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
Good post.
It occurred to me as well, and I have been privately laughing about it.
Those ‘supporters’ of Massey have found just as many ‘excuses’ as Massey tried to use on the officer during the videotape.
Notice that they won’t answer any questions posed to them.
But they expect (demand) you to answer theirs.
It is the kind of behavior tactic used by children when being disciplined by parents.
“Why did you so ..such and such...”
“Johnny’s mom let’s him do it!”
“I resort to posting the laws of Utah and analysis of the information given.”
It said that basically that if the driver refuses to sign, that the officer is not forced to take the person to jail.
But the officer does have the OPTION to place the person under arrest and take them to jail, based on their behavior.
“Pretty cut and dry to me. Bad cop.”
The question I have is, was that your opinion before or after you watched the video?
While he did those things, he wasn't tazered until he asked the officer, for the second time, "what is wrong with you?".
The first thing I saw was the video. I read the numerous articles and then poked around the laws and watched the interviews.
The other law I posted was the law regarding arrest. The officer never said he was being placed under arrest, under what authority, under what law. He also failed to follow the state guidelines for taser use in Utah from what I have seen on other sites but I haven’t had time to find those and research them. I am sure some of it is subjective so the investigation needs to play out. The rest is my formulated opinion on what will happen based on what I see, hear, and read and of course one must consider the negative exposure to the state of Utah and the State police there in general.
He made a decision to arrest for failure to sign the ticket from what I can gather and that is a judgement call. A poor one considering the violation and the circumstances.
here’s a thought: don’t speed and obey the signs.
Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to explain how you approached this thread and came to your conclusions.
“The officer never said he was being placed under arrest, under what authority, under what law. “
First, I don’t believe that they have to do so, at least until they have made sure you are restrained and the situation is under control.
“I am sure some of it is subjective so the investigation needs to play out. The rest is my formulated opinion on what will happen based on what I see, hear, and read”
Well, we agree on that point 100%.
“He made a decision to arrest for failure to sign the ticket from what I can gather and that is a judgement call.”
Again, We AGREE!
And I guess that has been the bottom line on the great division between the sides in this debate.
I do think the driver was going to get in his vehicle and drive off. He seemed to have made up his mind that he was not going to TAKE THE TICKET, no matter what it took. (My opinion) He gave that “I don’t have to listen to you” look and started towards his vehicle.
I think the officer thought the same thing.
However, none of that matters.
We each have our own, and varied opinions, and we will just have to see how it plays out in court.
~(: )
“While he did those things, he wasn’t tazered until he asked the officer, for the second time, “what is wrong with you?”.
So, if this is true, then the officer gave him plenty of time to turn around and place his hands behind his back. Instead he started to walk towards his vehicle as if he was going to flee the scene.
Right?
DEMAND others answer your questions, but never, ever answer theirs. Kinda like Hillary Clinton. It tells me they have ‘an agenda’.
Do you?
Wow... you're feeling a little differently today, eh? Yesterday, you complimented me for "debating this issue intelligently"... today, you tell me I'm like Hillary Clinton?? Now.. THAT is an INSULT!
I've been on FR for quite awhile too... 9 years. I have no agenda. Just discuss a few things here and there that interest me.
I directly answered about 6 things from one of your post yesterday. I've only ask you ONE question:
Was it really necessary to arrest this guy?
I notice, that you are still dodging this question.... I don't blame you.. cause, it's a tough one for your side.
LOL... no, I'm not the guy I previously called a "sassy-mouthed sissy man". And, I'm not Hillary Clinton either.
I have been critical of Mr. Massey's actions.. he is not without blame in this incident. But, it is clear to me that it was Trooper Garnder's poor decisions and lack of professionalism that caused this incident to blow up and get to the point where a taser was used.
I've watched this stupid video at LEAST 20 times now. I have never viewed it with a "closed mind"... I've also shown it to MANY of my friends now.. including my police detective neighbor (who has also shown several co-workers) Frankly, I've yet to find anyone here who disagrees about the problem in this case.
We really don't know ALL of the facts in this case.... none of us know whether there really was another speed sign earlier.... we don't know whether Massey was clocked over the limit... we don't know everything that was said in the car...
From what we can see and hear, it appears to me that Massey REALLY believed he had done nothing wrong, and was trying desperately (and, ineffectively) to plead his case.
I believe Massey was SHOCKED (pardon the pun) when Gardner started yelling and pointing a gun (taser) at him. I think he was scared sh*tless. Gardner was acting like a maniac, and it was shocking to a guy who is not used this kind of situation, and is simply engaged in conversation. I don't believe Gardner was planning on fleeing the scene.. I think he was just scared, confused, and not sure WHAT to do.
