"They stunned him until he complied...."

[B.D.F.]

Yep, good thing too 'cause he looks pretty dangerous strapped into a restraint chair. If I watch the video in slow motion and squint a little bit, I believe I can see the kid blinking his eyes with intent to inflict bodily harm. Yeah, that's it.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/tennessee-police-officers-tase-restrained-173955078.html

Looks like the kid was in some state of mental distress. Certainly it was required that he be forcefully contained earlier, when they were putting him in that chair but once strapped in, I cannot think of any reason to inflict further physical pain and suffering on the kid.

Two words would really help in these situations: "Civilian oversight". A few more words would straighten it out: "Civilian oversight and department management".

Live video is going to be the best thing that ever happened to law enforcement IMO. Well, that and some reasonable but insistent citizens who are able to read simple documents, such as the Constitution of the United States.

Brian

[maxtog]

I wouldn't be too quick to jump to any conclusion.  To me it looks like the officer on the left is trying very hard to finish securing the inmate's hands and the inmate was continuously fighting and that is when the stunning began.  It is interesting that such a video would be posted without any commentary from the officers as to why they did what they did.

[B.D.F.]

Jump to a conclusion? Very hard to finish securing his hand to the chair?

Did you watch the same video I did? Seriously, the man was strapped to a chair. An LEO tried to gag him, and the person in the chair used his hand, well- secured to the chair, to remove the gag from his mouth. The end. What else needed to be done to the human, make him read the alphabet backwards? Sing in key?

Sorry, he was strapped into a restraint chair and not even close to getting out of it. The worst he could do that that point was say bad words, make loud noises, and have biological 'events' (leaving slippery spots on the floor). If the LEO's could not deal with that, then that segment of American needs new LEOs.

I lean to the right (politically) but I am not blind nor am I impervious to good sense or the Constitution. That man was secured and posed no danger to society or the persons around him. Tasing him, repeatedly, was unnecessary and excessive.

I certainly would listen to any further evidence, video or audio that anyone could present. But I seriously doubt there could be an argument presented that would persuade me that what is shown on that video was NOT EXCESSIVE.

My country is being besieged on all sides but I will defend it to the last breath.  Civilian oversight. Civilian management. Civilian government, always following the Constitution.

Brian

I wouldn't be too quick to jump to any conclusion.  To me it looks like the officer on the left is trying very hard to finish securing the inmate's hands and the inmate was continuously fighting and that is when the stunning began.  It is interesting that such a video would be posted without any commentary from the officers as to why they did what they did.

[gPink]

I'm in complete agreement with Brian on this. The electroshock therapy was not applied to cause immediate compliance it was used to moderate future behavior. One of the purest uses of torture. These people are not law enforcement officers.

[mikeyw64]

I read the words

Think the last bit sums it up


"CCTV footage and footage taken from the camera on the Taser capture the incident. In the second video, taken from the Taser camera and matching the time period shown in the first video, one officer is heard saying, “I’ll keep on doing that until I run out of batteries.” "

[mikeyw64]

ah there is audio on the video on this UK news site

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4744588/Three-cops-suspended-repeatedly-tasering-teen.html

[maxtog]

Jump to a conclusion? Very hard to finish securing his hand to the chair?

Don't get too worked up, I just explained what I thought I saw and a possible explanation.  I am not saying everything they did was right, or that your observations were wrong.

Seriously, the man was strapped to a chair. An LEO tried to gag him, and the person in the chair used his hand, well- secured to the chair, to remove the gag from his mouth. The end. What else needed to be done to the human, make him read the alphabet backwards? Sing in key?

He was probably put in the chair for being violent and dangerous and refusing to comply with orders, posing a danger to himself, to the officers, and possibly to other inmates.  He wasn't being gagged, they applied what is called a "spit guard", which is placed over the head when an inmate is spitting and/or biting.   Yes, the inmate was able to remove the spit guard because they didn't tighten the straps properly.   When they tried to better secure his hand so he couldn't do it again, he fought very very hard and they eventually used the taser to force him to stop fighting.  After the tasing, the guards were able to secure his right arm, I think, the video ended too soon.  I agree that it certainly appears that they used excessive force.   At the same time, they didn't slap him, hit him, choke him, or do anything else overtly punitive...   Of course, that could be because they knew it was being recorded and decided to abuse the tools that they were allowed.

Sorry, he was strapped into a restraint chair and not even close to getting out of it.

To me it appeared it wasn't about getting out of the chair, it was about securing his torso and hand so he couldn't remove the spit guard again.  It appeared they didn't use the straps correctly over his shoulders (they were too loose and over his arms not shoulders), which is why he was able to move so much and get his hand to his face. 

The worst he could do that that point was say bad words, make loud noises, and have biological 'events' (leaving slippery spots on the floor). If the LEO's could not deal with that, then that segment of American needs new LEOs.

