Police in Schools

Texas High School Student Tased by School Resource Officer/Sheriff's Deputy, Now in Medically-Induced Coma

Family files lawsuit

|

tased by cop
attorney photo

Tasers are meant to be a non-lethal way for police officers to force targets into compliance, but more than 500 deaths have been attributed to Tasers since 2001, largely due to cardiac arrest. At one Texas high school, the use of a Taser by Randy McMillan, a sheriff's deputy/school resource officer, on 17-year-old Noe Niño de Rivera has resulted in the student being put in a medically induced coma. The family has filed a lawsuit against McMillan, the school district, and the county, and alleges Rivera was tased after trying to break up a fight. Via YNN Austin:

The court document says the teenager began to walk backwards with his hands up when McMillan shocked him with the Taser.

Rivera fell to the ground and hit his head on the floor, causing permanent injury to his brain. He was airlifted to a nearby hospital where it was determined he had suffered a severe a brain hemorrhage and was put into a medically-induced coma.

Last week officials with the Bastrop County Sheriff's Office said Rivera was acting aggressive before the Taser was used. They say the two officers ordered the teen to back off, but he ignored their commands, according to a county spokesman, prompting McMillan to use the Taser.

Still, the lawsuit says Rivera "posed no imminent threat of death or serious injury" to McMillan and the deputy was unlawful in his use of force.

The court document also says McMillan used a Taser on another student one year ago, and says the school district and the county sheriff's office failed to discipline him correctly.

The family is seeking a jury trial. About a hundred students walked out of class last week to protest Rivera's tasing. KVUE reports the family's attorney claims to have cellphone video corroborating the family's story, but did not share it with the TV station. The KVUE story also includes one parent voicing support for McMillan. "I find it hard to believe that an officer of that standing would ever do anything that he didn't have to actually do. If you're not there you really can't judge," she said.

McMillan has been moved from the school to patrol duty for the time being.

NEXT: Supreme Court to Review Secret Service Treatment of Protesters

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. KVUE reports the family’s attorney claims to have cellphone video corroborating the family’s story, but did not share it with the TV station.

    I’m sure the student who took the video doesn’t want to be identified for their own safety.

    1. DON’T TASE ME, BRO!

      All HyR laugrioting aside, this sucks.

      “School Resource” officer. Some resource.

      1. The officer went home safely. That’s all that matters.

        1. Always look on the bright side of life

          *whistles the rest*

          1. Life’s a piece of shit
            When you think of it
            So take some time to laugh and dance and sing

            AAAAND….

            Always look on the bright side of death
            Just before you draw your terminal breath

            Thanks for the ear worm, bro

          2. As someday it may happen that a victim must be found,
            I’ve got a little list, I’ve got a little list
            Of society offenders who might well be underground
            And who never would be missed, who never would be missed…

      2. SRO are useless. You don’t get assigned to an office in the local high school because you are the star recruit coming out of the academy.

        1. They just remind me of the “CETA” jackwads we had when I was in high school. Non-lethal recent college grads who needed work, or GDA achievers (interesting contrast there).

          One was a recent college grad lesbian who “worked” with the girls basketball team when she wasn’t diligently patrolling the parking lot. The other was a fat 40-50 dude with a gut that stuck out about 6 inches over his belt who looked like a cartoon.

          We used to run to my buddy’s brown Buick station wagon to escape for lunch, knowing fatty would never catch us, and lesbo didn’t care, cause we were friends with most of the girls on the bball team.

          Other than that, they did nothing.

          I don’t know why we all played the game, cause they also never reported us to the principal, and we never got in trouble.

          That began the formation of my fondness for local positions paid for by state and federal funds from nameless bureacrats. Good times.

          PS At least our useless and/or fat asshole wannabe overlords didn’t have tasers.

          1. brings up the important question of why is school prison and you can’t leave when you want to? It always bugged me. I am my parents problem not theirs. My parents should be the ones that are responsible for me to go to school. shit the nannyism is great in this place now

  2. “I find it hard to believe that an officer of that standing would ever do anything that he didn’t have to actually do. If you’re not there you really can’t judge,” she said.

