Here we go again - speeder tasered

robr

robr

Legendary Member
Joined
31 July 2001
Messages
5,201
Location
Boston, MA
http://www.kutv.com/content/news/topnews/story.aspx?content_id=33fb7027-f63d-4414-9a9f-f815f4d4f302

The man refused to sign a ticket for allegedly speeding and after that a Utah Highway Patrol trooper tased him in front of his pregnant wife and baby.

Now the man is planning to file a lawsuit against the Utah Highway Patrol.

Jared Massey may or may not have been speeding but he was arrested when he refused to sign the speeding ticket, not knowing he had to. Now you can see it all unfold on Youtube.
 
This makes me sick :mad: .If you woke up on the wrong side of the bed you shouldn't have to take it out on other people. BoHO he didn't sign the ticket who cares .O and the we cant hear behind traffic ya thats .B.S those tapes are tampered with .:cool: Not all cops are bad but some get over there head.:mad:
 
that's the bullshit - these punks never get fired.
(like that punk that peppersprayed that girl when she gave him the correct change at the drive thru.... wtf :confused: )


"If Trooper Garner is found to have acted inappropriately it is highly unlikely he will lose his job."
WHY??? why not highly probable he WILL lose his job? why do they protect douches like this guy?

all i know is i would claim a personal lawsuit, not against the highway patrol. either way - it's like a tax return :mad:
 
Though I believe the officer over reacted- all of that could have been avoided if the person driving the car just did what the officer asked him to do. YOU will never win the argument on the side of the road. Sign the freaking ticket and go to court with your witnesses. If you do not do what the officer tells you to do, then you are just plain stupid and deserve what you get. And anytime an officeris pointing something at you-take it seriously. This person appears to think he can just ignore the officer-huge mistake. Finally, again, I do think the officer jumped the gun with his reaction.
 
So one should always do what an officer tells them, no matter what? Or just in this case? This was ridiculous, no warning, no provocation, and then the cop just shoots him in the back. If I were that guy, I think I'd be pretty happy about the way things went down. He stands to collect a big chunk of change now. It also doesn't sound like he was local (I'm just guessing based on the comment he didn't know one needed to sign a speeding ticket in Utah), so that pretty much precludes going to court to fight the ticket unless he wants to travel or pay for an attorney. This was just a pathetic escalation.
 
Yeah, that's a disgusting example of law enforcement.

Im suprised the officer didnt taser the pregnant wife also when she started to scream.

The officer should be fired and charged with assault.
 
how shocking!

on many levels, this is an interesting video. clearly, the outcome could have been a non-event rather than as it turned out. note to self:

* when stopped by a police officer, present documentation as requested by the officer and required by law.

* refrain from repeatedly acting as though our temporary "relationship" involves quid-pro-quo negotiation practices i've (apparently) employed on others in my life: family, co-workers, roundball players on the local courts, etc.

* doing whatever it takes to be "The Man" in front of my wife and child can wait for our next playstation time, so for the moment, i'll follow the officer's orders.

i could be wrong on this (and am not willing to invest the time to research it), but i'm betting every state has as a part of their DL privilege granting process the requirement to surrender your DL to a law enforcement officer when requested. "gosh, i didn't know i had to give you my DL" probably ain't gonna fly in any traffic court in the land.

it'll be interesting to follow the outcome of this... i think it represents a great learning opportunity.
 
Someone needs to play a little devil's advocate. The driver refused to sign the ticket and whether or not he is a local he was wrong to refuse that instruction. Then when he was outside the car he again refused to listen to the officer and turned his back to walk back to his vehicle. What if his intention was to get back to his vehicle and take a weapon from under the seat? How long is the officer supposed to wait not knowing what a person is going to do when he refuses to obey the officer in the first instance?

Ultimately it may be determined to be an inappropriate use of force under Utah guidelines but the driver's behavior was a factor and he is not without blame.
 
I see nothing wrong with the actions of the officer.

