That's from the transcript that Swoly-D found at http://www.txcn.com/sharedcontent/dws/txcn/austin/stories/060909kvue_Taser_woman-cb.64ccc02d.html From what I've seen, cops generally keep themselves between you and the road when you are pulled over on a highway. I believe they're trained to do this for that purpose. Either way, good move by the officer.
Traffic stops are very dangerous. Yes, cops, will risk their life and put themselves between oncoming traffic and you. Hell, even being in the shoulder isn't enough protection. People will run onto the shoulder during daylight. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5186595.html
As stated . . I don't ANYONE should have been Tazed in this situation and I don't think this woman did. . .the fact she is old . . just makes it more unbeleivable. Rocket River
Man, you just don't see it. Do me a favor, please. If you ever get called for jury duty, and the prosecutor asks the question about experiences with law enforcement, raise your hand and be honest about your biases.
http://tiodt.blogspot.com/2006/10/kid-killed-by-taser-for-shouting-i.html Tasers are a death sentence. Let's taser all speeders and possibly kill them in process. I mean, who needs speeders in this world? They are a treat to mankind and all speeders should be subjected to torture and possibly death. Hell, let's just start waterbording all speeders, they'll teach them a lesson.
Officers do have another option instead of Arresting a citizen for not signing a citation. It is not Mandatory to arrest people who don't sign citations.
Yes, but that is an option and it is used at times. There was nothing wrong with the cop trying to arrest her. There is no age limit on when you can arrest people. Now there is something severly wrong when a cop tries to arrest you for something that he has a right to arrest you for (i.e. not signing a ticket), and you basically break away from him and tell him "no you aren't going to arrest me...and on top of that I'm getting back into my vehicle...ha ha ha". That's why I'm dying at those defending this woman. If you yourself told a cop you weren't going to be arrested and were going back to your car, then you would not be suprised when you were detained with some type of force. The only reason that this is news is because it's a 72 year old lady and folks love them some granny!! Being old doesn't mean you can tell a cop you aren't going to jail....or that he should let you choose option B (driving away) after he has justifiably chosen option A (to arrest you), and you tell him "no sir, that option isn't gonna work".
Yeah I watched it again. Its very plausible he did it for safety,it does look like thats what he did. But shove training for safety, I highly doubt it. Check out this video, not quite the same situation but PoPos have to be more responsible you never know what can happen. Id hate for that Officer to have to call the Ole Lady's family explaining what went wrong cuz he was tazer happy. <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/u5qlg-EDFCE&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/u5qlg-EDFCE&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
The point you are missing is that police should also weigh the situation in regard to their response. You seem to believe that non-compliance gives them the all clear to escalate when that isn't the case. If your reasoning was correct then police should in all circumstances engage in high speed pursuits when someone speeds away rather than pulling over. That isn't the case as many municipalities have banned high speed pursuits.
No, I don't believe non-compliance gives cops the right to escalate the situation, but I also don't believe in double standards or profiling. I believe cops have options, and the only reason this is an issue is because the suspect is an old woman. This cop went through his options in accordance with the law (ticket, attempted arrest, multiple warnings, detainment). You say he shouldn't escelate the situation (i.e. he shouldn't have detained her), so that means the only other option is to let her get back in her vehicle and leave after she has refused to sign her ticket (strike A), resisted arrest (strike B) and tried to get back into her vehicle (strike C). In no other situation would these acts be acceptable. You are basically rewarding her for being non-compliant because she is old, and that's not fair or how the law works. So old folks don't have to follow the law now?? Others have a high chance of getting hurt in high speed chases, which is why they don't always pursue them. That is nothing like this case. Yes, he could have injured her by tasing her (mainly because she is old), but he also could have injured her by forcibly arresting her. He was taking a chance on injuring himself by allowing a person who had just resisted arrest to go back to their vehicle....as you never know what they have in there and she had already shown that she was noncompliant. Again, I am completely against profiling and in no other situation would you say it's cool for a cop on the highway...that's basically putting his life in danger everytime he stops someone...to allow a person to go back to their vehicle when he has ordered them away from their vehicle. This is another case of "she doesn't seem like a threat because she is an old lady". Old ladies know how to shoot people too!! One thing that cops are taught is not to assume that innocent looking people are innocent, because that's how you can lose your life. Crooks and terrorists sometimes use old folks, women and kids to do all kinda foul things (not saying it's on that level...just making the point that you can't judge a book by it's cover and have set rules for set people). You have to treat everyone the same, i.e. the reason handicapped people and children still have to go through security checkpoints at the airport. The only other alternatives were to forcibly detain her (which also could have injured her), or let her go....which could pose danger to the officer and which would normally not be done for anyone else. That's why I'm fine with him lighting her up, especially when he warned her like 3 times before he did it. Edit: And he didn't escalate the situation by trying to arrest her. That's an option when you don't sign your ticket, and it's not unsafe to arrest old people. I can see how one can argue what he did after that was escalating the situation, but I have no problem with him not letting her back to her vehicle for previously mentioned reasons.
It reminds me of this story that was posted in the hangout, several months ago. These twins keep running into the traffic. The cops keep running into oncoming traffic to get them off the road. <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_LCQkSst5iQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_LCQkSst5iQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Lauer asked Winkfein if she told a little white lie when she denied being argumentative or resisting arrest in a TV interview shortly after her arrest. Winkfein replied that an electric zap has a way of clouding one’s recollections. “I told what I remembered,” she said. “When he Tased me and kept it on and it threw me to the ground, that erased all memory.” Really? Seriously. Really? I like how at the beginning of the story they tell us her name. Kathryn “Sue” Winkfein. Ironic. That's just horrible that she got 40K for this!
that seemed like a very dangerous female perpetrator......surprised they couldn't find a place for her in gitmo.......in any case, i'm prowd as can be that we have fine upstanding officers like this one to uphold the law of our land.....god bless america
This broad was on The Today Show today (with her lawyer and son I think); I was half-paying attention. They were basically painting her as this big victim and Matt Lauer appeared to be eating it up from what I could tell.
lol you obviously weren't watching. Lauer was being nice, but he did ask the questions people wanted to ask. He even said "many people, myself included, thought 'hey, she was asking for it.'" or something like that. Every time she was in a difficult position (practically every other question), he lawyer would jump in and try to clear it up. As for the settlement- the government said that it paid that money upfront because it would have cost more to fight the case in court. Sucks but logical
Tasers aren't meant to be convenience tools as they've become. How hard is it to handcuff a 72yo? The guy was obviously venting his frustation through physical violence. That's battery.
