2 KCPD Officers Face Termination For Taser Use

According to the video, agency policy says that in order for a suspect to be legitimately tasered, the subject must be:

Resisting arrest,

Fighting,

Running, or

Using threatening gestures or language.

There's nothing saying that they cannot be handcuffed while being tasered, and what if the subject was handcuffed and using threatenting language? If that was the case, then I don't think that the officers can be legitimately fired over the issue.

I say congrats to the officers.

Can any of you tell me what will happen to this department's use of tasers, incidences of officer's being assaulted/injured, and general crime if these two officers are fired? Here is your answer: taser use will decline, officers will be injured as a result of being assaulted more, and crime will increase. Officers will not risk using the taser which might place them in a controversial area so that their chief can hang them out. Don't use it and you won;t be in these officer's shoes. Then you must refer back to hands-on techniques where you previously could stand-off with a suspect. Anytime you go hands-on their is a risk for injury to the officer. More officers will be forced to go hand-on for fear of using their tasers. Officers will be assaulted and injured more frequently because of this. Finally, some crime rates will increase. When officers have the correct tools and confident in their backing they can aggressively pursue crime. Even if they have the correct tools but fear discipline if using it then they will not pursue some crimes as aggressively. Here is an example: An officer is driving around at night when he notices a drunk person who seems aggitated. This person is in violation of the law but has not bothered anyone, yet. No calls have been received on this person, yet. However, this officer has the correct tools and is confident in his department's backing. He does not want to wait for this drunk to try and break into someone's home, disturb the peace, etc. He gets out, confronts the person, and arrests him. If this person resists he gets tasered or OC spray. Now this officer fears his department does not back him. Remember, "A Perceived problem is a problem" or "Perception is reality" he drives on and waits for the calls if they come at all. Maybe this drunk goes home and goes to bed or maybe he victimizes someone. Their is your crime increase folks. Now don't go getting all defensive saying none of our officers would just drive by, I know better, I served my time on the mean streets and have seen it...it happens and who could blame them at times like this. You are not going to get disciplined for patrolling your beat, answering your calls, and taking your reports. Their is nothing in police policies that says you must aggressively police. Enough...you all get the picture. I wonder if this chief ever went to SPI?

Do not Fire them for that. Why ruin their lives and career over something easily correctable. I can't say I agree with that last taser shot, but I also was not there..DO NOT FIRE THEM. WHAT A ********** FOR A CHIEF!

well did you hear about the officer in the 3rd divison that use his taser on a suspect 32 TIMES? wonder what will happen to that?

Oh, my gosh, now rcw has another thing to think about when he tries to make mouth coleman happy! This sounds like a very extreme overreaction.......War Wagon

Let's see. The officers followed policy, but got fired any way cause of the potential political fall out. Sounds kinda like what McKenzie had to go through.

We need some teeth in KRS 15.520 so that when the chief wrongs an officer, say like Mac, and its proven over and over that the officer was in the right, the chief can get indicted on charges of Official Misconduct for using his powers to cause harm to another. Right now the only thing RCW could be charged with is impersonating a law enforcement official.

Sorry, dude. Not to call you a lair, but until I see something or hear something official, this sounds like one more out of control rumor started by the mayors office or somebody that wants to be somebody. This can reallly make our guys and gals look bad. Its a perception thang, u know dawg, if its on da poleece web page, it musta be tru dat. Peace out bro.

There was no need for the last taser shot. The suspect was in handcuffs and being compliant. Where was the threat at this point? Lucky the guy did not have an injury to his head due to the fall. Poor judgment !!!!

While I was not there of course, the last shot seems like some poor personal emotions got involved. Should have just threw him in the car and went to jail.

P.S. Why did he still have the taser hooked up anyways? Looks bad for us all.

First of all, I didn't hear about the officer in the 3rd that teased someone 32 times. Pretty interesting. I know the video doesn't tell all, but we have all been around an individual who didn't want to go to jail. Put his A$$ in the back of the car and make him give you reasons to tease him again, not because he's standing there calling you a dumb MF. I have no problem teasing someone that needs to be teased but lets be smart here. The guy in the video didn't appear to be 3 or 4 times as big as the officers. That's going to make it tough to articulate why you had to tease him an excessive amount of times. I'm not going with the verbal abuse. That last tease on video may have been personal. We all still have to be able to handle ourselves somewhat physically. I'm not saying fight someone toe to toe, but I am saying if he is controlled, put his A$$ in the car. If he fights aggressively while you are attempting to put him in the car, you can tease him to get him to comply. After in the car if he bangs his head on the shield or start kicking at windows, BUZZ. Atleast at that point you can articulate it. Especially when you have a camera.

2221999

All street officers should participate in weekly martial arts training. There is no replacement for knowing how to defend yourself when your guns and gadgets aren't readily available and someone is trying to stomp a mudhole in you or trying to stab you with a knife. If you aren't well trained in how to fight properly, you're much more likely to either get hurt or to use excessive force. Every Sergeant should count how much time their guys waste in restaurants and gas stations each week, and make them fill that time with some kung fu training in the Division parking lot! When I become Chief, things are going to change around here.

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) -- The Board of Police Commissioners on Thursday fired two officers for allegedly misusing a Taser stun gun on a handcuffed man last year.

Police Chief Jim Corwin had recommended that the officers, David Easley and Matthew Howell, be fired and a hearing was held last week.

A camera in a patrol car recorded the officers arresting a suspected car thief on Aug. 10, 2004. When the 24-year-old Kansas City man tried to run from police, Howell fired a Taser -- which stuns a person using electrical current -- and hit the man in the back.

The suspect was then handcuffed, and Howell fired the Taser four more times. The fifth use of the stun gun came after Easley allegedly told Howell to "hit him again."

Corwin and other police officials told the Board of Police Commissioners that the first two uses of the Taser appeared to be within department policy. But Corwin said the fifth use of the stun gun clearly was not.

Corwin told the board that it looked as if the officers were abusing the suspect and punishing him because he refused to stop talking.

Easley, 34, told the board he was only bluffing and hoped to scare the suspect into cooperating when he said "hit him again." Howell, 39, testified that he fired the stun gun a final time because he believed the suspect was resisting arrest by saying he wasn't going to jail. The officers also said the suspect didn't complain of any injuries.

The board voted 3-1 to fire the officers.

In its decision, the board said termination is "a just and proper action" based on the evidence presented. Dissenting board member Karl Zobrist said he agreed department policy had been violated but thought the officers should be suspended, not fired.

Larry Rebman, an attorney for the officers, said Easley planned to appeal the board's decision. Rebman had not yet talked to Howell but said he considered the decision to terminate Howell "unjust" because other officers in similar circumstances had received "far less punishment."

In a written statement, Corwin said the officers' actions made the department look bad and jeopardized its ability to continue using Tasers.

"This was an unfortunate incident involving officers of the Kansas City Police Department," Corwin said. "The public has entrusted the department to use the Taser appropriately, and I expect all officers to act responsibly."

Looks to me like yet another instance of what I call "dueling policies." You have a policy that probably says something like, tase 'em if they resist - but that doesn't explain that if handcuffs are on, you don't do certain things like use the Taser.

I heard a metro guy used his taser 32 times on a guy? Whats up with that...

When in doubt, do like our Administration does and turn off your radio so you won't have to hear the radio call in the first place.

Looks like Corwin is on the short list to run LMPD when ol bobby is done screwing it up!!

Poor guys/gals in blue--they are damned if they do and damned if they don't......what's the answer?????