would have responded well, regardless. It appears to me that he was already agitated, and I think gaining tactical control of the situation took higher priority then letting him know why he was stopped. It still could have been stated to him, however. It might have saved the situation. It certainly wouldn’t have hurt anything, at that point.

  • That officer went well out of his way to NOT have to get physical with this guy. 60 times? Really? That is absurd. He clearly was not responding to commands. A few times would have been plenty, and then the officer was well within the law to take physical custody of him.

  • What many people do not realize is that from a technical (and legal) standpoint, a traffic stop for an on-view violation is considered to be an arrest. Many people simply don’t recognize this fact when they are stopped, and that’s how they get themselves into trouble.

  • As for HOW he was taken into custody…well…I probably would have gone about it differently, but I’m not going to second guess another officer. I wasn’t there, so I can’t see what he saw, or how he saw it.

  • I doubt the lawsuit will go anywhere. Legal stop, legal use of force. Hard to say though…a civil jury may see it differently. Lots of hate against Tasers, these days.

16

[quote]Vegita wrote:
Uh, yea, I also draw the line here, I mean the cops KNOW this guy is going to be a smartass and instead of beating him at his own game, telling him the infraction, diffusing the situation like they are supposed to, they chose to escelate it. Not following my orders boy, don’t you know who I am boy? BZzzzzzzzzz.

I understand that police officers put thier life on the line every day to help keep our streets safe, but they do not get a pass when they assault an innocent, unarmed civilian. This was assault, thier badge does not give them that right. Why was it so hard to tell the guy, Hey I pulled you over because your plate is not mounted correctly, now please get back in your car so I can process the ticket that I was origionally going to only give you a warning for before you got out and started being a smartass. Then write the guy a ticket and leave it at that. I mean cops have authority, they can fuck with someone and still stay well within thier rights and not have to resort to such tacticts to still fuck the guy over.

V[/quote]

If you preemptively get out of your car and walk towards an officer with your hand in your pocket…YOU have escalated the situation. Even if the guy was told why he was pulled over,etc how do YOU think this situation could have been de-escalated???

We all know there is no way in hell he’s going to be allowed to get back into his car…AFTER he has acted in the manner that he did.

17

[quote]mapwhap wrote:
I respectfully submit the following:

  • Unless Utah has a law requiring it, I’m not aware of any legal requirement to inform a driver why he is being stopped immediately upon contact. On the other hand, I personally think it’s good form to do so. It has saved me a lot of grief and arguments by simply stating why I conducted the stop.

  • On the other hand, after watching the video, I highly doubt this gentleman would have responded well, regardless. It appears to me that he was already agitated, and I think gaining tactical control of the situation took higher priority then letting him know why he was stopped. It still could have been stated to him, however. It might have saved the situation. It certainly wouldn’t have hurt anything, at that point.

  • That officer went well out of his way to NOT have to get physical with this guy. 60 times? Really? That is absurd. He clearly was not responding to commands. A few times would have been plenty, and then the officer was well within the law to take physical custody of him.

  • What many people do not realize is that from a technical (and legal) standpoint, a traffic stop for an on-view violation is considered to be an arrest. Many people simply don’t recognize this fact when they are stopped, and that’s how they get themselves into trouble.

  • As for HOW he was taken into custody…well…I probably would have gone about it differently, but I’m not going to second guess another officer. I wasn’t there, so I can’t see what he saw, or how he saw it.

  • I doubt the lawsuit will go anywhere. Legal stop, legal use of force. Hard to say though…a civil jury may see it differently. Lots of hate against Tasers, these days.

[/quote]

This is a fair analysis, I have to ask if cops realize that you lose motor control while being tazed though, as in quite a few videos I’ve seen of people being tazed, the cops are demanding they do something (put hands behind back, roll over etc) WHILE being tazed which, might be difficult if you no longer have control of your muscles.

Another question I have is, you say unless there’s a law about it, they don’t have to be told why they’re being pulled over, yet later say being pulled over is legally and technically “being arrested” and as far as I know (at least in my country) you have a right to know what you are being arrested/charged for.