Spitting in someone's face is a way to transmit disease and pretty disgusting.  The spit guard doesn't stop talking, yelling, or making noise; but it does help with spitting and biting.   http://www.medline.com/product/Spit-Guard-Transport-Hoods-by-Humane-Restraint-Company/Safety/Z05-PF108311

I certainly would listen to any further evidence, video or audio that anyone could present.

I have watched lots of such video in the past from jail shows on TV and would like more information, too.   Hopefully the incident will be reviewed by authorities and appropriate action taken against the guards.

[maxtog]

ah there is audio on the video on this UK news site

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4744588/Three-cops-suspended-repeatedly-tasering-teen.html

Wow, that certainly puts a new flavor on it.  There is absolutely no question in my mind that they overused the taser.  The audio reveals it wasn't a few short stuns, it was continuous for way longer than could possibly ever be needed.  The second video is interesting too, it looks like they were trying to assess what happened AFTER and ended up tasing him several times again??  I think that video was mis-labeled as being after and not before.  Very confusing.

[B.D.F.]

Perhaps you did not watch the video I posted the link to, to the end? The kid had something like 40 taser burns on him, the majority of them inflicted after he was secured to the restraint chair.

Hey, I understand the idea of being cranky and wanting to inflict harm to 1) stop the abuse from the subject. 2) get even- hey, it IS a normal human reaction and emotion. 3) feed the adrenaline rush. Again, a pretty normal human reaction although also an unpleasant facet to 'us'. And further, I absolutely can understand the concept of rage, distaste, disgust and so forth building up day after day doing something such as police work. And I would be able to forgive some kind of occasional outburst or some measure of 'over control' given an emotional response: hey, a person shoots at another person and the 'target' person gives the shooter a smack.... even if perhaps that shooter is now wearing handcuffs. Not coloring w/in the lines but I understand it. The key here is 'a' as in one, not a beating.

What I cannot overlook is repeated overstepping by the same person. Or excessive overstepping (a gray area but cases like this are so far over the line, it can no longer be seen in the rear view mirror). And last and worst of all, a group- effort to inflict pain, suffering and damage to any person no longer a threat.

Not cranky with you Max, just a bit passionate on this issue generally. The lines are clearly drawn and have been written down for a couple of centuries. As a group, we need to get the herd back w/in those lines and hold everyone in a position of any authority to reasonable bounds.

Video is the best thing to happen to our society in a century I think, and once the majority of the population realizes that they (the population) IS the controlling authority, and the people maintaining order do so by drawing their authority from that group, and not the other way around, things will straighten themselves out I believe.

And I am not a liberal, not a young person, and not at risk at all of being that kid in the restraint chair. But I cannot underwrite using excessive force on 'that kid' (or any person or people) by paying for it and then looking the other way when it happens.

Brian

Wow, that certainly puts a new flavor on it.  There is absolutely no question in my mind that they overused the taser.  The audio reveals it wasn't a few short stuns, it was continuous for way longer than could possibly ever be needed.  The second video is interesting too, it looks like they were trying to assess what happened AFTER and ended up tasing him several times again??  I think that video was mis-labeled as being after and not before.  Very confusing.

[maxtog]

Perhaps you did not watch the video I posted the link to, to the end?

I only went to the original link you posted and had watched it several times.  There is only one video, no audio, no clear finish to the video (even though it is long), no mention about taser burns, no transcript about "draining the batteries", nothing about suspension.  But just now (prompted by your message) I discovered the "According to local news reports" link to:  http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/cheatham/2017/07/28/three-deputies-placed-administrative-leave-after-lawsuit-claims-excessive-force-used-inmate/517969001/  Had I done that to begin with, I would have had a lot more information, and also before Mikey posted his link.

[mikeyw64]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2013458/Pensioner-82-hospitalised-days-tasered-police.html

And I am not a liberal, not a young person, and not at risk at all of being that kid in the restraint chair.

[B.D.F.]

OK, it sounds as though the original link I posted may have been altered.

What I saw went on to show the kid being tasered while in police custody but still unrestrained; they started tasing him while trying to subdue him to put him in that chair. And by the way, that did not seem excessive or outside reasonable LE behavior.

Then the video of them tasing him while in the chair.

Then video of him back at home with his step father explaining what happened, why they chose to sue the police agency, and showing video of a lot of taser burns all over the kid's torso (over 40 according to step- dad). And an interview with the family's lawyer about what the local LE agency is being sued for and why.

And the other LEO video from an officer's camera giving the voice of the 2 nd man of the three LEOs telling the kid in the chair something to the effect 'they would tase him unitl they ran out of batteries'.

That was the information I based my original post on and it was sufficient for me to arrive at the conclusion that I did.

