PDA

View Full Version : Armstrong v. Village of Pinehurst; Fourth Circuit case regarding Taser use



KeeFus
01-14-2016, 10:49 AM
FYI, this case just happened on Monday, January 11, 2016. Upsetting a lot of apple carts.

http://ncja.ncdoj.gov/Armstrong-v-Village-of-Pinehurst.aspx

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/151191.P.pdf

HCM
01-14-2016, 11:32 AM
FYI, this case just happened on Monday, January 11, 2016. Upsetting a lot of apple carts.

http://ncja.ncdoj.gov/Armstrong-v-Village-of-Pinehurst.aspx

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/151191.P.pdf

This is a crap decision and will get more officers and suspects hurt. It's only a 3 judge decision. Are they seeking an en banc review?

runcible
01-14-2016, 11:56 AM
That all TASER use in that jurisdiction is to be considered "severe and injurious" seems odd, and in being so described without additional context, bizarre.

I am curious as to what the preferred form of gaining compliance would be, and how that in turn will look (ie. ASP curriculum).

In a perfect and cynical world, there'll be plenty of OT from waiting silliness out; but realities for many is that there is insufficient manpower to cordon off every barricade event and still handle the needs of the rest of the locality.

psalms144.1
01-14-2016, 12:14 PM
I'm pretty surprised by this ruling. It appears to me, based on a quick review of the information provided, that any use of pain compliance on a non-cooperative subject would be ruled a violation of the 4th Amendment. So, baton strikes, OC spray, joint locks, pressure points - all risky. I guess we ask politely, if they don't comply, we let them alone and wait for them to become a "danger" to us or society in general. That's sure to work out well.

Four years, one month, 14 days, and a wake up...

pablo
01-14-2016, 12:27 PM
Just more of the same IMO. Many police departments have already moved to Tasers to just below deadly force and out of the realm of being useful.

Tasers should never intentional be used as a pain compliance tool, they are not reliable in that role. Unlike TV when that 5 second ride is over, it's over. The goal is NMI and pain compliance is side effect. One place where Taser has really failed themselves and end users is by creating a training program that leaves end users with unrealistic expectations of the product. Training exposure almost always involve wide probe spread across major muscle groups.

It's amazing how a couple ineffective drive stuns take the bulk of the blame for the individuals death, and not the pig pile where they were in an extending life or death struggle with a crazy guy. Fighting someone to the point that they are so physically exhausted that they just die is perfectly acceptable under the current CIT intervention model.

If there was an ambulance on standby, I think this would have been an excellent place to use a Taser. Attempting a deployment across the back and cuffing under power, would have given a very good opportunity to have a quick medical intervention.

If what's I read was correct, then it doesn't sound like that entire situation was handle well at all.

-If the cops were waiting around for a court order to be signed, there weren't exigent circumstances. Most states allow the arrest of mentally ill individuals without a warrant when they are a danger to themselves and others. In these situations you can't say lets wait to get a court order and then when the warrant shows up, decide that's it a big deal and things need to be resolved Right Now!
-The Taser was not used in an appropriate manner.
-No officers checked the physical condition of the arrested after a fight.
-EMS was not requested and standing by.

KeeFus
01-14-2016, 12:31 PM
Four years, one month, 14 days, and a wake up...

Four years, 11 months, 14 days. Screw the wake up, I will finally call out sick.

voodoo_man
01-14-2016, 03:16 PM
So they want me to use an ASP to gain compliance over using a taser?

K.

LSP552
01-14-2016, 08:53 PM
I'm pretty surprised by this ruling. It appears to me, based on a quick review of the information provided, that any use of pain compliance on a non-cooperative subject would be ruled a violation of the 4th Amendment. So, baton strikes, OC spray, joint locks, pressure points - all risky. I guess we ask politely, if they don't comply, we let them alone and wait for them to become a "danger" to us or society in general. That's sure to work out well.

Four years, one month, 14 days, and a wake up...

There is life after retirement Brother!

41magfan
01-14-2016, 09:26 PM
There is life after retirement Brother!

Absolutely! I've been counting the days in the other direction for 6 years and 14 days. Retirement life is goooood.

ETA: My adaptation to an old legal maxim .... "Poor judgment makes for bad laws, policies and procedures."

TGS
01-14-2016, 10:03 PM
Did that opinion read incredibly biased to anyone else? With the numerous snide shots here and there, sounds like Thacker has a problem with how policing is done at all.

BehindBlueI's
01-14-2016, 10:08 PM
I'm pretty surprised by this ruling. It appears to me, based on a quick review of the information provided, that any use of pain compliance on a non-cooperative subject would be ruled a violation of the 4th Amendment. So, baton strikes, OC spray, joint locks, pressure points - all risky. I guess we ask politely, if they don't comply, we let them alone and wait for them to become a "danger" to us or society in general. That's sure to work out well.

Four years, one month, 14 days, and a wake up...