You say Massey was going to "refuse the ticket? Really? How do you do that? It was already recorded. What happens after that means what? Nothing... Massey could EAT the ticket.. doesn't change a thing.
I don't know why Gardner decided an arrest was warranted here. I honestly can see no other reason than: He didn't LIKE Massey. And, I don't think that's reason enough.
“As for all the screaming about suing the department into oblivion, no way. Good luck showing damages in civil court.”
Doesn’t really have to show damages. All he has to show a jury is that the officer used excessive force and put his life in danger. I’m sure there’ll be a discussion on civil rights.
““The officer never said he was being placed under arrest, under what authority, under what law. “
First, I don’t believe that they have to do so, at least until they have made sure you are restrained and the situation is under control.”
77-7-6. Manner of making arrest.
(1) The person making the arrest shall inform the person being arrested of his intention, cause, and authority to arrest him. 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;
(b) the person being arrested is actually engaged in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, an offense; or
(c) the person being arrested is pursued immediately after the commission of an offense or an escape.
(2) (a) If a hearing-impaired person, as defined in Subsection 78-24a-1(2), is arrested for an alleged violation of a criminal law, including a local ordinance, the arresting officer shall assess the communicative abilities of the hearing-impaired person and conduct this notification, and any further notifications of rights, warnings, interrogations, or taking of statements, in a manner that accurately and effectively communicates with the hearing-impaired person including qualified interpreters, lip reading, pen and paper, typewriters, computers with print-out capability, and telecommunications devices for the deaf.
(b) Compliance with this subsection is a factor to be considered by any court when evaluating whether statements of a hearing-impaired person were made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently.
Another Utah code thats interesting:
“77-7-7. Force in making arrest.
If a person is being arrested and flees or forcibly resists after being informed of the intention to make the arrest, the person arresting may use reasonable force to effect the arrest. Deadly force may be used only as provided in Section 76-2-404.”
Since Massey was never informed of the officers intent to arrest him it seems the officers only salvation would be if he can justify the man was fleeing. If I was on a jury I would not buy the fleeing argument.
Be actually arresting you for a felony and reading you your Miranda rights?
They must make the statement "You are under arrest", or you can ignore them and walk away?.
That the officer has no right to place you in handcuffs unless he is arresting you, describes the charges to you, and follows your orders?
My answer would be "no" to each of the above, but I only have a layman's understanding of the subject.
Do you agree that by tasing the guy along a busy highway, the trooper put the guy's life at risk?
“Was it really necessary to arrest this guy?”
When Massey asked him why the cop said “because you would not sign the ticket”.
I really hope this trigger happy cop loses his shirt.
Thank you for your response, and question.
Happy Thanksgiving Holiday to you and your family.
“Do you agree that by tasing the guy along a busy highway, the trooper put the guy’s life at risk?”
No. I think that the driver put himself at that risk by not following the officer’s instructions.
The driver had walked back and forth and was walking close to the edge of the shoulder, and could have gotten hit by passing traffic, regardless to whether he was ever tazered or not.
When the officer said “turn around and put your hands behind your back”, he could have simply complied.
Here is what I think would have been a WISER choice for the officer.
He should have asked for the ignition keys.
He should have told the driver to stay seated.
He should have waited for backup to arrive, then asked the driver to get out.
And, as I’ve said before, Hindsight is 20/20. Being there, having to make split second/life or death decisions is much harder.
I doubt it goes to court. UHP will pay out a tidy sum for the reckless actions of this trooper, IMO.
Be wary Ken, just after UCANSEE2 tells you “Happy Thanksgiving”... he turns on you and calls you names.... Like, “Hillary”. :-)
Hey coppers... I have good news. I now have ONE neighbor’s wife who thinks this entire incident was ALL Massey’s fault. But, I’m not sure you’re going be to all that happy with her reasoning.
She said... (and I am QUOTING! NOT, my words..) :
“99.9% of all cops on the road are brainless arrogant pricks, and there is NO REASON to even attempt to discuss anything with them”.
THIS is the image this guy, Gardner, gives you... Are you guys all OK with that? I’m guessing.. yea.
Well.. at least, now... you're admitting that the officer could have made better choices... we're making SOME progress.
Actually.. no, the cop said, "Because you were not following my instructions".
I think, this was a pretty honest answer. He WAS arresting him because Massey was not doing what Gardner wanted him to do.
BTW>> Thanks much for all the post regarding arrest instructions etc. It is helpful to the discussion for all of us to know what the law actually says.
One other point that has not been addressed on this thread: What does the law say about the officer's search of the car at the end of the tape? Why did he do this? Was there probably cause? Any reason at all? Was that legal? Or... is this just another example of something routinely done by practically all cops... w/o regard for necessity or legality??
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.