From what you are saying, I would guess the information at the end of that link I provided has changed. If so, you and I cannot converse reasonably about the incident given the two different levels of information (no one's fault if a third party changed the info. provided at the place that link leads to).

That is what generated my reaction, due to the opinion formed: they went well beyond what was necessary to secure that individual and did enough of it, for long enough, that I consider it criminal behavior on the part of the LE participants. If it were my community, I would approach both the city or town level politicians as well as the state level politicians and express my opinions and suggest responses. Further, I would contact civilian agencies to see if any were planning on addressing this and seeing how I might assist them (money, time, etc.)

Citizens of the area ignoring incidents such as this one are not only allowing it but underwriting it by fueling it economically (taxes).

And again to make my position clear: it certainy seems the kid needed arresting, confining, and physical control. Of course I have no problem with that. My resistance comes ONLY after he was secured into a restraint chair, and then only at the continued LEO 'physical attacks' to either get something from the person they did not need, or to punish him and that is not w/in their purview.

Brian

I only went to the original link you posted and had watched it several times.  There is only one video, no audio, no clear finish to the video (even though it is long), no mention about taser burns, no transcript about "draining the batteries", nothing about suspension.  But just now (prompted by your message) I discovered the "According to local news reports" link to:  http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/cheatham/2017/07/28/three-deputies-placed-administrative-leave-after-lawsuit-claims-excessive-force-used-inmate/517969001/  Had I done that to begin with, I would have had a lot more information, and also before Mikey posted his link.

[maxtog]

OK, it sounds as though the original link I posted may have been altered. [....]From what you are saying, I would guess the information at the end of that link I provided has changed. If so, you and I cannot converse reasonably about the incident given the two different levels of information

Wow, no I had none of that stuff you said, just one video of the chair.  So yeah, no wonder we had different reactions.  I have been back there at least 6 times, including just now, and it is still just that one video and a few sketchy paragraphs of not much info.

[B.D.F.]

Yeah, that certainly explains our different reactions.

That said, you folks should know me pretty well by now and I think I am pretty even handed and reasonable most of the time (a loose pack of forum.... 'gentleman' excepted, and that only ever happened one time, on one forum- I am now bait proof :-)  ). I do not normally scream that we should stop everything and deal with some insignificant issue.

And even in this instance, they did not kill or maime anyone.

That said, this clearly crosses the line of acceptable behavior by LEO personnel in my opinion, and further, there is some FaceTwit posting by the Chief (? the head of that dept) smirking and poking fun at this event. I believe those three LEO's should be cited, punished at the very least, and dismissed and charged at the worst, and the Chief of the Dept., any anyone else in a position of authority such as the Mayor or Town council leader held accountable for this frankly Pi$$ poor behavior.

This is not how I want my country to run and I do not support, condone, allow or think of it as 'hey, stuff happens....'.

Brian

Wow, no I had none of that stuff you said, just one video of the chair.  So yeah, no wonder we had different reactions.  I have been back there at least 6 times, including just now, and it is still just that one video and a few sketchy paragraphs of not much info.

[Steve in Sunny Fla]

I watched 2 videos from the links provide, one was 4+ minutes from the time he had the spit guard applied, and then the ensuing electronically charged wrestling match. The other was the 1.16 min UK version when the officer said he'd tase til he ran out of batteries.

   So how about a view from a guy who has been there, done that?  BTW, let me explain that most folks would see the number of officers as being excessive force; the fact is the more officers, the easier it is to restrain / subdue an inmate / subject without hurting them. Or if they're bad officers, really kick the subject's butt  .

   1)  originally the inmate was softly restrained, that's why his hands could be pulled close enough, and he could bend over enough, to pull the spit mask down. Oh, and BTW, he didn't get in the chair accidentally, he was being a problem before that. Then sliding the chair and trying to pull out of the restrains - so he's obviously still resisting.

  2) the officer on the right arm was attempting to move the restraint to another location at the end of the chair side rail, to prevent an further effort to escape the chair / spitguard but the inmate was resisting.

 3) officer # 3 comes in to help get the right wrist restraint secured. Inmate still resisting.

  4) inmate resists the officer holding the spit guard, leans forward, and is trying to BITE officer #3's forearm.

   5) At this point the taser is brought in.The inmate ALWAYS had the opportunity to comply. He was communicating during tasing. He could well have said "enough" just as well as said "FU".

   Based on the repeated tasing, the inability of the officers to fully secure the right arm (and needing to resecure the left arm) it APPEARS like it's torture. IMO, it's not.

   Even if during each tasing he was so tensed up that he couldn't comply, when they stopped each application and his body relaxed, he could have gone limp in compliance.  He CHOSE not to.

  What you're seeing is an incredible amount of rage and willpower. Do you want to deal with that guy, once he gets out of the restraints? I wouldn't - and actually I have - and it's scary as hell.

