Police adjust policies on use of force after federal ruling on Tasers

Local law enforcement agencies are making minor changes to their policies on use of force after a federal court ruling limited Taser use on suspects.

The decision handed down by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals states officers should not use “serious injurious force,” such as a Taser, on a suspect who is evading arrest or acting in a way that is dangerous to the suspect. Rather, the court ruled, officers should only use such force when there is “a risk of immediate danger that could be mitigated by the use of force.”

Capt. Mark Bollinger said the Rock Hill Police Department didn’t have to “overhaul” its use of force policy, but made “tweaks” to it.

“We have rewritten our general order already,” he said. “We are on top of it.”

The court’s decision came last month in the 2011 case of a mentally ill North Carolina man who wrapped his arms and legs around a road sign to prevent officers from taking him to a hospital. Officers used a Taser on the man to get him to release his grasp and he later died.

The three-member panel ruled those officers used excessive force and violated the man’s Fourth Amendment rights. Law enforcement agencies in South Carolina – which is in the 4th Circuit along with North Carolina, Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia – must comply with the ruling.

Doug Barfield, an attorney and spokesman for the Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office, said the changes clarify when an officer should and should not use a Taser.

“One of the big ones is, you should not use a Taser against a subject who is simply fleeing,” he said. “There’s got to be some immediate threat of danger.”

The sheriff’s office policy formerly allowed use of a Taser if a suspect is displaying passive resistance. Barfield said the policy has been adjusted to comply with the ruling, and that all the policy changes will be included in the next monthly training at the sheriff’s office.

Bollinger said Rock Hill’s general order stated even before the ruling that officers can’t use a Taser on a fleeing suspect.

“The Taser is a less than lethal force, but the (suspects) that just aren’t cooperating, or the individual that the court case is based on ... they just have to keep talking to them,” he said. “We only use ours if it looks like it’s going to lead to a very physical confrontation or they act super aggressively toward the officers.”

Most agencies train officers to try gaining compliance first by talking with a suspect, according to Maj. Bryan Zachary of the Fort Mill Police Department.

“A huge part of what we do is the ability to communicate with people,” he said. “We make every attempt to achieve compliance of that person by verbalizing with that person, by trying to reason with that person.”

The S.C. Criminal Justice Academy does not instruct officers on how to use a Taser but on when to use one as part of the “use of force continuum,” according to Maj. Florence McCants. The continuum urges officers to use a “one plus one” principle when confronting a threat.

“Basically, what it means is that an officer is always expected to remain one threat level above the incident,” McCants said. “An example would be if someone were to come at an officer with a stick or rock in an attempt to inflict bodily harm, the officer is justified in using (pepper spray) or Taser.”

The academy’s lesson plan on use of force dictates mandatory medical attention after using a Taser, pepper spray or night stick, even if the suspect refuses medical attention.

McCants said police agencies were contacted to ensure they understand the potential impact on their use of force policies.

“I don’t think it changes a whole lot. You have agencies that don’t even have Tasers,” she said. “More needs to be done as far as communication verbally. Some may depend on (Tasers) as a form of getting a suspect into compliance. Now they have to utilize different tools and mechanisms.”

This story was originally published February 3, 2016 at 5:31 PM with the headline "Police adjust policies on use of force after federal ruling on Tasers."