Posted on 11/22/2007 7:37:13 AM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
Was a Utah Highway Patrol trooper acting within policy when he used a Taser on a driver who refused to sign a traffic ticket?
That is the question UHP internal investigators hope to answer after Trooper John Gardner - a 14-year UHP veteran - zapped Vernal resident Jared Massey with the device for refusing to sign a speeding ticket or submit to being arrested during a traffic stop about 10 a.m. on Sept. 14.
The incident placed UHP on the defensive when the officer's dashboard video of the emotional confrontation found its way onto Internet site YouTube.
"We are doing an internal investigation to see if the trooper's actions were warranted," said Trooper Cameron Roden, a UHP spokesman. That investigation is expected to be completed this week or sometime next week.
The 10-minute video begins as the officer passes a sign clearly showing a speed limit of 40 mph on U.S. 40 in Uintah County.
Gardner - who remained on active duty as of Wednesday - then proceeds to pull over Massey's Dodge SUV.
The trooper approaches the driver's side window and twice asks for Massey's driver's license and registration. The second time, the trooper is audibly frustrated, saying, "Driver's license and registration, like now."
"How fast did you think you were going?" the officer asks.
"I was going 68," Massey could be heard saying.
"OK, there's a sign right there that says 40 miles per hour," the officer says, shortly before returning to his squad car.
When Gardner returns to the SUV with the traffic ticket, Massey refuses to sign the citation, insisting that Gardner show him the 40 mph sign.
"Well, you are going to sign this first," Gardner said.
After refusing, Gardner asks Massey to exit the SUV, which at 2:23 minutes into the video, he does.
The pair walk to the front of the officer's car, where Gardner points his Taser at Massey, ordering him to place his hands behind his back.
''What the hell's wrong with you?'' Massey asks, while turning and beginning to walk back to the SUV. Gardner tells the driver to turn around, but he refuses and continues walking away.
The officer aims the Taser, and at 2:37 minutes into the video, fires it into Massey, who falls backward onto the pavement and can be heard screaming. Massey's wife then comes out of the SUV screaming and is ordered back inside the vehicle by Gardner.
''Ma'am, do exactly as I say or you're going to jail, too,'' the officer says.
After the incident, off camera Massey can be heard repeatedly asking to be read his Miranda rights, but it remains unclear from the video, which cuts in and out, whether the officer complied with that demand.
Roden said he was unaware whether the man was given his Miranda rights, but noted Massey could have been read them when booked into the Uintah County jail.
In the video, Gardner repeatedly states he tasered Massey because the man failed to comply with his instructions and demands.
A short time later, an unidentified officer strolls up on scene and Gardner tells him that Massey "took a ride with the Taser."
Gardner then states that Massey was "jumping around, making me nervous as hell. I was like, nah, we ain't playing this game."
"Good. Good for you," the unidentified officer says.
Massey, who was not available for comment on Wednesday, is scheduled to stand trial for the speeding ticket Jan. 14 in Uintah County Justice Court.
When drivers sign traffic tickets, they are not necessarily admitting guilt but merely acknowledging they will show up at court or to pay the ticket, Roden said.
In the event that a motorist refuses to sign, a trooper can simply write "refuses to sign" on the citation, which is then given to the driver, or they can chose to arrest the motorist, Roden said.
"I can't speculate to this incident what was going through officer's mind," Roden said. "The officer has to weigh a lot of different things."
Troopers that carry Tasers must take a four-hour certification course outlining how and when to use the devices, according to UHP's nine-page policy. They are taught to use them in three circumstances:
* When a person is a threat to themselves, an officer or another person.
* In cases where the physical use of force would endanger the person or someone else.
* When other means of lesser or equal force by the officer has been ineffective and a threat still exists.
"There's a lot that goes into it," Roden said.
UHP requires an officer file a report any time a Taser is used, noting, among other things, how many warnings the subject was given and where the electric probes hit on a person's body.
Officials are then required to get the person arrested checked by medics. Massey was later taken to Uintah Basin Medical Center in Roosevelt, Roden said.
ngonzalez@sltrib.com
Don’t you think that could be accomplished by getting it released to him by the Highway Patrol, as it was, and handing it over to his lawyer? Going public with it has some purpose other than simply preserving it.
FIRST: A big THANK YOU for finding and posting the relevant section of Utah Civil code applying to the situation in question. My hat is always off to someone who is willing to support their side of a debate with ‘facts’.