Just give them a pamphlet with a map to the jail, instructions on how to report to the sally port, and ask they pin a case number to their shirt before entering. If they are dangerous, request they handcuff themselves prior to entering.

I'm more and more glad I drive a desk most of the day.

DMF13
01-15-2016, 12:06 AM
It appears to me, based on a quick review of the information provided, that any use of pain compliance on a non-cooperative subject would be ruled a violation of the 4th Amendment. So, baton strikes, OC spray, joint locks, pressure points - all risky. I guess we ask politely, if they don't comply, we let them alone and wait for them to become a "danger" to us or society in general.An oversimplification, and actually not what the ruling says at all.

Chuck Haggard
01-15-2016, 02:40 AM
This is the kind of decision that occurs when everybody involved, cops on scene, judges, has no idea what the fuck they are looking at or doing.

The Taser has nothing whatsoever to do with this death, or even how this case was handled, it's just one ingredient in a call that appears to be poorly handled, and then poorly judged because no one involved knew how to argue the case or the facts.

This has every appearance of being a classic excited delirium case, and nothing in the decision shows that anyone involved knows anything about this subject.


For the cops here, Taser use in drive stun mode is typically stupid as hell and just makes things worse, this appears to be another case of exactly that.

Dr_Thanatos
01-15-2016, 08:43 AM
This is the kind of decision that occurs when everybody involved, cops on scene, judges, has no idea what the fuck they are looking at or doing.

The Taser has nothing whatsoever to do with this death, or even how this case was handled, it's just one ingredient in a call that appears to be poorly handled, and then poorly judged because no one involved knew how to argue the case or the facts.

This has every appearance of being a classic excited delirium case, and nothing in the decision shows that anyone involved knows anything about this subject.


For the cops here, Taser use in drive stun mode is typically stupid as hell and just makes things worse, this appears to be another case of exactly that.

The cause of death in this case was Complications of Excited Delirium Syndrome. There were no contributing causes listed. It was a messy case from the outset.


Sent from my SM-P905V using Tapatalk

jnc36rcpd
01-15-2016, 11:22 PM
Judge Wilkinson, while concurring in part seems to get it. I suspect his honor perhaps has more real world experience than his compatriots.

Seeing the writing on the wall, our training has emphasized that the suspect must pose an articulable threat before Taser deployment. We acknowledge that this policy places officers in harm's way and will undoubtedly result in many more injuries to suspects. but as Joe Friday said, we don't make the laws, we just enforce them.

While I suspect we would have attempted verbal persuasion techniques for longer than thirty seconds in this case, we still recommend drive stuns if done for a specific purpose. Removing a suspect's hand from an object he or she is clenching is one example that we use. That said, protocol dictates that an articulable threat be posed.

The ACLU, BLM, MoveOn, NAACP, and other criminal advocacy groups are rightly concerned about law enforcement use of the Taser. Their concern, however, should not be about misuse of overuse of the Taser. They should be concerned that more and more officers may decide to throw the frigging thing in the trunk because it's too much hassle to carry or deploy the thing.

Coyotesfan97
01-17-2016, 07:59 AM
I've always suspected the ACLU and their ilk would much rather have video of Officers using batons on a suspect than a Taser deployment. It makes it so much easier to scream police brutality. Our policy puts Taser with batons, bean bags, and dog bites.

voodoo_man
01-17-2016, 08:05 AM
I've always suspected the ACLU and their ilk would much rather have video of Officers using batons on a suspect than a Taser deployment. It makes it so much easier to scream police brutality. Our policy puts Taser with batons, bean bags, and dog bites.

Oh yeah, beating someone with a metal pipe (ASP) looks really bad. I try to never make outward "windup" gestures with an ASP and I try to always use control techniques instead of blunt impacts.

11B10
01-17-2016, 12:47 PM
This is not so much a "reply" to anyone - just two specific questions from a non-LEO to experienced people like Mr. Haggard and voodoo_man. #1 - please explain the "drive stun" setting to me - when SHOULD it be used and, what is it's desired effect on a person? #2 - From what I have been able to learn, there is far too little training of ANY tactic done with all non-lethals (in this case, the ASP) - more specifically, the control techniques. A classic example, to me, seemed to be the Rodney King case. Is the lack of widespread training still true today - or, is your perception there is some of it - just far too little?

Thanks, gentlemen!

voodoo_man
01-17-2016, 01:32 PM
This is not so much a "reply" to anyone - just two specific questions from a non-LEO to experienced people like Mr. Haggard and voodoo_man. #1 - please explain the "drive stun" setting to me - when SHOULD it be used and, what is it's desired effect on a person? #2 - From what I have been able to learn, there is far too little training of ANY tactic done with all non-lethals (in this case, the ASP) - more specifically, the control techniques. A classic example, to me, seemed to be the Rodney King case. Is the lack of widespread training still true today - or, is your perception there is some of it - just far too little?