18

[quote]Vegita wrote:
Uh, yea, I also draw the line here, I mean the cops KNOW this guy is going to be a smartass and instead of beating him at his own game, telling him the infraction, diffusing the situation like they are supposed to, they chose to escelate it. Not following my orders boy, don’t you know who I am boy? BZzzzzzzzzz.

I understand that police officers put thier life on the line every day to help keep our streets safe, but they do not get a pass when they assault an innocent, unarmed civilian. This was assault, thier badge does not give them that right. Why was it so hard to tell the guy, Hey I pulled you over because your plate is not mounted correctly, now please get back in your car so I can process the ticket that I was origionally going to only give you a warning for before you got out and started being a smartass. Then write the guy a ticket and leave it at that. I mean cops have authority, they can fuck with someone and still stay well within thier rights and not have to resort to such tacticts to still fuck the guy over.

V[/quote]

I’m not trying to be a jerk, but you must not understand police officers put their lives on the line every time they put their badge on or you at least take this for granted. The fact of the matter is many many people hate the police, many times for no reason, and the police have to deal with this every day. The person in the car could have had a gun, knife, whatever in his pocket and used it to harm the officer. Put yourself in the officers shoes. You pull a guy over, obviously the dude you pulled over is not going to be happy about it, and he gets out of his car with hands in pockets. A red flag is immediately raised in my mind and I am going to do everything in my power to defend myself. I would taze him too.

I’m not saying the officer didn’t go to far after the initial hit, but I think he is absolutely justified in the initial hit.

Also how do you know the guy is being a smart ass and not out to harm the officer?

Also what make you think this officer was thinking, “Not following my orders boy, don’t you know who I am boy? BZzzzzzzzzz.” Do you know him?

19

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Uh, yea, I also draw the line here, I mean the cops KNOW this guy is going to be a smartass and instead of beating him at his own game, telling him the infraction, diffusing the situation like they are supposed to, they chose to escelate it. Not following my orders boy, don’t you know who I am boy? BZzzzzzzzzz.

I understand that police officers put thier life on the line every day to help keep our streets safe, but they do not get a pass when they assault an innocent, unarmed civilian. This was assault, thier badge does not give them that right. Why was it so hard to tell the guy, Hey I pulled you over because your plate is not mounted correctly, now please get back in your car so I can process the ticket that I was origionally going to only give you a warning for before you got out and started being a smartass. Then write the guy a ticket and leave it at that. I mean cops have authority, they can fuck with someone and still stay well within thier rights and not have to resort to such tacticts to still fuck the guy over.

V

If you preemptively get out of your car and walk towards an officer with your hand in your pocket…YOU have escalated the situation. Even if the guy was told why he was pulled over,etc how do YOU think this situation could have been de-escalated???

We all know there is no way in hell he’s going to be allowed to get back into his car…AFTER he has acted in the manner that he did. [/quote]

I’m not saying what the guy did was smart, specifically though, because this is unfortunately how some cops react. This was not about the officers safety, it was about his authority being callenged. Like someone else said, the guy really should have waited in his car and then asked why he was pulled over IF the cop didn’t tell him when he came to his window. I mean if we are going to allow police to taser and apprehend people now because they “thought” the guy could have been a threat to them, then all bets are off.

Thier duty isn’t to protect themselves, it’s to protect the public, they signed on to take a bullet if need be, that is thier job, no one forced them into doing it, they chose it. It is not unreasonable for people to expect to not get tasered unless they are perhaps, breaking a law or something?

V

20

[quote]mapwhap wrote:

  • On the other hand, after watching the video, I highly doubt this gentleman would have responded well, regardless. It appears to me that he was already agitated, and I think gaining tactical control of the situation took higher priority then letting him know why he was stopped.

It still could have been stated to him, however. It might have saved the situation. It certainly wouldn’t have hurt anything, at that point.
[/quote]

That’s what I’m trying to get at. I do agree that telling him at some point instead of repeating orders probably could have toned him down. But you know as well as I do(maybe more) that if it panned out that way…they’re not going to all laugh it off and send the guy on his merry way with a ticket.

What’s to say that he doesn’t get more agitated when it’s possible that he’s still getting a ticket…and/or still getting put in cuffs and being arrested?

An officer in that situation will unfortunately have to assume the worst in a person acting in the manner in which he did.