"Let me show you what happens to people who do not listen to the police," Cop Says Before Tasering Little Boy

The guardian ad litem for a 10-year-old Sante Fe resident is suing Officer Chris Webb.

Courthouse News reports that the guardian ad litem for a 10-year-old Santa Fe resident is suing New Mexico Department of Public Safety and Motor Transportation Police Officer Chris Webb for an absolutely irresponsible use of his Taser:

Guardian ad litem Rachel Higgins sued the New Mexico Department of Public Safety and Motor Transportation Police Officer Chris Webb on behalf of the child, in Santa Fe County Court.

Higgins claims Webb used his Taser on the boy, R.D., during a May 4 "career day" visit to Tularosa New Mexico Intermediate School.

"Defendant Webb asked the boy, R.D., in a group of boys, who would like to clean his patrol unit," the complaint states. "A number of boys said that they would. R.D., joking, said that he did not want to clean the patrol unit.

"Defendant Webb responded by pointing his Taser at R.D. and saying, 'Let me show you what happens to people who do not listen to the police.'"

Webb then shot "two barbs into R.D.'s chest," the complaint states.

"Both barbs penetrated the boy's shirt, causing the device to deliver 50,000 volts into the boy's body.

"Defendant Webb pulled the barbs out [of] the boy's chest, causing scarring where the barbs had entered the boy's skin that look like cigarette burns on the boy's chest.

"The boy, who weighed less than 100 lbs., blacked out.

"Instead of calling emergency medical personnel, Officer Webb pulled out the barbs and took the boy to the school principal's office," the complaint states.

Salon reports that Webb "claims he accidentally discharged the Taser" and "was given only a three-day suspension."

Comments

[Marshall Gill]

Stop Resisting!

[bmp1701]

Sounds like the little tyke learned more about a law enforcement career than most kids do at "career day."

[Death Rock and Skull]

"New Mexico Department of Public Safety and Motor Transportation Police Officer"

Its fucking obnoxious when regulatory cabinets decide they need there own police. Illinois has secretary of state police, in addition to normal state police. New York has its gun carrying trash police.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

MA, to its credit, consolidated. they used to have the Registry of Motor Vehicles Police, the Metropolitan Park District Police, and a few others that all merged into the state police. it had the added benefit of pissing the "real" state troopers off. anything that pisses MA state troopers off is probably ok, because ... well... they are MA troopers. it's a MA thing.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

jesus christ. ok, if there EVER was a case that warrants criminal charging for assault (ATFPAPIC), it's this one.

merely pointing the taser at the kid, "joking" or not would warrant suspension. it's a weapon, not a fucking toy. shit like this pisses me off.

[generic Brand]

So what will your reaction be if when the officer is not fired and jailed?

[robc]

Assault with deadly weapon. Assault isnt enough.

[Harvard]

Lord God how I prayed this was you, you pond scum sycophant.

[Fist of Etiquette]

As I said before about this case, I think he did in fact accidentally discharge the taser. What he didn't do accidentally was point it at an individual as a joke.

We all know what would have happened to a civilian who did this, especially to a child. Hint: It's longer than three days.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

right.

my point is that the pointing alone should warrant AT A MINIMUM, a 3 day suspension. also note that tasers have a safety.

so, he pointed the taser at the kid, FLICKED the safety AND depressed the trigger.

sorry, but that should warrant an assault charge. and it very well MAY, assuming the claims are correct god knows they should have plenty of witnesses to corroborate.

you don't use a weapon like a taser to make a point, even a joking one. and especially not a trained sworn LEO on duty doing so with a ten year old.

i don't see any "wiggle room" here. imo, it's a clear cut assault. i don't know the statutes and case law in the state this occurred, but i am speaking from a model penal code perspective.

the model penal code includes under the assault umbrella a person who recklessly causes injury in situations like this, so assuming he did not intend to depress the trigger... groovy. but it's still assault imo

[Calvin Coolidge]

Sorry. Laws are for people who aren't cops. The kid brought this on himself by being a troublemaker. If you aren't guilty, you have nothing to fear.

[Juice]

You'd fit right in at policeone.com.

