Independent Police Monitor questions NOPD’s use of Tasers
11th December 2017 · 0 Comments
As the troubled New Orleans Police Department continues to implement a federally mandated consent decree that seeks to raise the law enforcement agency up to federal standards for constitutional policing, at least one agency is questioning the NOPD’s use of force in its encounters with civilians after reviewing a number of cases.
In a 12-page report, the Office of Independent Police Monitor detailed seven cases of Taser use that raise questions about the NOPD’s use of force.
In each case, the report showed an NOPD officer used a Taser in a way that may have broken policy but in each case, those officers were deemed justified by the use of force review board.
In one case an officer tased a suspect after they claimed they had a heart problem and in another, the police monitor says an officer Tased a suspect who was handcuffed and in a holding cell.
The incidents cited by Independent Police Monitor Susan Hutson are both disturbing and concerning, given the fact that the troubled police department has been implementing the federally mandated consent decree for more than three years and has been looking for an exit strategy.
“On January 27, 2016, Officers Troy Williams and Ladarius Johnson responded to a report of two Black men selling narcotics on a certain street block,” the report said. “They immediately targeted two Black men they saw there. Officer Johnson detained and searched one man; Officer Williams approached the other and yelled, ‘I’m gonna Tase you brah, I’m gonna tase you. Come over here.’ The suspected person responded, ‘For what?’ Officer Williams then grabbed the suspected person’s arm but the suspected person broke free and started to run away. Officer Williams immediately discharged his CEW (Conducted Electrical Weapon), striking the suspected person at close range in the face. One prong of the CEW penetrated the suspected person’s skull and lodged a centimeter into the suspected person’s brain. The CEW delivered tens of thousands of volts of electricity, and the suspected person began to have seizures. Officer Williams later stated that he felt that the suspected person may have been armed, as Officer Williams could not see one of the suspected person’s hands. PIB concluded that Officer Williams’s CEW deployment did not violate any laws or NOPD policies.”
“In an incident on February 19, 2015, Officer Latoya Hamilton used a CEW in drive stun mode (which is separately banned by the Consent Decree) against a handcuffed suspected person,” the report said. “The suspected person attempted to leave custody and was being handled by five NOPD officers. Officer Hamilton reported that she was kicked in the knee and stomach. Officer Hamilton removed the cartridge from her CEW and used it in drive stun mode on the suspected person. She reported using her CEW on him three times. Despite the Consent Decree and Ops Manual’s restrictions, PIB did not provide any analysis in its written report regarding the use of a CEW against a handcuffed subject. PIB and the UFRB (Unauthorized Force Review Board) subsequently found that Officer Hamilton did not violate the rule on ‘Unauthorized Force.’”
“A handcuffed suspected person said, ‘I have a heart problem,’ prior to a NOPD officer using a CEW on him — despite the Consent Decree and NOPD Operation Manual’s tight restrictions on the use of CEWs on handcuffed subjects,” the Office of Independent Police Monitor wrote about another incident.
Ursula Price, the deputy police monitor, told FOX 8 News that it’s just one instance where she worries that classifying the case as justified could set a bad precedent.
“I’m not saying that officer should’ve been punished, but he should have been corrected. I don’t think the NOPD wants people in holding cells to be Tasered, so let’s just be clear with the officers that that’s not the way we conduct business,” Price said.
Regarding yet another problematic case, Hutson wrote, “An NOPD officer used a CEW on a suspected person, who then said, ‘I can’t breathe.’ The officer’s response: ‘I don’t care.’”
“In an incident on May 13, 2016, Officer Stephen Guidry and two other officers were pursuing on foot a fleeing, handcuffed suspected person wanted for domestic aggravated assault with a firearm,” the report said. “As the suspected person was hopping over a fence, Officer Guidry used his CEW in an attempt to stop him. Officer Guidry and PIB justified the CEW use based on Officer Guidry’s fear that the suspected person ‘would avoid capture and possibly confront the victim.’ However, a fear of possible confrontation is not ‘imminent bodily harm.’ Nor were there any facts to suggest that. In fact, at the Use of Force Review Board hearing, PIB conceded that the CEW use was ‘probably a violation of policy.’ Nevertheless, the UFRB members voted that the use of force was justified.”