    These boots were made for licking…

    (I like how the second sentence contradicts the first)

    1. It’s possible she is just that naive.

      Many people assume because they have not had confrontations with cops and wannabecops, that the LEOs are nice people just like themselves.

      1. It’s possible she is just that naive.

        Are we sure they airlifted the right person? If anyone needs a coma induced to treat brain damage, it’s the one still insistent that Officer Do-Right can do no wrong.

        1. hahahahaha.
          The blind allegiance to government and government entities is slowly crumbling, unfortunately morons like that somehow still have a blind belief that authority figures can do no wrong.

          1. you would be surprised…i see no or little change….maybe they don’t trust them…like they know they are bad but continue to say oh well just go alone.

            heard my university prof say some stupid shit like that

    2. I’m guessing she might stick her toe into the judgment waters if it was her precious with a brain injury.

  3. KVUE reports the family’s attorney claims to have cellphone video corroborating the family’s story, but did not share it with the TV station.

    My guess is that he will offer to give it to the county as part of the settlement (if the price is right). ‘Cause, you know, video can be embarrassing.

  4. “I find it hard to believe that an officer of that standing would ever do anything that he didn’t have to actually do. If you’re not there you really can’t judge,” she said.

    Holeeeeeeey shit. Is this woman 12 years old?

    1. “She wasn’t…unresponsive!”, exclaimed Roman Polanski.

      “Oh, wait….never mind…”

  5. Ed, Ed, Ed. What’s the point now of this post? Do you want tazers banned? Because there’s no evidence here of anything. Everyone is welcome to assume this is another Respect My Authoritah gone too far. Whatever. I don’t give a shit, unless there’s real evidence here.

    Some 17 year old was getting physically threatening and the officer chose a tazer rather than to engage? Isn’t that what they’re trained to do? Absence evidence, there’s nothing here other than a story which Ed hopes will eventually be used to further promote Ed’s own anti-cop fetish.

    And FFS, I am not, AM NOT, defending the cop here. I just think this story is completely devoid of evidence and thus becomes a sounding chamber for whatever biases one wants to promote (kids are punks! Damn immigrants! Fucking cop pigs!). And I find that Ed is particularly good and putting these type of fact-free posts on H&R and I find it tiresome.

    1. Does your butt hurt? Cause it sounds like your butt hurts. Especially when Ed’s around.

      Should we schedule a meeting for you and Ed to discuss….whatever it is…that’s….making your butt hurt?

      A meeting? Mmm’kay?

      1. I’m sorry if my feedback offends you.

        No wait, I’m not sorry. Blow me.

        1. *pokes MP repeatedly in the shoulder*

    2. In what way is tazing someone not engaging?

      1. Come on Nikki, it’s not like he killed the kid.

        1. In fairness to MP, you have a he said / he said situation here.

          1. True, but I fond the constant bitching about content/topic/articles that should have been written etc by some to be incredibly irritating.

            1. Yes, that’s right. That’s exactly what one should do when a fault is perceived. Simply STFU and deal with it. Because that’s what we do around here. STFU. Accept FYTW and simply exist.

              1. Could someone please give MP a cookie and a juicebox?

                Anyone?

                1. Maybe the nice police officer could give him a ride home.

              2. Yes, which is exactly why RBS is speaking up about your comment. You should be so proud.

                1. I’d be flattered if I thought it was anything beyond viewpoint suppression to better round out the H&R echo chamber.

          2. You don’t think that using a taser to break up a fistfight is, well, never mind excessive, fucking stupid? Whatever happened to grabbing an unarmed person? Aren’t they supposed to be trained to deal with situations like that?

            The larger truth here, again, is what abject, pussies LEOs have become.

            1. I don’t think we have any fucking clue what really happened here.

              You’re making my point. Idle speculation in the complete absence of evidence.

              But, hypothetically, if a dude who is not obviously armed charges a cop, is your claim that only physical response is warranted, even considering the non-lethal but potentially harmful situation what the officer would be in?

              I’m not advocating tazers. But I’m not sure it’s clear what boundaries your advocating either.

