Monday, September 22, 2008 -
Editorial
A stunning use of forceA federal magistrate judge gives two Tukwila police officers an appropriate warning on excessive Taser use Tasers can provide police officers with a safe way to gain control of a violent suspect. But a federal magistrate judge examined the case of a Tukwila man Tasered from the front and back by two police officers and appropriately called foul. Tukwila police stopped Terrance Releford in 2006 because the man had outstanding warrants against him. Officers did not note anything about Releford's conduct that was uncooperative or violent. Yet, each officer Tasered the man twice. The officers, one in front of Releford and one behind, ordered him to turn around. When Releford hesitated as to the direction he should turn, the officers fired Tasers simultaneously, knocking him to the ground with a combined 100,000 volts. Releford was then ordered to roll onto his stomach and place his hands behind his back so he could be handcuffed. Both officers fired their Tasers simultaneously again when Releford didn't move quickly enough. Two blasts from two officers was too much, the judge ruled. The force used against Releford wasn't justified. The man had not resisted arrest. One of the officers cited hostile run-ins with Releford in the past. It could be police thought Releford would be so again. They also cited his imposing size: Releford is 6-foot-5, 280 pounds. That he had just been released from jail for theft and possession of stolen property may have put officers on edge. But "the court has little difficulty in concluding that, in light of all the circumstance, the amount of force used ... outweighed the need to use that force," Magistrate Judge Mary Alice Theiler said. The judge also recommended an attorney for Releford, so damages can be pursued against the Tukwila Police Department. This is appropriate. A police internal investigation cleared both officers of claims they had used excessive force. A pursuit of damages forces the department to justify how it reached a conclusion so different from the judge's. Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company Received on Tue Sep 23 23:31:59 2008