[Juice]

Here's an example of a comment from there:

http://www.policeone.com/legal.....areer-day/

Regarding the lawsuit:

If the family is on welfare, the state should deduct that from the money she is mooching on. What kid doesn't have some scars growing up?

and

Look on the bright side. Hopefully, the boy will always remember this when he grows up and is confronted by the police!

Indeed.

[Matrix]

Yeah... shoot them before they shoot you!

[hamilton]

Agree with you Fist, but just want to bitch about your use of the word "civilian". The cops are civilians too. I hate that shit.

[Fist of Etiquette]

I refuse to take your point. POINT REFUSED.

[BakedPenguin]

You sound like my ex-girlfriend.

[Episiarch]

Doesn't he always?

[Fist of Etiquette]

I SAID GOOD DAY SIR.

[Lewisite]

Slugworth would gladly accept that point....just saying.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Huh. That's where that's from.

[Ted S.]

You need to reed up on the Robert Peel's principles of policing.

[Deep Lurker]

No, the cops ought to be civilians.
They aren't. Not any more.
That's the problem.

[Auric Demonocles]

Well, he's only been suspended, so that means he's on vacation. So he's actually served 0 days compared to a non-cop's sentence.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

ssupended does not mean vacation

is he SUSPENDED without pay, or is he on Admin leave with pay

those are entirely different

one is a punishment, the other is not. the latter is merely a way to seperate him from the public WHILE an investigation is done.

admin leave with pay- i've been on it. it doesn't mean i did something wrong. had a guy blow his head off in front of me. admin leave . my partner had to do CPR to an infant at a car crash. got admin leave

it's merely an admin procedure.

people here constantly think an officer is "gettign vacation" when they hear of admin leave. it's not.

it's NOT the punishment. punishment means WITHOUT pay, which is not what admin leave is.

[Auric Demonocles]

It's vacation. I never said he was getting pay, but you don't necessarily get paid to be on vacation.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

if you get time off w/o pay, i think it's a stretch, if not dishonest to call it "vacation".

assuming he makes a decent cop wage, like $50/hr , three days is the equivalent of a $1200 fine.

[Mensan]

$50/hr!?!?!?

WTF!!!!!!

Paramedics (2-years of college) make $14/hr
Exercise physiologists (6 years of college) make $21/hr
Critical Care RNs (4 years of college) make $30/hr
And cops (3 months of training) make $50/hr?
WTF.

[Groovus Maximus]

This is also not including benefits, Mensan, I wager.

[Art Vandelay]

When you're out on the streets, risking other people's lives, you deserve $50/hr.

[Auric Demonocles]

No it's not. Paid vacation is different than "vacation", that's why it's specified as paid vacation.

[seguin]

That's not how it works in the private sector...most of us have to budget for our own vacation.

[alan_s]

"$50/hr"

Excuse me while I clean up the drink I just spit out.

[Death Rock and Skull]

When I'm on vacation, I don't expect to get paid because I'm not doing any work. Not getting paid makes things simpler.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

ok, it's clear you want to play word games with "vacation", i'll pass thx

[Death Rock and Skull]

I'm not playing word games. I really have never gotten paid for taking a vacation. It makes for a more honest and flexible working relationship- get paid for the work you do.

[robc]

Ive been on vacation plenty of times, I didnt get paid any of them (since 2000). Self-employment works that way.

Also, a bunch of my friends work for a company that as of Jan 1 is entirely getting rid of the whole concept of Paid Time Off. You have a salary. Come to work, dont come to work, whatever. If you dont get your job done, they will fire you.

So, if, in theory, you could get all your work done for the year on Jan 2, you could take the rest of the year off. Not that that is at all reasonable.

[Karl Hungus]

Dunphy, I'm curious what your reaction to this story would be if the kid's father (or guardian, or whatever) had been there, and upon seeing the kid tased, had beaten Mr. Webb like a rented mule, placed him in his own handcuffs, and placed him under citizen's arrest.

[Harvard]

Don't forget to shoot his fucking dog.

[josh]

perfectly said. i think it was dr. house that said "mistakes are as serious as the consequences they cause" or something like that. suspension for pointing it, the rest demands something stronger.