              1. You’re making my point. Idle speculation in the complete absence of evidence.

                Nope. We have certain facts established. There was a fight with teenagers. The kid may or may not have been “acting aggressively,” but we have the goon’s own testimony in that he used the taser because the kid wasn’t complying with orders.

                They say the two officers ordered the teen to back off, but he ignored their commands,

                Whatever they fuck that means. Sounds like contempt of cop.

                I say again: abject pussies.

              2. Using a taser is most definitely a physical response.

                I think that one issue that is relevant here is the overuse of tasers. They should be an alternative to shooting someone or beating them with a nightstick, not an alternative to restraint.

          3. Too bad the cop wasn’t wearing a camera. Then he could be proven to be the upstanding defender of the people that we all know him to be.

            That video from a bystander could be useful.

            I’ll withhold judgment until we have more facts.

            1. I’ll withhold judgment until we have more facts.

              I won’t. I’ll go with “The cop is lying through his lying, fucking teeth” for $1000, Alex.

              When I’m wrong, I’ll cop to it and eat my words, but that will be the exception. The odds don’t favor the house here.

      2. I meant physically engaging via grabbing/tackling/punching/etc.

        1. Okay, well, I’d say then that a significant point of the article is that using a tazer is physically engaging someone in a very dangerous manner, and less-lethal does not mean nonlethal.

          1. So then what? Ban tazers? Re-work police training to re-define their use as “life or death” only? What exactly?

            That’s my question. What is Ed proposing? Because he’s not. He’s simply bitching, and AFAICT, it’s just because shit went down and a cop was involved.

            1. What is Ed proposing?

              He’s reporting a story. Why does he have to propose anything?

              1. Because this isn’t some goddamned general news site. Anything posted on H&R should be used to either advance or contribute to a particular discussion.

                This does neither. It’s a story that presents no evidence of general police abuse and makes no claim that existing taser usage protocols in regards to officer safety were abused in this case.

                1. Maybe you should be running things, then.

                  It’s a story that presents no evidence of general police abuse

                  A 17-year old kid is in a coma from some baboon recklessly using one of his non-lethal toys. Sounds liek abuse to me.

                  Sounds very similar to the story from last year where a handcuffed, drunken girl was running away from your typical endomorphic cop. Instead of doing what any normal person would do, run after her and grab her, he just tased her,from about 6 feet away. She fell flat on her face and is still in a coma.

                2. Anything posted on H&R should be used to either advance or contribute to a particular discussion.

                  So sayeth Editor-In-Chief MP. Well, I, Supreme-Overlord-Editor-In-Chief, say otherwise. So there.

            2. So then what? Ban tazers? Re-work police training to re-define their use as “life or death” only? What exactly?

              Sure. And to do that, educate people so they know that tazers are not fucking safe, so that we can go back to a period where they were supposed to be used only when you would already have been justified using a gun.

              Ed’s not bitching. He’s teaching people that when a cop tazes you, you can end up in a fucking coma.

              1. He’s teaching people that when a cop tazes you, you can end up in a fucking coma.

                And when he punches you in the face and you fall down and hit your head you can end up in a fucking coma.

                So all we’ve learned is that various non-lethal responses to a violent situation can end badly for someone.

                Which is pretty fucking obvious.

                1. And when he punches you in the face

                  Which.
                  Never.
                  Fucking.
                  Happened.

                  1. I think the point is that the injury was an indirect result of the tazer and a direct result of the teenager’s head hitting the pavement, which could conceivably happen from getting punched or tackled or non-fatally shot or slipping on a patch of ice.

                    I’m not defending the use of the tazer, just acknowledging that it’s unrealistic to expect the police to gently cuddle people into submission.

    3. Because there’s no evidence here of anything.

      KVUE reports the family’s attorney claims to have cellphone video corroborating the family’s story

      We’ll see.

    4. So there is “no evidence here of anything”, yet you know that “some 17 year old was getting physically threatening”?

    5. I just think this story is completely devoid of evidence

      Then your issue is with the TV station.

  6. If there are cops around don’t get involved.

    1. Truant! Truant! Truant, they’all say!

  7. Tasers are meant to be a non-lethal way for police officers to force targets into compliance

    This is completely wrong, or it should be, or once was. Or something.

