I don’t see any such checks to abuse of power in the model of policing that you propose. Are we subjects now, to what is essentially rule by whatever violence the government should choose to mete out?
If you were the subject of an abuse of power by an officer of the law or other agent of the government, what checks to such abuse would you want and/or expect to be in place to deter those abuses, protect you from them, and/or compensate you for damage done by them?
This question is not only generally relevant to the topic, but also specifically relevant to the jurisdiction, which has a reputation for excessive taser use, and this specific officer as well.
I’m not sure that I’ve proposed a model of policing. If anything, prior to 1985 there was actually less of a check on police power in this sort of situation. The common law that went back to our founding and even earlier held that police could kill any fleeing felon. (OTOH, there were fewer offenses that were considered felonies, but assaulting a police officer and taking his weapon surely would have been one of them.)
Policing is inherently a slippery slope with limits that are difficult to formalize. The quality of policing is fundamentally a function of culture rather than of formal limits. A healthy culture can place few such limits on its police yet still have civilized policing that respects the citizenry.
Murder suspect Robert Durst wants police to give back the $161,000 'life on the run' money seized during arrest
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3042789/Durst-wants-money-police-161K.html
Geez! They stole it at gunpoint, fair & square! What a whiner!
Besides, Durst might have Done Bad Stuff, so the stealing is All Good.
Wonder if that's why Slager pulled over Walter Scott's Mercedes? Because he thought he might rack in some revenue or a car for the local "Policing For Profit" drive?