[CE]

No, that's backwards. The more serious crime was pointing a deadly weapon at someone, in jest or not. Accidentally discharging it was an accident.

[robc]

Pulling the trigger isnt an accident.

[Generic Stranger]

Yup. I believe the term is "negligence"

The Three Rules of Firearm/Projectile weapon safety:

Rule 1: Keep your booger hook off the bang switch until you're ready to fire

Rule 2: Do not point your weapon at something you are not willing to destroy.

Rule 3: Know your target and what's behind it.

Dude violated the shit out of rules 1 and 2.

[Generic Stranger]

That's assuming the more charitable explanation for his actions, and not the more likely one that he's a sociopath who gets off on tazing little kids, anyway.

[Episiarch]

At least the pig was honest. Remember, not cleaning his car is "not listening to the police". And then he taught the kid to respect his authoritah.

So, in this case, he is either a fantastically criminally negligent retard who accidentally shot a kid with his taser, or he is a savage vicious powertripping bully scumbag who will taser a 10 year old for merely refusing to do work for him.

Of course he will keep his job; those qualities, whichever he is, is what they look for in cops.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

i think the predictions are stupid AND SO OFTEN proven wrong

assuming the claims made are correct, i find it unlikely he will keep his job, but we will wait to see. like most cases, when it does turn around that way, reason isn't there to report on the aftermath. only the initial story, in many cases.

i'm willing to put up an internet wager. assuming the facts are as adjudicated/stipulated as claimed - iow, that he drew his taser , pointed it at the kid, made the statement about "let me show you" and subsequently depressed the trigger, my prediction is he will be fired.

any takers on that bet?

[Auric Demonocles]

my prediction is he will be fired

But what about jail?

[Dunphy (the real one)]

that's not my prediction. MOST first time offenders for assault do not get jail. that's the case with "civilians".

feel free to ask a defense attorney or research court records. granted, this is a pretty egregious assault, but granted also it MAY be unintentional. it's still an assault.

again, i gave a prediction. any takers?

[Auric Demonocles]

that's not my prediction.

That's the point I was making. Your prediction doesn't involve any criminal penalties at all.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

im aware of that.

its my prediction. contrary to epi's

i am saying that assuming that the facts claimed are either stipulated or adjudicated to have happened. (like the case goes to civil court, or an internal review corroborates them by the internal standard, which in many agencies is preponderance), that he gets fired.

simple prediction.

any takers for or against?

im certainly not going to make a prediction about CRIMINAL issues, when i don't even KNOW the state's criminal code. that would be ridiculous.

[Old Man With Candy]

Does it count if he gets rehired at another nearby department?

[robc]

No internet in Seattle, that seems odd?

[R C Dean]

The double standard is that he wasn't even charged with assault (technically, I believe this is actually a battery, but state laws can be weird on this), unlike any mere "civilian" who tasers a ten year old ("negligently" or not).

Pointing a taser at someone and pulling the trigger easily passes the intent requirement for assault and battery yet apparently it never crossed anyone's mind that this guy should be charged with a crime.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

you can argue it's a double standard. one could also look at the AVERAGE penalty for first time offender, and then look at a three day suspension, which is the equivalent of a $1200 fine, and say maybe it's not so much of a double standard.

if a "civilian" commits assault, eh can't be fined like that. a cop can, through admin procedures

now, in my opinion, this assault is egregious enough (assuming it happened as claimed), that he SHOULD BE (normative argument) criminally charged, assuming it can be proven and assuming that it's in line with that state's penal code for assault

that's my opinion, though.

at a minimum, though, imo assuming these claims are true and can be substantiated, he absolutely should be fired.

[R C Dean]

You're still arguing about the penalty. I'm not. I'm questioning why he wasn't even charged.

And no, you can't equate lost pay (if any; we don't know) with a conviction and fine. Any employer can suspend or fire an employee; its not special and the equivalent of judicial punishment if a police department does it.

And I'll even venture to say that most employers would fire any employee who tasered a ten year old kid for not washing their car.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

im questioning why he wasnt charged ALSO

we agree. again, i don't know what the state penal code is, but assuming it fits and it PROBABLY does

[R C Dean]

Glad we agree that this case demonstrates the double standard that police enjoy the benefit of.

