- The following is the memo issued by Palm Bay Police Chief
William Berger
- to police officers regarding the agency's Taser policy:
-
-
- Kirwan) Chief Berger,
-
- I am writing to you because it appears that you and your
department are confused about the nature and levels of the performance
of your jobs, as police officers in the country, today. War or no war;
citizens of the USA are entitled to be treated as "innocent"
until proven guilty - and not the other way around. The burden of proof
for the facts of any situation is upon the courts to prove those facts
regarding guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. You and your officers have
confused your role in the System, with that of Vigilantes with too much
power in your hands and too few thoughts in your heads.
-
- TO: All Department Personnel
- FROM: William Berger, Chief of Police
- DATE: June 10, 2005
- RE: Temporary Taser Policy Amendment
- Recently we took into custody a seventeen-year-old male
- juvenile for a violent criminal act against his family.
In the
- process of making the arrest,
- our officers justifiably deployed a single TASER cartridge,
- the probes of which
- struck the subject in the upper chest and upper abdomen.
-
- Kirwan) If there were several officers involved in this
arrest, why not just physically subdue the suspect, handcuff him, and take
him to the station where he could be charged with a potential crime or
released?
-
- The subject stands about 6'03 and weighs approximately
- 140 pounds; an extremely thin build.
-
- Kirwan) All the more reason for NOT tasering the suspect.
-
- He was handcuffed without any further
- incident and transported to the station for booking.
- About an hour and a half after the arrest the subject
- began complaining of chest discomfort and was immediately
- transported to the emergency room.
- The emergency room doctor determined
- the subject suffered a collapsed lung and
- suggested a possible cause as being a
- combination of the subject's body build
- and the TASER use.
- The emergency room doctor stated he believes
- the TASER probe may, and I stress may,
- have punctured the chest cavity allowing
- air to enter and causing the lung to collapse.
- I am convinced that the TASER is probably the best non-lethal
- defensive weapon in police work today. It has proven
invaluable in
- protecting officers, the public and offenders. It has
reduced
- injuries, overall is safer for everyone involved and
is clearly a
- reasonable force option. While it is my intention to
work vigorously
- to keep the TASER, at times we will encounter circumstances
that
- dictate that we proceed with some caution
- or take some special measures.
-
- Kirwan) Here it seems is the crux of your problems -
your department seems to be fixated on weaponry, as though all those you
encounter in your job (that of protecting the public) has to involve the
use of weapons.
-
- Protecting the PUBLIC is your job, protecting your officers
is secondary. When you hit a "suspect" with 50,000 volts you
have already decided that this person is guilty and therefore in need of
violent force to be subdued. That is excessive force by any definition
- except perhaps for the regulations governing prisoners being detained
by the military in far-flung locations around the planet. You, Chief Berger
are NOT in Iraq, or Gitmo, or Afghanistan - you're in a town in Florida,
USA.
-
- http://globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV505A.html
-
- Our laws were designed with a desire "to protect
the innocent." This new System has exactly the opposite purpose in
mind - arrest anyone that looks suspicious, and to hell with the damage
done to the individual or to the society! (As we did in Iraq - so it is
here).
-
- Unfortunately you and your department are not the only
police department in the US who believe that what you are doing is "protecting"
something, but certainly not the innocent. The optimal example for your
actions was created for you by the Department of HOMELAND SECURITY when
they made war upon the citizens and visitors to Miami, Florida on the occasion
of the FTAA protests:
-
- http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/11/281370.html
-
- The people you are interacting with are usually citizens
of the United States, and whether or not that is the case - you are NOT
authorized to torture or abuse those you are charged with simply arresting.
Your function may be the first line of defense for the society, but it
is also the first step that is taken by anyone accused of a crime. You
and your department seem to have forgotten the difference between those
who are ACCUSED of a crime and those who have been found guilty. In any
case where officers are called, people have a right to expect to live to
refute any charges that may be brought. Cops need the good faith cooperation
of the people "they SERVE." When that trust has been too frequently
shattered, by trigger-happy, overly enthusiastic people in uniform: that
result paints a target on every officer in the offending in this land.
-
- WB) I have consulted with representatives from the treating
physicians,
- police experts, our own TASER instructors, TASER, Inc.
and others.
- We are working diligently to determine exactly what caused
the
- above situation.
-
- There is a good possibility that the TASER was NOT the
cause
- of the subject's medical condition.
- However, effective immediately,
- I am temporarily and until further notice directing officers
- to AVOID frontal chest shots or "center mass"
- on extremely thin or small structured subjects.
