“The taser wasn’t ‘deadly force’. It wasn’t used incorrectly.”
I was referring to the gun you said he would have used with a criminal. If he used it correctly then why was he retrained and why did they pay the other jerk?
“If it had been a ‘real criminal’ and he had a ‘real gun’, then the officer would have been justified in using his own gun. “
Oh so being a ‘criminal’ is not grounds for deadly force. Guess you’re just throwing away all those civil rights.
“If he used it correctly then why was he retrained and why did they pay the other jerk?”
He used the taser correctly.
He was assigned to take a ‘communications’ class, as a result of the case gaining such high publicity.
Officials at UTAH PD reviewed the case, and decided that there might have been some lack of clarity on Mr. Massey’s part, as to what the Officer was asking Mr. Massey to do.
Even a moron knows what “put your hands behind your back means”, but it could be argued that since Officer Gardner did not state “I am taking you in”, “I am placing you under arrest to go post bond”, that Mr. Massey couldn’t figure it out on his own.
(There are parts of the video where Officer Gardner is speaking to Mr. Massey and we can’t hear what is being said due to traffic noise. Officer Gardner may have told Mr. Massey that if he didn’t sign, he was going to take him in.
If so, and when Mr. Massey still refused, Officer Gardner told him to step out of the car. Mere speculation, but if it happened, would that change the attitude of many on this case?)
They paid the other jerk because of the same reason many lawsuits are settled out of court.
It costs less and it’s over.
Not because they are guilty.
How many people pay a defective tail light fine (to get out of a speeding fine), even if they had no defective tail light? (and even if they think they weren’t really speeding)