The driver questioned why he was getting a ticket. Officer tells him for speeding. Then the driver questions the speed limit, which they had just passed not even 50 yrds from where he was pulled over, it was posted as 40mph, even with orange flags attached to the sign.

Driver then refuses to sign a ticket, which in this country is not an acceptance of guilt, only a promise to appear in court. Like Queenlives mentioned, you do "agree" to certain conditions when you apply for a driver's license in any state of this country. Driving is a privilege , not a right.

Once the officer asks the driver to step out of the car, it does look like he was quick to go for the taser. But its obvious this driver did not want to sign a ticket and much less get arrested and go to jail. He turns around and starts walking away from the officer. He has at least one of his hands in his pocket while walking away. Right there is where being tasered was justified. You have an uncompliant subject, that's walking away from an officer , with his hands in his pockets.

He could be reaching for a weapon in his pocket, or trying to get to one back in his vehicle. Any officer would do the same.

The driver's attitude also changed from being a jerk, "what the hell is wrong with you", to "officer, I dont know what you are doing" and admitting he saw the posted speed limit.

and robr, if someone is pointing a weapon at you, no matter how non/less-lethal it may be, I think you should do what they tell you to do. you try and be a hero/brave, you will lose.
 
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RBUUlpGR7UQ&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RBUUlpGR7UQ&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
 
NSXrebel said:
I see nothing wrong with the actions of the officer.

The driver questioned why he was getting a ticket. Officer tells him for speeding. Then the driver questions the speed limit, which they had just passed not even 50 yrds from where he was pulled over, it was posted as 40mph, even with orange flags attached to the sign.

Driver then refuses to sign a ticket, which in this country is not an acceptance of guilt, only a promise to appear in court. Like Queenlives mentioned, you do "agree" to certain conditions when you apply for a driver's license in any state of this country. Driving is a privilege , not a right.

Once the officer asks the driver to step out of the car, it does look like he was quick to go for the taser. But its obvious this driver did not want to sign a ticket and much less get arrested and go to jail. He turns around and starts walking away from the officer. He has at least one of his hands in his pocket while walking away. Right there is where being tasered was justified. You have an uncompliant subject, that's walking away from an officer , with his hands in his pockets.

He could be reaching for a weapon in his pocket, or trying to get to one back in his vehicle. Any officer would do the same.

The driver's attitude also changed from being a jerk, "what the hell is wrong with you", to "officer, I dont know what you are doing" and admitting he saw the posted speed limit.

and robr, if someone is pointing a weapon at you, no matter how non/less-lethal it may be, I think you should do what they tell you to do. you try and be a hero/brave, you will lose.
Click to expand...

I do not agree with you assessment, I see it as a non threatening person and the officer over reacted. We will see who is right on this one, I am sure the public will watch this one.
 
minervoflorida said:
I do not agree with you assessment, I see it as a non threatening person and the officer over reacted. We will see who is right on this one, I am sure the public will watch this one.
Click to expand...


So I assume you expect something like this to happen before an officer can pull out a weapon, wether lethal or not. :rolleyes:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rgqrt67CP7U&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rgqrt67CP7U&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
 
The Utah guy way over reacted IMO, the public seems to agree on this one, go to the Utah HP site, they are looking into it.
Wait till the news gets this one. The public is upset.
People can die from tasers.
Police have a tough job but they often have a power issue, and we are seeing signs of that coming out in their abuse of power, what if the cop had his gun out, would he have shot him???????
 
minervoflorida said:
<snip>what if the cop had his gun out, would he have shot him???????
Click to expand...
so you do understand the reason the cop didn't use his sidearm was because his training indicated the use of non-lethal force was (1) justified (2) the most appropriate response @ that point in time - you get at least that much, right?

hopefully the incident will receive a complete and unbiased review. as for mega-dollar settlement, i wouldn't buy an mtv-crib thinking the settlement will cover it.

given utah's ultra-liberal reputation :rolleyes: , that may not happen.
 