   Now I really think we DO have an excessive force issue with LE in the US, I think that the tide is turning and most officers know they're under the microscope now. These detention deputies SURELY know there was a camera filming them from several directions. They tried to be as gentle as the inmate would allow - he forced the issue.

  so in the famous words of Strother Martin from Cool Hand Luke ... " What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it. . . well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men." 

  If I were on a civilian review panel, I'd call it a justified use of force, and advise the subject to straighten out his life, because as he can see, "stupid hurts"

  Steve



 

[DeansZG]

 Excellent explanation, Thank you Steve !  I agree whole-heartedly with your analysis of the video.  Too bad for the perp, but with the impending lawsuit against the officers, it appears he didn't learn his lesson.. 

[B.D.F.]

I do not think it is the responsibility or even the prerogative for L.E.O.'s to 'teach anyone any lessons'. They exist (as LEO's) to maintain the public safety. With that kid strapped to a chair, I cannot see what public danger he posed. Had those officers stepped 8 feet away, the kid in the chair could not have caused any threat or inflicted any type of harm on anyone at all. Pushing that chair, from the rear if the officers were afraid of him spitting on them, into a remote area and leaving him isolated would have easily addressed the situation.

But those officers have been suspended, so perhaps there are yet more lessons to be learned, and most of them not to be learned by the kid who was in the chair.

Again, and as always, I support L.E.O.'s performing their jobs. And perhaps a little excess here and there; people are people (in positions of authority or not) and tempers flare.... the occasional 'cuff' is to be expected in the real world. But the planned, severe abuse and physical assaults of persons after the altercation is over cannot be tolerated or explained away. And it is quite clear we are seeing more and more of these instances now that the world is full of video, grabbing moving images of almost everything, almost all the time.

Brian

Excellent explanation, Thank you Steve !  I agree whole-heartedly with your analysis of the video.  Too bad for the perp, but with the impending lawsuit against the officers, it appears he didn't learn his lesson..

[B.D.F.]

And something else to think about regarding this incident: this kind of behavior, on the part of patients, happens all the time in mental health facilities. And it is dealt with all the time by mental health professionals, usually large male nurses (because that is what is available), and this type of behavior on the part of any staff would simply not be tolerated by the patients, by that staff member's co- workers, by the institution where it occurred, or by the state in which it occurred. Certainly it happened in these institutions a century ago and longer back but not today or even in recent decades.

I have some first- hand knowledge of this because I have a relative (female, and she used to come home with the bruises after a 'tough day at the office) who worked in and managed a portion of the psych. unit in a hospital.

When someone is acting like a, well, a 'putz' and completely out of control, I think almost all of us feel like giving them a smack. And after a while of dealing with a lot of them, there must be a temptation to give one or more of them a LOT of smacks. But those tasked with dealing with these situations must be able to avoid these temptations and tendencies, or they should be prevented from being in those positions in the first place. And by the way, I count myself among those who would NOT be able to do anything like this, day after day, without becoming altered for the worse by the experience.

And this type of restraint and applicable career paths for individuals is not limited to those dealing with difficult, combative people either. My wife chair the board of a local day care (not for profit) that my own children went to several decades ago and the people who work there are also special IMO and can deal with what I would call exasperating children (not all, and not always but more than enough, all the time) from fussy infants all the way to nasty 12 year olds. Another job I could not do but the people who do do those tasks are simply wonderful at it.... and very well supervised BTW. Even the little slip- up I mentioned earlier (giving a person who so desperately needs one a 'pop') is simply not tolerable; those people simply cannot lose their tempers or lose control with the children under any circumstances. They can, on occasion, leave the room and the building, go around the corner and punch the wall though. :-)

Brian

[jimmymac]

Sick bastards. Can't control their own life, so they try and control others. 

[BruceR]

Sick bastards. Can't control their own life, so they try and control others.

Well, they're guards at the county lock up.  I'd say controlling the inmates is their job.  That doesn't make them sick.  And if you're one of the inmates, you've left the world of democracy.  You no longer have a say in how your day to day life goes.  hHe jailers have that say.  And if you break the rules there are consequences.  Now if little Johnny decides he's tougher and more stubborn than the guards are, what are they supposed to do?  Say Johnny's having a rough day and just let him be?  No.  Not even close.  They have to establish and maintain control from the very beginning of Johnny's stay.  I'm not sure what led to Johnny being put in a restraint chair, but I have an opinion that inmates who obey the rules don't get put in it.  And I'm just going to be very blunt and say that stupid hurts.  And it should.  And this little exercise served a far broader purpose:  all the rest of those model citizens on the wrong side of the glass are watching Johnny get his nuts zapped off and thinking to themselves, "I'm not doing whatever he just did."  I'll bet the jail was quiet as a  Monday morning church that night.