Legal News

Don?t Tase Me, Bro, Or You?re Violating My Rights

By Amir Efrati

Since bursting onto the scene as an alternative weapon for law enforcement, the Taser stun gun has caused heaps of controversy, and the occasional viral YouTube video, including this cringe-worthy footage from a university town-hall forum with Sen. John Kerry.

Now, an electrifying new decision by a U.S. appellate court could open the door to lawsuits against police officers who wantonly use their Taser on John Q. Public.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday agreed with a lower court ruling that an officer from the Coronado, Calif., Police Department wasn’t immune to a damages lawsuit filed by a civilian after a Taser encounter in 2005. In fact, the court ruled, the officer violated the civilian’s constitutional right “to be free from excessive force.”

Click here for the opinion, and here are stories from the San Jose Mercury News and the SF Chronicle.

The 3-0 ruling apparently is the first of its kind to set out standards for when Tasers can be used, the Mercury said.

“The objective facts must indicate that the suspect poses an immediate threat to the officer or a member of the public,” Judge Kim Wardlaw wrote.

Here’s the Bryan v Brian backstory: Carl Bryan’s car was stopped by officer Brian McPherson in 2005 as the 21-year-old was driving home, the Chronicle writes. Wearing only boxer shorts and tennis shoes, and upset at himself for forgetting to fasten his seat belt, Bryan swore at himself as he stepped out of the car, and was shouting gibberish and banging his thighs as he stood 15 to 25 feet away from the officer, the court said.

Bryan was unarmed and did not challenge McPherson verbally or make any menacing gestures, Judge Wardlaw wrote. The court also said the evidence indicated that Bryan was facing away from McPherson when the officer fired his Taser.

The result: Bryan fell on his face, breaking four front teeth, and needed a hospital visit to remove the electronic dart. He was charged with misdemeanors of resisting and opposing an officer, but prosecutors dropped the charges after a jury deadlocked.

Bryan sued the city, police department and McPhearson. A trial judge dismissed all but the McPhearson part of the suit. Monday’s 9th Circuit ruling says a jury should decide whether the officer had used too much force to subdue someone who was not threatening him.

“While Bryan’s behavior created something of an unusual situation…this does not, by itself, justify the use of significant force,” Wardlaw wrote.

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on December 30, 2009 (boomark / email).