“It seems to me that the NOPD has no motivation to change,” Ramessu Merriamen Aha, a New Orleans businessman and former congressional candidate, told The Louisiana Weekly Thursday. “The federal judge in the case, Susie Morgan, the federal consent-decree monitor, Sheppard Mullin, and the federally mandated consent decree itself have not been enough to bring significant changes to the NOPD. The NOPD superintendent, the department’s top brass and the NOPD’s Public Integrity Bureau have allowed officers to continue to get away with violating residents’ civil and human rights.
“Even the Landrieu administration, City Council and other elected officials are complicit in this miscarriage of justice by turning a blind eye toward these kinds of incidents and rewarding NOPD officers with substantial pay raises for a job poorly done.”
Deputy Police Monitor Ursula Price told FOX 8 that NOPD officers are allowed to break policy if they believe there is an immediate danger and that is likely why each case was deemed justified.
“The command staff took a broad definition of immediate danger to include things like, ‘Well I thought he might get away and hurt someone,’ or ‘I heard a sound and thought he might have a weapon,’ but all of these people were already in NOPD custody under some type of control, even the ones that were running away were running with handcuffs on,” Price said.
Price argues many police believe Tasers aren’t lethal, but she says there is growing evidence that Tasers have killed people, especially vulnerable people like those with heart conditions.
She expressed concern that the review board responsible for clearing officers who use force on suspects may not have a broad perspective on cases like the ones reviewed in the report.
“It’s worthy to note that the use of force review board is all law enforcement, that everyone who gets to decide whether or not that decision was justified are either NOPD officers or former police officers who are on the consent- decree monitoring team. Perhaps that process needs to include civilians like people in our office so they can have a broader perspective,” Price said.
“The NOPD has worked extensively with the Department of Justice Civil Rights division, the FBI and our federal consent- decree monitors to ensure our electronic control device policies are in line with the highest standards of constitutional policing. The OIPM has always had a seat at the table and meets regularly with Chief Harrison,” the NOPD said in a written statement.
“Without benefit of seeing the full report, we believe incidents cited here do not represent our efforts in full. There is always room for improvement, and we continue to work to refine our policies and training.”
A U.S. Department of Justice investigation of several officer-involved killings in New Orleans— including the Danziger Bridge Massacre and the killing of Henry Glover, both less than a week after Hurricane Katrina — led to a scathing report in 2011 that said the department was rife with corruption and abuse and a 492-point NOPD consent decree. After nearly two years of negotiations and vetting of prospective federal monitors, the NOPD began implementing the consent decree in August 2013.
The City of New Orleans paid $13.3 million in settlements last December to the victims and survivors of the officer-involved killings of Henry Glover, James Brissette, Ronald Madison and Raymond Robair, and four other unarmed civilians who were shot but survived the incident on the Danziger Bridge in eastern New Orleans 12 years ago.
The OIPM report concluded by making several recommendations aimed at improving CEW training and protecting civilians from the improper use of Tasers.
“The issues and patterns identified above directly impact people who have been subject to CEW use, affect the New Orleans community’s relationship with NOPD, and expose the City of New Orleans to potential financial liability. The OIPM recommends that NOPD take the following steps to address the issues regarding CEW use:
• NOPD PIB and OIPM meet by March 30, 2018 to discuss a more robust review process for CEW deployment and use. Following that meeting, NOPD and OIPM will work together to develop the review protocol. The development of the review protocol will include a date for completion of the process and a date for implementation.
• In addition to the first recommendation, OIPM would like to be invited to engage in a discussion at a UFRB hearing regarding the standards for CEW use and case review with the broader leadership of NOPD. We request this discussion on or before the March 2018 UFRB hearing. A discussion regarding the legal and policy standards for CEW use would benefit both the OIPM and NOPD.
• Assess and document findings regarding whether NOPD officers are receiving sufficient training and guidance concerning the legal and policy constraints on the use of CEWs and the risks associated with CEW use. Share the assessment methodology and findings with OIPM.
• Have the NOPD Operations Team assess and document their finding whether the CEW tactics that officers are instructed in are appropriate given the pattern of issues identified above. Share the assessment methodology and findings with OIPM.”
This article originally published in the December 11, 2017 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper.