    IIRC, tasers were originally meant to be used as a non-lethal tool for police to use to defend themselves or others specifically in lieu of firing a gun — in a event where police would be justified in using lethal force, but circumstances allowed, they could use a taser instead.

    The *current practice* is to use tasers as pain compliance and extra-judicial punishment devices, which is not how they were originally introduced and justified to the public. If their use were limited to only circumstances where the police would have been justified using lethal force, there’d be a lot less tasering.

    1. The ‘ol bait ‘n switcheroo!

    2. Yerp, of interest here are the product warnings — from Taser — directed to LEOs: “Can cause death or serious injury”

      http://www.taser.com/product-warnings

  8. The court document says the teenager began to walk backwards with his hands up when McMillan shocked him with the Taser.

    Rivera fell to the ground and hit his head on the floor, causing permanent injury to his brain. He was airlifted to a nearby hospital where it was determined he had suffered a severe a brain hemorrhage and was put into a medically-induced coma.

    It shouldn’t matter if the kid was being hostile earlier, at this point he was disengaging. Apparently it’s absurd to hold cops to higher standards of judgment, even though you’d think that would come with the authority and public trust that is given to them.

    1. What do you mean higher standards? I’d settle for equal standards. Don’t you think a peasant would have been immediately charged with a crime for shooting someone who was backing away with their hands in the air?

    2. the point is that there is a different version of events offered. I think you’re assuming the argument by choosing to believe one set of facts rather than another.

      1. When cops stop adopting Obama admin standards of honesty, when the video evidence stops contradicting their story almost every time, when police chiefs and “internal investigations” find no wrongdoing when there clearly was, when police unions stop litigating to get obvious violent scumbags reinstated, I’ll start taking their side.

  9. Via the reason fb page:

    This is EXACTLY why intelligent people don’t buy the idea that if there were more “good guys with guns” in schools, every problem would be solved.

    1. every problem would be solved.

      It’s easy to take down arguments that no one makes.

    2. Police officer good guy

      1. I hate sites that think you are using HTML.

        Police officer does not necessarily equate to “good guy”

  10. I find it interesting that this guy isn’t safe to have roaming the halls of the high school, so they turn him loose on the streets of the city.

    1. You have to prove yourself worthy of promotion.

  11. McMillan has been moved from the school to patrol duty for the time being.

    Officer accused of excess force? Put him on patrol duty!

  12. The court document says the teenager began to walk backwards with his hands up when McMillan shocked him with the Taser.

    Rivera fell to the ground and hit his head on the floor, causing permanent injury to his brain. He was airlifted to a nearby hospital where it was determined he had suffered a severe a brain hemorrhage and was put into a medically-induced coma.

    Ugh.

    Last week officials with the Bastrop County Sheriff’s Office said Rivera was acting aggressive before the Taser was used. They say the two officers ordered the teen to back off, but he ignored their commands, according to a county spokesman, prompting McMillan to use the Taser.

    Wait, what?

    The court document says the teenager began to walk backwards with his hands up when McMillan shocked him with the Taser.

    WHAT???

    1. So, he was tazed because he ignored their commands to back off, AND was tazed WHILE IN THE ACT OF BACKING AWAY???

    2. The court document is from the law suit, the one filed by the kid’s family. That’s why it’s different.

      1. Just because the parents allege it doesn’t mean it is true anymore than what the cops say is true. I will withhold my outrage until someone not involved with the law suit and who has actual knowledge of what happened tells me the cops were in the wrong or until a jury finds that the cops were wrong. As it is, who knows what happened.

        1. I didn’t say that made it true John. I was simply letting Brian know why the accounts contradicted each other. He seemed to think they were both from the police version.

      2. Ah, okay. My mistake.

  13. I should have become a cop. It’s apparent that you can do whatever the hell you want with no repercussions, and severe allegations simply result in a paid vacation or department change.