[Rasilio]

See and you are not even going far enough here.

IMO by accepting the position of police officer, a position of considerable authority and prestige which is generally quite well compensated with tax revenues you are accepting to be held to a higher standard than your fellow citizens where it comes to criminal law.

This guy should be facing FAR GREATER pubishment for these actions than a random civilian.

If for example the average first offense for assault on a minor in this state were to be 3 months Probation and a $1000 fine plus payment of any medical bills of the victim then this officer should be looking at a minimum of a $5000 fine and 1 year in jail plus having his police license revoked for a minimum of 5 years.

The fact that police are not held to higher standards than "civilians" is in and of itself a problem because it creates a disconnect between power/authority and responsibility.

[Apatheist ?_??]

you can argue it's a double standard. one could also look at the AVERAGE penalty for first time offender, and then look at a three day suspension, which is the equivalent of a $1200 fine, and say maybe it's not so much of a double standard.

No his punishment from his employer should be different than the punishment he receives from the criminal justice system. Doing otherwise would be a double standard.

[Adam330]

"you can argue it's a double standard. one could also look at the AVERAGE penalty for first time offender, and then look at a three day suspension, which is the equivalent of a $1200 fine, and say maybe it's not so much of a double standard."

Um, no. I'm not a cop, but if I did this, my employer would fire me immediately, no questions asked, no due process, etc. I.e., much less protection than this cop will get. The criminal justice process is entirely separate.

[Auric Demonocles]

You don't have a right to a job, so taking it away isn't a fine. Get it through your dumb cop head that you aren't entitled to a taxpayer job.

Additionally, if I was on company time and I tasered a 10 year old, I would certainly lose more than 3 days wages. Basically anybody at any job who did that would end up fired.

[Stormy Dragon]

The double standard is that he wasn't even charged with assault (technically, I believe this is actually a battery, but state laws can be weird on this)

A lot of states don't have a separate battery charge anymore; the making of the threat and the carrying out of it are just different degrees of assault.

[Lewisite]

Jail? Jail is for little people. This guy will simply cart his ass on down the road to the next town, apply for another cop job, get hired, and....you know...all sins forgiven.

[R C Dean]

i find it unlikely he will keep his job,

We already know he will. He was suspended for three days. The department has already done what they're going to do.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

no, we don't know that. i have seen NUMEROUS cases of initial punishment revisited when different facts came out

ASSUMING the claims made in this article are confirmed, my prediction is he will be fired.

any takers on that bet?

[Episiarch]

I will concede to you, dunphy, that the egregiousness of this event may actually cause him to lose his job after review, so no, I do not care to take a bet I may lose. My comment above was overblown.

Still, the very fact that it's a possibility that he might keep it is still a subject for discussion.

[Art Vandelay]

Was he explicitly instructed to NOT tase 10 yr old boys? No?? Then, he won't lose his job.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

and that's why you are not a troll, epi. intellectual honesty. i respect that. i may disagree with you on occasion 🙂 but i can respect that you are a straight shooter.

cheers

[Harvard]

As I can respect you as a mall cop.

[R C Dean]

The department's initial reaction was a three day suspension, based on the officer's claim that it was negligent.

Will public outcry cause them to revisit this? Perhaps. But left to their own devices, we know exactly what they would do. Because they did it.

Being forced to do something more doesn't exactly refute the claim that there is a double standard at work here.

Is there any possibility at all that, had this been done by a mere subject of the State, it would have been waved off pending a public outcry? I don't think so.

[R C Dean]

Yes, I moved the goalposts a little there. Its possible that the department will do something more here, and that his job isn't entirely safe, I'll give you that.

But my point stands that this is still an example of the double standard. No arrests, no charge, no firings was the default reaction of the police and prosecutors when a cop does this, but would never be their reaction if a mere "citizen" did this.

Buckling to public pressure (if they do) doesn't change that.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

public pressure is very often a factor in noncop cases as well...

[Lewisite]

*cough*trayvonnn*cough*

[rho]

I'll take that bet. Being fired, and then rehired in a closely related department doesn't count, though.

I bet you a dozen Internets.

[Paul.]