Now. I think the following part of the code applies in this situation. The court will judge if that is true or not.
Such notice shall not be required when:
(a) there is reason to believe the notice will endanger the life or safety of the officer or another person or will likely enable the party being arrested to escape;
JUST WHAT DID THE DRIVER WANT TO ARGUE ABOUT?
Now I never heard that the from the dirver he was doing 68 mph what I heard is he keep asking the officer how fast was I going?
I will listen again this will be the 3rd time!
Boy listening to you one need to wear hip booths!
Let’s put it this way the driver seemed immature but not indifferent!
The officer should have explained to him by signing only mean you will appear in court and has nothing to do with pleading.
I would feel justified if the ego manic officer too was also taser in the back
boots
...........ummmmmmmmmmmmmm...............hhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....
“This is just a hothead cop”
And not just an ‘inexperienced’ young man who risked his own life, the life of his wife, the lives of construction workers and the life of the officer by refusing to cooperate or listen to the officer, refusing to sign a simple speeding ticket, and who now is trying to use the VIDEO on YOUTUBE (after being EDITED) to get out of the ticket?
Just answer one question. Why, after admitting he was doing 68mph, and was asked to sign the citation, would be refuse?
I don't see one that would apply. Which do you think could?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Such notice shall not be required when: (a) there is reason to believe the notice will endanger the life or safety of the officer or another person or will likely enable the party being arrested to escape;
I don't follow. How would announcing "You're under arrest" in any way "endanger the life or safety of the officer or another person"? And heaven's to Betsy, surely you don't think that in the time it would have taken to say "You're under arrest" he would have escaped? It wasn't a foot chase.
Same one UCANSEE2 spotted: a).
I see your point. But I think you are missing the point.
When you are pulled over by an officer of the law, you are technically UNDER ARREST.
The officer explained that the speed limit was 40 and the driver admitted to doing 68. The officer wrote up the citation and asked the driver to sign it. He refused.
The driver was asked to get out of the vehicle.
The officer pulled out the taser and told the driver to turn around and put his hands behind his back.
The driver’s question “what did I do?” had already been answered. He was speeding, given a ticket, and refused to sign it, and then thought what ????? That there would be no repercussion for refusal to sign???
The driver stated something like “show me the sign”. The officer does not have to show him anything. If you want to argue technicalities, you do that in court.
Now, if you could prove that the driver was actually an alien from outer space, I might buy that he didn’t know he was being put ‘under arrest’ and into handcuffs, and would be hauled to the police station for refusing to sign.
Otherwise, we just have a person who thought he could wiggle out of it, or was such a bad driver that he didn’t NOTICE all the construction signs and guard rails and the speed limit sign. Pretty hard NOT to NOTICE construction work on the highway. It was however, evident on the video.
FROM THE ARTICLE written by Nathan Gonzalez.
“I was going 68,” Massey could be heard saying.
Thank you as I listen again just after all that loud traffic noise I heard him say it after the officer said how fast do you think you were going?
This is not true at all. When you are pulled over, you are under an "investigatory detention" that has not yet turned into an arrest.
I think the cop should also be found of assaulting the pregnant wife.
There was NO need for the cop to open her door and attempt to intimidate her. This was evidently done to inflame the husband.
The cop should be in prison for multiple assault and battery charges. The badge should be recycled. The police uniform should be exchanged for an orange jump suit.
This is not NAZI Germany.
Contrary to some posters’ desires.
So someone filling out a questionaire which asks about prior arrests - and who has been pulled over sometime in the past - should answer “yes”?
Normally those questionnaires make exceptions for traffic tickets and they are covered in another block of the form.
Your post 102 is similar to other States codes for custodial arrest. The way it is implemented by departments may vary, but it allows for issuing preparatory commands for officer safety, such as, “Turn around and put your hands behind your back.” then applying the cuffs, and saying “You’re under arrest for _______.”
You're armed.
At what point do you put a stop to the torture of your wife?
Do you think the cop should have just written "refuses to sign" on the ticket and moved along or otherwise defused the situation as he could have or was he reasonable in aggressively asserting his authority?
No problem
The side of the road is not the place to argue a ticket-the court is.
Sometimes the Key Board Commandoes get themselves into a big lather over these things. They base everything off emotional reaction to their perception of the impending police state brought about by the JBT’s of LE, instead of logic, observation and knowledge.
Occaissonally I post something to try and pierce the fog, but normally let it go. Their minds are made up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.