But at what point does using excessive force stop being classified as an accident. Did the guy face down really need to be tasered? Sure grabbing the wrong weapon can be called an accident... but the guy was killed needlessly because the cop felt the need to inflict uneccessary pain.
We can't make the call. Grant (the guy on the ground) was resisting arrest and it took several officers at once to try and get him cuffed. The cop announced to the others that he was going to tase him (so they would not be touching the target when it happened).
We just don't know if tasing was appropriate or not. It was a tragic accident and the cop is getting punished. Some lowlifes on this forum want him to be executed or brutally beaten for it. That's just wrong.
Uh, what? He intentionally pulled out his gun. The guy was already cuffed and laying on his stomach. He shot him and knew what he was doing. It was murder.
Lies. Despite contradictory statements from the victim's family/friends, the victim still wasn't cuffed shortly after the shot.
After some initial resistance, he started complying with police by laying on his stomach. When he heard one officer instruct another to arrest him, he immediately resumed resisting arrest. If charged with a crime, this would have been his "third strike" (read about three-strikes law). The victim was chemically "compromised" and distressed at the likely possibility of extended jail time. They couldn't get him to put both arms back and he wouldn't stop trying to get one of his hands near his waistband. If true, tasing might have been appropriate.
He pulled out a weapon. regardless if gun or taser. Why didn't the other officers pull out theirs if the situation was so out of control?
He announced to the other officers that he was going to tase. They got out of the way. You wouldn't use a taser while other people are touching the target, or they might also take the hit. It only takes one officer to tase a man on the ground.
Facebook
Twitter