    1. You would think that patents of nobility weren’t forbidden by the Constitution or something…

  14. “The officer acted in line with his training and used non-lethal force. It is unfortunate that the suspect required tazering and of course we wish him luck with that coma thing”

    – Joint statement issued by the Chief and the Fraternal Order of the Po-Po

    “Is it any coincidence that the pohleese was a white pacific islander and that the student was of African-Eskimo decent? Some people, including the Holy Reverends Sharpton and Jackson say not”

    – NBC News at 9

  15. I have to go with MP above on this one. This paragraph is too damn vague.

    Last week officials with the Bastrop County Sheriff’s Office said Rivera was acting aggressive before the Taser was used. They say the two officers ordered the teen to back off, but he ignored their commands, according to a county spokesman, prompting McMillan to use the Taser.

    What exactly was the kid doing? Without knowing that beyond “acting aggressively” you can’t judge this case. It is possible that the kid really was an asshole who decided to pick a fight with a cop and the cop was in the right here. I can’t tell from the post. I don’t like cops any better than anyone else on here. But I am not going to let my dislike of cops blind me to the reality that a lot of 17 year old kids are violent morons who often leave adults around them no choice but to give them the ass kicking they richly deserve.

    This is a totally fact free post that just allows anyone reading it to project their biases onto the case. Reason is not served by doing this kind of shit.

    1. John the problem here is even if the kid was being an asshole it rarely justifies this level of force.

      I imagine cops have some form of combat training that would enable them to put down a 17 year old without resorting to zapping them.

      1. John the problem here is even if the kid was being an asshole it rarely justifies this level of force.

        This is the the very clear point that MP is continuing to completely miss.

        1. And the point you are missing is that 17 is not 8. He wasn’t a kid. He is, as far as I am concerned an adult and fully capable of being a physical threat.

          Fuck this bastardization of the term “kid”. If he were on trial for screwing his 15 year old girlfriend everyone on here would rightfully be calling him an adult free to do what he wants. Lets not change the standard here and start pretending he is not an adult.

          1. I can tell you that when The Boy reaches 17, he’ll still be a kid. And if he were screwing a 15 year old girlfriend, I’d be calling him a stupid kid (for getting caught).

            In no way does anything here make him an adult, not legally, not societal.

            1. I disagree. He is certainly old enough to create a physical threat and he is old enough to get his ass kicked as a result. The cop may have been right here. You just can’t tell. That is all I am saying.

              You guys are acting like the student was 8 and there is no conceivable way the cop was right. And that is just not true.

              1. You guys are acting like the student was 8 and there is no conceivable way the cop was right.

                How about young man? Is that better? Show me where I have implied that he was a little kid.

                The cop may have been right here. You just can’t tell.

                Yes, you can. The best they have is that he was “acting aggressively.” Define that for me, please. was he threatening them of just being macho? Was he making threats or just yelling insults? Or, you know, maybe they’re just lying.

                Have you not been here for the past few years and read the outright bullshit lies that cops have spun to cover their asses when they’ve been nothing more than brutish goons? Sorry, but cops lost my benefit of the doubt a long time ago.

                1. Yes, you can. The best they have is that he was “acting aggressively.” Define that for me,

                  I can’t. that is the whole point and why this is a fact free and stupid post.

                  1. Bullshit. It don’t think it really matters how old he is, tazers shouldn’t be used simply to “gain compliance”. Tazers should be used the way they were intended: as an alternative to greater force. There was absolutely no need to use a tazer in this instance, they just thought it was easier for them than grappling with him.

                2. The best they have is that he was “acting aggressively.”

                  Exactly right. The weasel words give it away; if they could factually use stronger words they would have.

        2. And the point you continue to miss is that preventing a physical conflict is generally considered a legitimate use of non-lethal force.

          You can argue that some non-lethal force mechanisms are too dangerous to be considered “non-lethal”, but that’s no the argument being made here.

          Either get rid of tasers or define their boundaries. But don’t bitch when you don’t know the facts and simply wish to project that your loosely defined boundaries were crossed.

          1. Either get rid of tasers or define their boundaries

            I already have, several times, in this situation. Feel free to actually read what I write.

            1. but we have the goon’s own testimony in that he used the taser because the kid wasn’t complying with orders

              When cops stop adopting Obama admin standards of honesty

              A 17-year old kid is in a coma from some baboon recklessly using one of his non-lethal toys. Sounds liek abuse to me.

