Agency defends officers who used stun gun on handcuffed man

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Jacques Billeaud, Associated Press
Updated 8:26 pm CST, Monday, February 11, 2019

GLENDALE, Ariz. (AP) — Officials at a police department in metro Phoenix defended its officers who were captured on body-camera video repeatedly shooting a handcuffed man with a stun gun during an encounter in a motel parking lot.

A lawsuit stemming from the July 2017 encounter alleged one Glendale officer kicked Johnny Wheatcroft in the groin during a struggle, while another officer shot him with the stun gun in the testicles.

Glendale police held a briefing Monday to respond to the excessive force allegations after a video of the encounter surfaced on local TV.

The agency said Wheatcroft wasn't following officers' commands and that Wheatcroft's wife hit an officer in the head with a plastic bag containing full soda cans, knocking the officer to the ground.

Read more: https://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Lawyer-says-client-did-nothing-to-warrant-police-13607860.php

---

[RockRaven]

1. If he's handcuffed, it doesn't matter what his wife is doing, when it comes to tasering his balls

just saying, Glendale cops need to work on their argument in favor of tasering a cuffed guy...

[Honeycombe8]

4. Agency says he was tased in the thigh. Not groin.

Tasing a handcuffed man who isn't kicking you at the time = wrong.

But dude probably knows now not to be combative and resist arrest. That's actually illegal. I don't understand why people do that. They have to know it won't end well. Cops are required to arrest you, so they will do what is necessary to bring you in. If you are combative, they will have to be, as well.

This went too far, though. I expect he'll get a few dollars from the lawsuit.

[RockRaven]

5. Whether they tasered him in the knee or the nuts, referencing his wife's actions to justify is f-ed

The 3rd and 4th sentence of the article were:
"Glendale police held a briefing Monday to respond to the excessive force allegations after a video of the encounter surfaced on local TV.
The agency said Wheatcroft wasn't following officers' commands and that Wheatcroft's wife hit an officer in the head with a plastic bag containing full soda cans, knocking the officer to the ground."

If you're gonna defend tasering a handcuffed guy, you've got to do a better job than "yeah but his wife was swinging at us" or anything which would allow AP to write an honest representation of your explanation which equates to the same.

My issue isn't merely where they tasered him, my issue is that they apparently excused tasering a handcuffed guy with reference to a 3rd person's actions, or said something close enough to the same for the AP to portray their statement as such. Either they engaged in immoral/illegal collective or scapegoat punishment, or their apparently incompetent PR people need to get their s--t together. Either way, that agency has got some work to do.

[Honeycombe8]

8. He was suspended.

"Nearly all of Schneider's stun-gun use also was allowed under policy, though the officer received a three-day suspension for using a stun gun on Wheatcroft at a point when he was cuffed and not resisting officers, Roth said."

"The agency said Wheatcroft wasn't following officers' commands and that Wheatcroft's wife hit an officer in the head with a plastic bag containing full soda cans, knocking the officer to the ground."

It does not appear that the agency "excused" tasing a handcuffed guy. And most of the tasing was in accordance with PD protocol.

None of it would have happened, but for resisting arrest, to begin with. So I don't forget that. People should know that resisting arrest is against the law in and of itself, and cops are duty bound to respond to it, and to arrest the person. I don't forget that officers are humans, not robots. When involved in altercations, bad things can happen. That's not excusing things, but it's a reality. The officer was suspended, so there was accountability.

But, hey, it's so fun to blame policemen for everything, and for being human and overreacting, isn't it? Much better than blaming a combatant perp, who caused the whole incident.

[DirtEdonE]

2. Defend the officers? Of course they did!

It's a stressful job and they all like to see us shake and scream while they hit that taser button. How can they relax, blow off a little steam and enjoy themselves if they're restricted in its use?

After all, it's non-lethal.

August 22, 2017 / 8:00 AM / a year ago
Reuters finds 1,005 deaths in U.S. involving Tasers, largest accounting to date
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-axon-taser-toll/reuters-finds-1005-deaths-in-u-s-involving-tasers-largest-accounting-to-date-idUSKCN1B21AH

I wonder where that total is now? Have fun officers. You won't be held accountable. Not here in the USA anyway.

[LiberalFighter]

3. Police chiefs and departments ALWAYS defend their officers.

It is called a conflict of interest. And why they should NEVER EVER have oversight.

Maybe the guy was an asshole. But police officers should be trained to follow certain procedures on handling people. If someone in the home is nearby don't be stupid to let them get too close. If the person is handcuffed there is no reason to taser. Too many police are efn assholes. Have to wonder if they were civilian if they would be on the wrong side of the law.

[safeinOhio]

6. Were any of them certified?

former Detective at St Louis Metropolitan Police (1994-2006)
Updated Feb 20, 2017 · Author has 728 answers and 2.4m answer views
Yes and No. If you mean TAZER training to be certified to use/carry TAZER than yes. To use a thing you must have the thing used on you first to know the effect and understand what you’re doing to the person. If as a matter of fact every day training at most Academies ..no, (unless every Officer must be certified to use TAZER on that Department then yes again).


I think that if they are going to tase a suspect 11 times, they need to understand what being tased 11 times while being kicked in the nuts feels like.

[oasis]

7. Jackbooted thugs.