I'm looking for a video we were shown at the police academy. It was a state trooper/highway patrol officer, pulled over a guy for some reason, don't remember exactly. Anyways, the driver refused to sign the citation and was acting pretty much the way this guy was. The officer was being polite, overly nice in my opinion, trying to talk to the guy to calm down. What the officer didn't know was that the driver was a Vietnam Vet, who felt he wasn't about to go to jail or get a ticket.

The whole video you see this officer trying to make the suspect comply in the nicest way he could. The suspect keeps pushing his limits, until he starts going for his truck. Officer is screaming at the suspect to stop, over and over again. Once at his truck, the suspect pulls out an AR-15 rifle and starts shooting at the officer multiple times, killing him. When detained and questioned later why he shot and killed the officer, his reason was that he saw no command presence in the officer, and wanted to know how far he could push him. The officer also just happened to be a rookie.
 
queenlives said:
so you do understand the reason the cop didn't use his sidearm was because his training indicated the use of non-lethal force was (1) justified (2) the most appropriate response @ that point in time - you get at least that much, right?

hopefully the incident will receive a complete and unbiased review. as for mega-dollar settlement, i wouldn't buy an mtv-crib thinking the settlement will cover it.

given utah's ultra-liberal reputation :rolleyes: , that may not happen.
Click to expand...

Look, no need to talk down to me, you have your opinion, I have mine.
"You get at least that much, right" is what I am talking about. Just discuss the issue.
 
robr said:
So one should always do what an officer tells them, no matter what? Or just in this case? This was ridiculous, no warning, no provocation, and then the cop just shoots him in the back. If I were that guy, I think I'd be pretty happy about the way things went down. He stands to collect a big chunk of change now. It also doesn't sound like he was local (I'm just guessing based on the comment he didn't know one needed to sign a speeding ticket in Utah), so that pretty much precludes going to court to fight the ticket unless he wants to travel or pay for an attorney. This was just a pathetic escalation.
Click to expand...


When the taser was introduced to be used by the police it was to be used in place of the gun when the perp was causing a threat. This cop tased the guy because he didn't obey the cops orders. That is BULL$HIT. Would the cop have shot the guy if he didn't have a taser? This is getting out of control and something needs to be done.
I hope the cop gets sued and loses everything he owns!
 
minervoflorida said:
Look, no need to talk down to me, you have your opinion, I have mine.
"You get at least that much, right" is what I am talking about. Just discuss the issue.
Click to expand...

fair comment. i was looking for clarification but perhaps worded it wrong; if so, mea culpa, apology offered.

back to the thread, i found the cnn interviews interesting for a couple of reasons:

* i think the video being out is a good thing for a whole stack of reasons.
while i don't like the idea that it took the video being made public to accelerate the investigation of this incident, i do like the fact that it is causing appropriate daylight to shine on what happened sooner rather than later.

* i think the driver is a fairly bright guy and certainly capable of setting the agenda of the discussion to his terms and, in the process, putting the UHP / state in a defensive posture.

* i think the driver may well end up like the guy who killed his parents, then asked the court to be merciful because he was an orphan - "there's been so much publicity i can't get a fair trial by my peers." comes to mind.

in thinking through this thread, i came to the point where i said to myself, "what if that were one of my boys that got tasered?" (they're 25 & 32) of course, i would feel very bad for that situation having occurred to them, but i would also think (or even say to them), "what the hell were you thinking? just take the ticket and see the officer in court."

it'll be interesting to see what happens.
 
minervoflorida said:
Police have a tough job but they often have a power issue, and we are seeing signs of that coming out in their abuse of power, what if the cop had his gun out, would he have shot him???????
Click to expand...

But he did not have his gun drawn. He elected to use non-lethal force to protect himself and control a situation caused by the driver who refused to cooperate with instructions, kept his hand in his pocket and then turned his back to walk back to his vehicle while challenging the officer's authority by yelling "what is wrong with you". Was the officer supposed to let him just go back and drive away?
 

Similar threads

Acura NsX Pilot
Cops In The Sky - Speeder Beware
Replies
12
Views
4K
FeetFxr
F
Back
Top