Thanks, gentlemen!


https://youtu.be/1LLVI9kObDo

As for training, no only training is for striking and pushing. I sought out and was taught specific techniques with an ASP other than strikes that allow me to use it as a tool for control holds.

In reference to the Rodney king situation, those officers did what they were taught to do, which was extremely ineffective and gave the appearance of a beating, which it was. So I always tell guys to stay away from doing that.

nwhpfan
01-17-2016, 02:02 PM
Doesn't surprise me. Reading the information presented the part that sticks out to me is the subject was is described as stationary and not violent. Seems something similar was settled in the 9th about 5 years ago so the 4th seems a little behind.

11B10
01-17-2016, 02:27 PM
https://youtu.be/1LLVI9kObDo

As for training, no only training is for striking and pushing. I sought out and was taught specific techniques with an ASP other than strikes that allow me to use it as a tool for control holds.

In reference to the Rodney king situation, those officers did what they were taught to do, which was extremely ineffective and gave the appearance of a beating, which it was. So I always tell guys to stay away from doing that.



First, thanks for the info and link. What I meant to say re: King was that I did know they had been taught strikes only, so that's all they knew how to do.

DMF13
01-18-2016, 12:15 AM
Doesn't surprise me. Reading the information presented the part that sticks out to me is the subject was is described as stationary and not violent. Seems something similar was settled in the 9th about 5 years ago so the 4th seems a little behind.It was settled in both the 9th and 10th Circuits long ago, and maybe more, but I can't remember if any other Circuits were cited in the decision, but the decisions in both the 9th and 10th are relevant to me and stick in my mind as I've worked in both, and taught use of force in both.

pablo
01-19-2016, 12:44 PM
This is not so much a "reply" to anyone - just two specific questions from a non-LEO to experienced people like Mr. Haggard and voodoo_man. #1 - please explain the "drive stun" setting to me - when SHOULD it be used and, what is it's desired effect on a person? #2 - From what I have been able to learn, there is far too little training of ANY tactic done with all non-lethals (in this case, the ASP) - more specifically, the control techniques. A classic example, to me, seemed to be the Rodney King case. Is the lack of widespread training still true today - or, is your perception there is some of it - just far too little?

Thanks, gentlemen!

A "drive stun" is when the cartridge is removed from the Taser and it's used like a stun gun. Basically push or drive the Taser into the offender and stun them, hence "drive stun". It hurts, but because the contact are 3/4" apart they don't produce any nuero-muscular incapacitation. There's general a violent reaction to being drive stunned. It's appropriate in places where the use of the Taser is justified, it would not be appropriate to the leave cartridge on the Taser and attempt a deployment that could produce NMI, and other alternatives are not available.

IMO a good place for drive stuns is when a hand cuffed prisoner has grabbed onto a wheel well or door frame, or hooked a foot under a car to resist being placed in a police vehicle and transported. It's generally a bad idea to flood a police car with OC spray. Baton strikes aren't practical. Going hands can become very dangerous in these situations. Using a Taser with a cartridge wouldn't be appropriate since the probes would have to be removed and that's really not safe to do with a combative prisoner in the back of a police vehicle. Using a drive stun on the offending limb could be an option. If there are at least 2 officers, one officer can pull the suspect into the car while the other drive stuns the offending limb to try to get it free.

One of the big things that is often overlooked in the Rodney King incident is that in the mid 80's LAPD banned the use of the LVNR and never provided officers with anything that was nearly as effective for restraining and controlling combative subjects. Officers were basically left with the options of beat the bad guy into compliance or shoot him, and it was a ticking time bomb. LAPD brass got a pretty big pass on their bad decision making due to the lack of technology at the time. There are a lot of parallels today between highly restricted Taser use, taking away useful tools from officers, and what happened in the Rodney King incident. Use of force and taking control of a combative prisoner is rarely pretty, but letting a situation devolve into the unknown for appearance sake rarely works out long term.

Chuck Haggard
01-19-2016, 01:20 PM
LAPD lost neck restraints because of in custody excited delirium deaths. Back then no one knew what we know now.


Drive stuns with the Taser almost never work, except in very specific and limited circumstances as noted above. Getting a handcuffed bad guy into the car when they plank up is one such scenario, they tend to sit down rather than take a drive stun to the pelvis. In the case in question the drive stun likely gave the dude an adrenaline dump and made things worse.

pablo
01-20-2016, 12:37 PM
LAPD lost neck restraints because of in custody excited delirium deaths. Back then no one knew what we know now.

Yet despite what we know today many departments routinely fail to train their officers to handle these situations, and fail to create and enforce appropriate call response policy. Or have supervisors that have a clue about when they can make a warrantless arrest.

We've been teaching mental health crisis/excited delirium intervention BS since 2002 and I thought we were behind the curve at the time. It's amazes me at how many departments still take the let's cross our fingers and hope bad things happen to someone else approach when it comes to this.