If I take the facts of this case at face value, that the officer truly and with no malice in his heart accidentally discharged a taser into the chest of a 10-yr-old, why did he only get a three day suspension?

If I were the police chief, I would consider him unfit for duty and fire him immediately.

[Paul.]

And if the chief couldn't fire him for some kind of union bullshit reason, I would pull a The Wire on his ass and put him on Pawn Shop duty for the rest of his career.

[Restoras]

I'll take it. First offense, accidental discharge, his word against a 10yo. No way he gets fired.

[Death Rock and Skull]

He will get fired, and then he will easily get another job in some bureaucratic agency, small town, or university police department.

[Loki]

This seems like the most likely scenario, unfortunately. He won't be permanently barred from police work until "accidentally" kills someone.

[Dunphy (the real one)]

im many states, if he is fired for various types of misconduct he can never work in that state again.

that;s true in my state
it's a good rule, imo

glad my state has such a rule

[Death Rock and Skull]

Reason has had articles or linked to articles about gypsy cops and gypsy teachers.

[Adam330]

No prediction is required. As of today, he isn't fired and is not in jail or out pending trial. Anyone else who did this would be.

[The Fatman]

I'll take that bet. According to the article this happend in fucking MAY. And this dick-hole is still a fucking tax-feeding pig? And not in jail for his egregious assault on a child. His PD is just waiting for shit to die down and sweep it under the rug. Please take this fuck-wipe into the inferno with you and your progeny.

[tagtann]

Worthless P O S, its scumbag cops liek this I LOVE to hear about in the news gfetting clipped in the line of duty!

http://www.io-anon.tk

[tarran]

Ooooh, anonibot is getting ready to start filling wine bottles with gasoline and rags!

[darius404]

See, this is why I SWEAR it's a real person, and not a bot. WAY too on topic, and an abnormal amount of sarcasm.

[Lewisite]

Skynet/Anonibot (v2.2a1) has become sentient.

[daveInAustin]

What is courthouse news and why does it have so many awful stories that should be covered by MSM, but appear only in courthouse news? Are these stories real?

[Loki]

What is courthouse news and why does it have so many awful stories that should be covered by MSM, but appear only in courthouse news?

In answer to the second part of your question, the reason the MSM doesn't cover these stories is because if they did that might cause some people to start questioning their unyielding subservience to the all mighty state and their agents.

[darius404]

As to the first, their website explains: http://www.courthousenews.com/aboutus.html

An excerpt:

Courthouse News Service is a nationwide news service for lawyers and the news media. Based in Pasadena, California, Courthouse News focuses on civil litigation, from the date of filing through the appellate level. Unlike other Internet-based publishers that simply aggregate information prepared by other content providers, Courthouse News publishes its own original news content prepared by its staff of reporters and editors based across the country.

[R C Dean]

Did this cop, who walked on a criminal assault, "negligently" forget to call an ambulance when the kid he assaulted blacked out?

Three day suspension, no charges. No double standard! Nuh-uh.

[Auric Demonocles]

He told the kid to wake up, but we all know how good that punk is at listening to cops.

[Loki]

I'm surprised he didn't try to wake him up with a little smelling salts pepper spray.

[0x90]

The criminal justice system does not primarily protect us from criminals; as things turn out, it mostly serves to protect them from us. The question is: what to do about it?

[The Late P Brooks]

And if this noble defender of the peace were to be found in a dumpster, his compatriots would, instead of saying, "Fuck him. He deserved it.' don their black armbands and weep and wail and decry the WAAAR ON POLEECE!

[Zeb]

Were there any other cops there? If so, they should be fired too for not arresting him on the spot.

[Paul.]

Salon reports that Webb "claims he accidentally discharged the Taser" and "was given only a three-day suspension."

Higher standards. I'm going to accidentally discharge a taser at a police officer, and I expect to only get a three day suspension.

[Episiarch]

I'm pretty sure the traction unit you'll wind up in will keep you suspended for way more than three days.

[Loki]

"Defendant Webb responded by pointing his Taser at R.D. and saying, 'Let me show you what happens to people who do not listen to the police.'"

Webb then shot "two barbs into R.D.'s chest," the complaint states.

