Repeated Taser use may have been excessive, rules 7th Circuit

Listen to this article

Police may have violated a woman’s civil rights when they shot her twice with a Taser for allegedly interfering with the arrest of her son, the 7th Circuit has ruled in reversing judgment.

Police were called to the plaintiff’s home on June 27, 2007, when animal control officers complained that the plaintiff’s adult son was interfering with their efforts to capture the family’s dog. Officers arrested the son for obstruction and placed him in the rear of a patrol car. The plaintiff became upset and began screaming at the officers. When she approached, an officer shot her in the abdomen with a Taser, dropping her to the ground. The officer gave her a second jolt of electricity when she allegedly ignored orders to roll onto her stomach.

The plaintiff sued under §1983, alleging only that the second tasing constituted excessive force.

The 7th Circuit decided that the police were not entitled to qualified immunity because the facts as alleged by the plaintiff indicated a violation of clearly established law.

“[W]e conclude that it was clearly established on June 25, 2007, that it is unlawful to deploy a taser in dart mode against a nonviolent misdemeanant who had just been tased in dart mode and made no movement when, after the first tasing, the officer instructed her to turn over. Prior to 2007, it was well-established in this circuit that police officers could not use significant force on nonresisting or passively resisting suspects….

“And viewing the facts in [the plaintiff’s] favor, there is no question that she was in fact subdued by the first tasing — she immediately fell to the ground and convulsed but made no movement after the first tasing ended.… [N]o reasonable officer could have understood [the plaintiff’s] conduct after the first tasing, as she describes it, to be active physical resistance,” the court said.

U.S. Court of Appeals,7th Circuit. Abbott v. Sangamon County, No. 12-1121.