Taser Manufacturer Tells Police Agencies It’s Unsafe to Shoot Suspects in Chest
As Sarasota criminal defense attorneys, we keep an eye on issues involving overuse of force and civil rights violations by law enforcement. One of the biggest such issues to emerge recently is the use of Tasers, stun guns that deliver an electric shock that causes a temporary seizure and intense pain. Tasers are intended to be an alternative to the use of lethal force -- but many police agencies also use them in situations that don’t call for lethal force, such as when a suspect resists arrest without violence. That’s a serious problem, critics say, because evidence suggests that Tasers can be and have been lethal under some circumstances, provoking numerous civil rights lawsuits.. That’s why we were pleased to see an Oct. 24 article on CNN.com reporting that Taser International reminded officers not to shoot for suspects’ chests.
In its new guidelines, the manufacturer told law enforcement to aim at suspects’ backs, pelvic muscles or thighs rather than the chest. Taser International said it has always acknowledged that its product carries safety risks, but said its recommendation was being made in part “to minimize controversy.” Controversies over Taser shots to the chest center around the devices’ potential to cause cardiac arrhythmia and heart attacks in vulnerable people, who include people with heart problems (diagnosed and undiagnosed), people using certain drugs and people who are already restrained in certain ways by police. Taser International has also acknowledged that repeated or prolonged stuns can impair breathing. Amnesty International reports that more than 350 people in the U.S. and Canada have died after Taser shocks since 2001.
Amnesty International has called for a moratorium on Taser use, at least in cases that don’t call for lethal force, until studies turn up more evidence on when they can be used safely. Here in Florida, Tasers were banned earlier this month by the Pensacola police department, after a teenager died while fleeing a police Taser shot. Another Florida case was recently turned down by the U.S. Supreme Court. In that case, driver Jesse Buckley was pulled over for speeding, but refused to sign the ticket he was written. Police handcuffed him and ordered him to walk to a patrol car, but he collapsed partway there and refused to get up. After a warning, police shocked Buckley three times, leading to 16 burn marks and an excessive-use-of-force lawsuit. A divided Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the police actions as legal, and the Supreme Court declined to review that decision.
Our Fort Lauderdale criminal defense lawyers believe this decision creates a dangerous precedent, by allowing police to use potentially deadly force against nonviolent offenders. For one thing, law enforcement simply cannot know ahead of time which suspects are vulnerable to death from Taser use (and overuse). Given that, we agree with Amnesty International that officers should restrict their use of Tasers to deadly-force situations, at least until scientists give us better information. But just as importantly, repeated electric shocks to a suspect who is restrained and nonviolent seem like a clear case of excessive use of force. It’s difficult to see how multiple shocks to a suspect like Buckley, who was reportedly lying on the ground and not combative, could be considered reasonable or necessary to control the situation.
