After nearly two years of silence, Palo Alto Police Department Tasers buzzed to life earlier this year with officers deploying the stun guns on two occasions, according to a new report from Independent Police Auditor Michael Gennaco.
The semi-annual report, which covers the first half of 2012, details the first of the two cases and alludes to a second, which Gennaco is currently reviewing. The auditor concluded that in the first case, the Taser deployment was consistent with department policy.
The first case involved a traffic stop in which an officer pulled over a car because its registration sticker had expired, according to the report. The driver allegedly didn't have a license and did not own the car and the passenger "responded strangely" when asked questions, Gennaco wrote. A backup officer was called in and as he approached the car, he allegedly noticed the passenger bending forward as if he were hiding something.
The report states that the passenger had "bloodshot eyes, mumbled speech, and had a hard time standing still and was sweating." He also had a bulge in his front pocket and gave "erratic answers" to officers' questions, leading them to conclude that he might be under the influence of drugs. The passenger allegedly consented to being patted down by an officer but pulled away. He also tried to pull an unknown object out of his pocket even after being asked by officers not to, the report states. Officers then allegedly grabbed his arms to keep him from taking the unknown object out, Gennaco wrote.
"He slipped from the grasp of the first officer who pulled out his Tasr and fired it at the passenger," the report states. "The Taser was effective and the passenger crumpled to the ground."
Officers tried to place handcuffs on the passenger but he was lying on the ground with his hands "hidden under his chest," the report states. An officer deployed the Taser once again, after which time the backup officer handcuffed him.
The passenger was taken to a nearby hospital, where one of the darts was removed (the second one had fallen out at the scene). He was medically cleared for booking and arrested. According to the report, he tested positive for cocaine and the object in his pocket was a glass crack pipe.
After the incident a police sergeant and a lieutenant reviewed the incident and concluded that "Taser use was justified and conformed to PAPD policy."
Gennaco agreed and wrote that both five-second activations of the Taser were "reasonable."
"While the officer's perception of immediate threat -- a prerequisite for Taser use under PAPD policy -- was inherently speculative in this situation, it was a reasonable inference from the suspect's belligerent stance and his fixation on an object in one of this pockets and his vigorous struggle against the pat down search," Gennaco wrote.
Even so, Gennaco raised some concerns about the Taser deployment. The officer who fired the stun gun "did not give a verbal Taser warning as policy requires when possible," Gennaco wrote, though he noted that the "rapidly evolving nature of the physical struggle provides justification of a warning not being given in this case." Gennaco also noted that police had interviewed the vehicle's driver, who concurred that her friend "flipped out" and that officers were acting "very proper." But Gennaco noted that the officer interviewing her was the backup officer involved in the incident and that the interview took place while the driver was being detained in the patrol vehicle.
"These are far from ideal circumstances for a post use-of-force civilian witness interview and could easily have been avoided by having the interview conducted by an available supervisor in a setting outside the patrol car," Gennaco wrote.
Tasers were once a controversial topic in Palo Alto, leading to at least one lawsuit and settlement by the city. But they have remained largely in silent mode since the department changed its policy for the stun guns in 2009. The new policy created a stricter standard for firing Tasers, requiring that the suspect "pose an immediate threat of physical injury" before firing a Taser is appropriate. Previously, officers were allowed to fire Tasers when suspects were "actively resisting," which included "tensing" or "bracing" to resist arrest.
Comments
Midtown
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:11 pm
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:11 pm
Gee, no wonder no one wants to be a police officer! Our police face crazy people with guns every day and to have to worry about whether one gave a verbal warning before using the taser is just absurd. In pre-tazer times an officer might have just swung a heavy night-stick at the suspect and broken an arm, leg or rib. Please officers, save your own life, taze away!
College Terrace
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:36 pm
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:36 pm
Before someone jumps in with a ludicrous comment about police brutality, let ne say that I agree with Marty. Much better to taze than shoot. I commend the PA police for not having some of the shoot-first (and to kill) incidents some other cities have had.
another community
on Nov 29, 2012 at 3:00 pm
on Nov 29, 2012 at 3:00 pm
Tasers do have to be considered a deadly force. Tasers can result in death, as has been reported in the news quite frequently. The question should be, does policy restrict usage to instances where deadly force would be called for. In narrowly interpreting police policy, the independent auditor has become a spokesman for the police and not a representative of the public at large, as is needed.
Old Palo Alto
on Nov 29, 2012 at 3:59 pm
on Nov 29, 2012 at 3:59 pm
Tazers can be lethal. They are usually a good alternative to a gun, but not enough judgment is used in many cases of deploying one.
Several years ago, in Union City, the police force there tazed a man who was standing in a creek, in water, and the poor man was electrocuted to death. It should have been a no-brainer. The victim was an unemployed, drunk, illegal alien who left behind a wife with a terminal disease as well as several children. I actually saw this as I was bikeriding by, then read in the paper the next day that the man was DOA at Washington Hospital in Fremont.
After this, I decided it might be that the police need more training on using these devices. They do target practice with their guns regularly, should there not be more practice of some sort with Tazers? Does it make a difference where the victim is hit with the barbs?
Old Palo Alto
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:45 pm
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Gee who cares just another day for Oakland, San Francisco, East Palo Alto, Richmond, Vallejo, San Jose, or Bart police. AS education, blue collar jobs, and moral values plummet in the bay area you better get used to this.
Community Center
on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:02 pm
on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:02 pm
How much are still paying for gennaco? I do not recall any useful information being derived from his reviews. Perhaps a case by case basis review would save the city money. His criticizes for no "warning" but then says it is ok and understandable. All while collecting city money to state the obvious.
Not specifically for tasers, but did some homework and many of these deaths that are speculated to have been caused by tasers seem to have ultimately been ruled to be only a slight contributing factor, if at all. Sometimes Cops need our tentative support rather than "deciding they need more training" with no knowledge of what that may currently be.
Barron Park
on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:32 pm
on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:32 pm
I am pleased to see some rational comments above. Too often there is a knee jerk reaction, "the police are completely in the wrong", or words to that effect.
Sure, there have been deaths caused by tasers. But there have been far more deaths caused by guns which can cause terrible wounds and cripple a person for life if they do not kill.
Nationwide in the last few months officers have been shot and killed without warning. I agree with Marty - the police person should act to save his/her own life if there is any doubt about the bad guy's intentions.
Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Nov 30, 2012 at 11:16 am
on Nov 30, 2012 at 11:16 am
This report is available for public viewing through the link listed as "report." I am curious why Palo Alto Online neglected to mention the fact that the suspect's blood results came back positive for cocaine. Isn't that an important point to note?
Midtown
on Nov 30, 2012 at 5:42 pm
on Nov 30, 2012 at 5:42 pm
People have been severely beat with Maglights similar to those used by police. To protect the pulbic, do we take away flashlights???????