              Holy shit! You’re right! The rationality of your arguments is simply undeniable! How could I have missed it!

              1. So you can read. Now, let’s work on those reasoning skills.

                1. Ooooo….more ad hominem…how delicious!

          2. But we know that tasers can cause death or great bodily harm. We also know that they were supposed to have tasers as a non-lethal way to stop someone they otherwise would have had the right to shoot.

            If they didn’t feel they were in so much danger they needed to actually shot this “kid”, then they should have tried to subdue him in another fashion that wouldn’t have led to him being in a coma.

            1. Because he assumed the tazer wouldn’t put the person into a coma, that is why. It was a very tough break for the guy. He just as easily could have tried to subdue him physically and ended up hitting the guy’s head against the floor. Physical confrontations are never without risk.

              And if the student started the confrontation, its too bad it ended this way. But I don’t necessarily blame the cop without further information.

              1. You’re so full of shit John. Wrestling someone to the ground is nowhere near as likely to result in something like this, someone without any ability to control their body is much more likely to crack their skull.

              2. If he assumed that, then the cop is an abject retard and shouldn’t be working a beat anyway.

                It’s not like this is a brand new thing, there’s been plenty of stories on the news about someone getting tased and cracking their skull open.

                Now maybe the situation actually warranted lethal or semi-lethal force and I agree that not knowing all the facts it’s hard to say. But if my time here has taught me anything it’s to never trust 5-0.

      2. Rarely but not never? I am not prepared to say that no 17 year old ever could justify this level of force. He was an adult as far as I am concerned. If this had been an 8 year old, i would agree. No 8 year old ever creates a threat that warrants using a tazer. But a fully grown 17 year old man? Damn right they could. I wouldn’t even go with never. I would go with quite frequently.

        Maybe the cop is wrong here. But I don’t see anything in this post that proves that or shows anything beyond he said she said.

        1. John, don’t you think that if the kid was truly presenting a danger to either the cops or someone else, that the cops would have said so? All we get is “acting aggressively” and a failure to comply with orders…ZAP.

          Their story is filled with weasel words. IOW, they have jack and shit to back their version up.

          1. Again, what does that mean? Maybe he was telling them he was going to kick their ass and standing two inches from their face screaming. If that is the case, I don’t blame the cop at all for tazing him.

            You just can’t tell. Was the cop probably wrong here? If I had to bet I would bet he was. But I am not going to get outraged until I know more than what is presented in this post. It is a sloppy and generally worthless post.

            1. If that is the case, I don’t blame the cop at all for tazing him.

              I do. Tasers weren’t intended for subduing unruly individuals. As Nikki points out, they were intended to be used *in place of guns.* Are you suggesting they should have shot him? Was pepper spray not better for this situaiton? It was a fight in a hallway between 2 girls, for fucks’ sake. He was a bystander.

              Now, tasers just another shiny toy for these giant, flinching pussies to use on mouthy people.

              1. Really, so if I go up to you and get in your face and start screaming I am going to kick your ass, you are just supposed to take it? You are supposed to pretend I don’t mean it and wait for me to bust your head in before doing something? More importantly, if you do act in fear and use your tazer, I am some kind of a victim?

                Bullshit. If this guy was minding his own business, I am all for sending this cop to jail for a long time. But if he started the confrontation and really was physically threatening the cop, I have no sympathy for him. Life sucks and it sucks even worse when you are stupid. It is not like the cop shot him.

                1. Really, so if I go up to you and get in your face and start screaming I am going to kick your ass, you are just supposed to take it?

                  I’d even give the cop leeway to shove the kid away and use a baton if he came back.

                  You are supposed to pretend I don’t mean it and wait for me to bust your head in before doing something?

                  Is that what happened here? There is zero evidence that it was and an allegation that it was the exact opposite.

                  But if he started the confrontation and really was physically threatening the cop, I have no sympathy for him.

                  Did he start the confrontation or was it the normal cop-makes-things-worse situation? I’ve witnessed and experienced that myself. What if he was 8 feet away? The what? Why do you presume that he was inside personal space?