They get a nice big settlement check from the state and the cop gets convicted of assault on a minor and serves several years in prison, in addition to losing his job and his nice plum cop pension.

HA HA HA, just kidding! That's what would happen in a free country. We all know the drill. "Nothing else happened, STOP RESISTING!, RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH!, and of course, FUCK YOU, THAT'S WHY!"

[Dunphy (the real one)]

i;d just like to say that regardless of what DOES happen, this cop at a BARE MINIMUM should be fired. BARE minimum.

the kid's guardian/estate/whatever should get a hefty civil settlement

he should NEVER work as a cop/leo or in any similar type profession again in his life.

if he had only pointed the taser, i'd say a 5 day suspension would be warranted, but if he pointed it AND fired it whether or not he intended it, that is BARE MINIMUM he should be fired. he's a disgrace to law enforcement.

tasers are not a toy, nor are they a way to make a point in a discussion with a fucking 10 yr old. this case REALLY pisses me off

[BakedPenguin]

The settlements won't have an effect until they come directly from police pensions. That would encourage an end to cop omerta regarding crimes by their co-workers.

[Ben P.]

This all happened in May. Dude has since May faced only a three day suspension. Since *MAY*. It is now October 31st. Given the cut-and-dried nature of this, what the hell?

[Virginian]

Do you really not see the double standard?

You talk about first offenses. Except you lead out that most people's first offense is a drug possession charge or a bar fight or shoplifting.

This pig tased a ten year old child. If a civilian had done that he'd be charged with multiple felonies.

Fines and firings are not appropriate punishments for violent crimes.

[Julio Cesar Samper Uribe]

How did that sound in the original German?

[The Late P Brooks]

What are the chances the union will admit his actions were completely indefensible and cut him loose?

Nil.

They'll fight for him tooth and claw. Because they hate the idea of accountability and restrictions imposed by a bunch of lowly civilians.

[califernian]

And nothing else happened!

[Brandybuck]

That's the difference between a government worker and myself. If I had accidentally discharged my tazer into a chest of a child, I would immediately resign. I would never again be able to work as a cop. It's more than the "accident", it's the level of negligence required for the accident to occur in the first place. Nothing could demonstrate to me faster that I was grossly unsuitable to being a cop than to witness this.

[Heroic Mulatto]

You're not a sociopath.

[Mensan]

He won't be fired. This happened 6 months ago, and he already admitted that he negligently fired the Taser at a child. His punishment was a 3-day suspension. There were no criminal charges. This is a civil suit.

[Generic Stranger]

I really think we need a set of police whose sole duty is to investigate other police officers who commit crimes, except unlike Internal Affairs they need to be completely outside the institution. Maybe make it a federal agency, and make Balko its Director. We could call it the Federial Police Investigation Guard Service.

[Heroic Mulatto]

Yeah? But then who watches the watchmen watching the other watchmen?

[Generic Stranger]

No, that's the beautiful part. The police get to investigate the FPIGS members; after all, they're not above the law either. Thus, they spend the majority of their time at war with each other, and they leave the rest of us poor bastards alone.

[Mensan]

F PIGS. I see what you did there, and I applaud it.

[The Bearded Hobbit]

What I find eye-opening about this is that it happened a couple of counties over and I heard NOTHING about it in any of the local news outlets.

... Hobbit

[Troy muy grande boner]

Is anything going to happen to this pig?

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHa.... what a stupid question.

[JohnLocke]

He should go to prison. That sounds like assault to me. When I was 14 I took hunter safety classes and was told the number one rule was never point a weapon at something you don't want to kill. Who trained this clown?

[Byron]

Some other sociopath clowns did.

[JSebastian]

Criminal negligence, quite clearly. There can be no absolution of the "reasonableness" standard , no matter who the offender is. That's under the rule of law of course.

When it comes to a court of equity, this is a 50K case, easy. And that's without even trying hard.

And if the kid had died, then it would be fair play to hunt this dangerous cop down and kill him. But that's under an ancient moral code that modern law sadly refuses to recognize. Weregild was always the prerogative of next of kin (or master, as case might have been). You didn't *have* to offer it, or even accept it , if it were offered unsolicited.

[ricbee]

Sounds like a typical cop to me.