- Therefore, the target areas should not be, whenever possible,
- the chest or upper torso, where the new longer probe
- may inadvertently pierce the chest cavity.
- When these conditions are present and when possible,
- TASER deployments should be directed
- to a subject's back of the torso or the extremities,
- particularly the upper leg.
-
- This is the preferred target area
- on extremely thin or small structured subjects.
- Staff and I will keep you updated
- as we progress on the issue and
- work rapidly to find answers.
- Chief William B. Berger
-
- Kirwan) What needs to happen, Chief, is that your department
needs to read carefully the Constitution of the United States, and discover
what your men and women's real role in this country truly is. Whoever created
your TASER policy needs to be terminated, and you in all good conscience
should resign. It is difficult enough, trying to live under an Outlaw administration
without having to deal with the added burden ofdimwitted police officers
that too often worship their weaponry, instead of giving any thought to
why they are at a "crime scene" in the first place.
-
- Since the town of Palm Bay's slogan is "A Perfect
Place to Grow" you might want to think about how the actions of you,
and the officers of your department will impact that phrase, once the world
knows how you choose to treat people under your "authority."
-
- Sincerely,
-
- Jim Kirwan
- kirwanstudios@earthlink.net
-
-
- Comment
- From Jim Mortellaro
- Jsmortell@aol.com
- 6-21-4
-
- In a previous comment regarding TASER use by police,
this writer made several statements which precluded the use of excessive
or lethal force to overpower a perpetrator. I believe this piece by Kirwan
requires further commentary on this subject.
-
- In your piece, Kirwan, you mention that by the use of
a TASER, the officers have determined guilt or innocence. You made other
comments regarding TASER use which are equally incorrect. But the one item
you neglected to mention is what you expect the officers to do in a situation
where a perpetrator resists arrest and/or becomes violent in the process
of arrest.
-
- Let us discuss both issues here. But first, allow me
to inform that in the past 30 plus years, I've served as auxiliary police
in the City of New York (47th precinct) as well as a number of communities
in Westchester and Putnam Counties. My service included State Police and
in some quarters the writer is called a "reserve" officer, since
I've attended the police academy in Westchester County. I can therefore,
serve as a police officer with full police powers in lieu of merely auxiliary
powers. In addition, I am expert in RF communications.
-
- Having said that, let me continue with the discussion
of your objections.
-
- When a police officer confronts a perpetrator who resists
arrest, what are his choices? He can (if conditions permit) call for a
backup. However there is often not sufficient time for a backup to arrive
in time to capture the perpetrator.
-
- The officer can also use lethal force, specifically his
firearm. This choice is highly dependent on the crime for which the suspect
is being arrested. A simple traffic stop often produces completely unexpected
results. The officer never knows when a traffic stop will result in a confrontation
for any number of reasons. The suspect is stopped for a minor traffic infraction,
but when the officer observes the driver, he can be found to be intoxicated,
on substances other than alcohol, have illegal subsances in the vehicle,
the vehicle may have been reported stolen, etc.
-
- I've had individuals refuse to show their license and
registration for a simple speeding infraction. In this case, neither TASER
nor any force other than ordering the driver to provide his license, registration
and insurance card should be used. If he takes off, you call for backup
and hopefully catch the driver down the road. In one case, the driver refused
to hand over his license and when asked to shut the engine down, merely
took off. A trooper began a chase several miles north of the stop. The
chase barely got under way when the driver hit another car which went out
of control. One death and two serious injuries resulted.
-
- No TASER. No weapon of any kind. The man looked as if
he was on either cocaine or methamphetamine.
-
- What if an arrest is attempted for some more serious
infraction. An arrest which must be made in order to make the streets and
citizens safe. The perpetrator resists. There is no backup or, the officers
are unable to subdue the suspect because he is increasingly and uncontrollably
violent. In your view, Kirwan, the officers would be expected to allow
the perpetrator to flee. You have removed all means of subduing the suspect.
-
- Well, a TASER could be used. Or lethal force. Or physical
force. One almost NEVER uses lethal force for a suspect except in very
serious crimes and/or self defense. Physical force does not work in this
hypothetical case. What is left is the TASER.
-
- Unless of course, Kirwan and many of the Rense.com readers,
feel that the perpetrator be allowed to flee.
-
- If you were a police officer, Kirwan, what would you
do? An answer is respectfully asked of you.
-
- Jim Mortellaro
|