                2. That’s going to depend a lot on the circumstances. If we are in a public place with other people around and you start doing that, the first thing I should do is back away and try to disengage. If you persist in being aggressive and threatening, and I have no reasonable means to go away, then maybe I’ll use force. And I’d expect no less from the cops.

                  1. There is no assertion that the cop reasonably believed that his life was threatened or that he was about to face great bodily harm.

      3. Much more fun to hit the kid multiple times with a cattle prod, which is what a TASER is when you get right down to it.

        This is what happens when your selection criteria for law enforcement is weighed heavily towards sociopaths.

    2. The court document says the teenager began to walk backwards with his hands up when McMillan shocked him with the Taser.

      I don’t know what happened either, but if this is true than I have a problem with the Taser being used.

      Maybe he was mouthing off to the cop, but walking backwards with your hands up is non-threatening.

      1. If that is true, sure. But that is not what the cops say happened. Maybe the cops are lying, but maybe the parents are their lawyers are lying too. Maybe both of them are lying. I can’t tell.

  16. MP does have a point – it is far from clear who, if anyone, is really at fault in this incident.

    1. No, he does not have a point.

      Upon what basis can one justify the cop employing a taser when we have had so many deaths and long term injuries associated with the use of tasers?

      Note, the use of a taser can be lethal; put another way, the only time it should be used is in a case of self defense.

      Did the cop claim that he had a reasonable fear that his life was being threatened or that he was about to be subject to great bodily harm?

      1. Did the cop claim that he had a reasonable fear that his life was being threatened or that he was about to be subject to great bodily harm

        “great” is relative. And as there are no particulars reported from the cop’s perspective there is no basis for any passing of judgment here.

        Except for those pre-disposed to find the cop guilty.

        1. What is the evidence that the cop feared, reasonably, for his life?

          The most important FACT is that the KID WAS TAZED!

          There is no right to use lethal force against any person, any time, unless the other person has used life threatening force against you or you reasonably believe that you are being threatened with great bodily harm.

          What evidence do you have in support of the cop using the tazer?

          NONE.

          1. What evidence do I need? I’m neither arguing that the cop was justified or not.

            You’re the one who said I don’t have a point. Which means you’ve decided that you have sufficient information to come to a decision on justification.

            What information you have…I have no idea. Because there’s none in this post.

            1. The information I have is:

              (1) The kid was tazed

              (2) There is no evidence that the kid threatened the cop’s life

              (3) There is no evidence that the cop feared that he was about to be subject to a beat down

              (4) The cop used a weapon which has resulted in both (i) death and (ii) great bodily harm to many

              Yes, you are not arguing that the cop was justified – I am not ignoring that point.

              Where we disagree is you think that there is no evidence to get on the cop whereas I think that there is some res ipsa loquitur here.

  17. It’s the gubmint’s version of the knockout game!

    1. I lol’d.

      Is that sick of me?

  18. This is so funny.

    Why do cops carry tazers? Does anyone even remember? I saw a comment that they were supposed to use them in lieu of a gun, but that’s really not it. The tazer thing started in response to cops taking down suspects with too much force–often with the nightstick. Some people died, and the cry went up to DO SOMETHING.

    And tazers were part of the solution, along with mace, beanbag rounds and rubber bullets–all part of using non-lethal force.

    And, for the most part, the cops said fine. They leapt to it.

    One could be optimistic and point out that the fatal takedowns were(mostly) accidents and the cops welcomed the opportunity the non-lethal avenues provided, or one could look at cops and think that they just wanted the expanded arsenal.

    Either way, they went for it, easily, without the need for activists to activate. Which put the activists in the lurch.

    Until they discovered that these non-lethal weapons could, in some cases, be lethal.

    So they geared up and protested the exact things they had just recently demanded the police carry.

    It’s just like the penalties for rock over powder cocaine–how many remember that the same people protesting the unequal sentencing are the people who called for that unequal sentencing when crack was tearing up the hood?

    I don’t know what happened here. There’s far too little information provided. But I’m pretty sure that the cop used the tazer because he thought it’d be non-lethal.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.