Taser Misuse Prosecutions
⚖️ Meaning of Taser Misuse
A taser (Conducted Energy Device – CED) is a non-lethal weapon used by police to subdue suspects.
Taser misuse occurs when:
It is used excessively, causing injury or death.
It is deployed without lawful justification (e.g., on compliant suspects).
It is used as punishment rather than for control.
Civilians illegally possess or use tasers.
Prosecutions often involve assault, battery, manslaughter, or misconduct in public office, depending on the jurisdiction.
🧾 Case 1: United States v. Timothy Loehmann (2014, Cleveland Police Case – Tamir Rice Incident)
Facts:
12-year-old Tamir Rice was shot by police officer Timothy Loehmann. While this case involved a firearm, it became central to later Taser policy reforms, as officers argued that non-lethal alternatives like tasers were underused or misused. Following this case, taser misuse incidents were heavily scrutinized.
In the subsequent cases (below), officers’ unlawful taser use became prosecutable under civil rights laws (42 U.S.C. §1983).
⚖️ Case 2: United States v. Michael Slager (2015)
Court: U.S. District Court, South Carolina
Facts:
Officer Michael Slager shot and killed Walter Scott, claiming Scott tried to grab his taser. However, video evidence showed the officer planted the taser near the body to justify the shooting.
Judgment:
Slager was convicted of violating civil rights under color of law and obstruction of justice.
Sentenced to 20 years in federal prison.
Significance:
This case linked taser misuse and cover-ups to civil rights violations, marking one of the strongest punishments for weapon misuse by an officer.
⚖️ Case 3: R v. Dizaei [2010] EWCA Crim 2133 (United Kingdom)
Facts:
Metropolitan Police Commander Ali Dizaei was found guilty of misconduct in public office and perverting the course of justice after using a taser inappropriately during an altercation with a member of the public.
He falsely accused the victim of assault and used his position to justify unlawful force.
Judgment:
Convicted and sentenced to 4 years’ imprisonment.
Significance:
This case established that senior officers are not immune to prosecution for taser misuse under common law misconduct in public office.
⚖️ Case 4: R v. Mark Knights (2016, UK Crown Court)
Facts:
Police officer Mark Knights used a taser on a handcuffed and compliant detainee inside a police station.
CCTV footage revealed that the detainee posed no threat at the time of taser deployment.
Judgment:
The officer was convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH) under Section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
He was dismissed from service and given a suspended sentence.
Significance:
Confirmed that unnecessary taser use on restrained individuals amounts to criminal assault, not just disciplinary misconduct.
⚖️ Case 5: United States v. Christopher Hutchins (2018, Arkansas)
Facts:
Officer Hutchins repeatedly tased a restrained and non-resisting suspect during an arrest, resulting in cardiac complications.
Bodycam evidence contradicted his report that the suspect was “resisting.”
Judgment:
Convicted under 18 U.S.C. §242 (Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law).
Sentenced to 5 years in federal prison.
Significance:
Affirmed that taser misuse by police can be a federal civil rights offence, especially when linked to bodily harm.
⚖️ Case 6: State v. Brooks (Minnesota Supreme Court, 2019)
Facts:
A civilian, Derrick Brooks, used a taser device on a neighbor during a dispute. Brooks claimed it was for self-defense, but evidence showed it was an offensive act, not a defensive one.
Judgment:
Convicted of aggravated assault with a dangerous weapon.
Court ruled that a taser qualifies as a “dangerous weapon” when used offensively.
Significance:
Set a precedent that civilian taser misuse can result in the same penalties as using a firearm in assault cases.
⚖️ Case 7: United States v. James Lewis (2020, Alabama)
Facts:
Police officer James Lewis tased a 14-year-old who was handcuffed and sitting in a patrol car.
The officer laughed during the act, and bodycam footage was key evidence.
Judgment:
Found guilty of civil rights violations and assault under federal law (18 U.S.C. §242).
Sentenced to 3 years imprisonment and permanent removal from law enforcement.
Significance:
Demonstrated that taser use on juveniles or restrained individuals without immediate threat is unlawful and punishable.
⚖️ Case 8: R v. Julian Steele (2021, UK Crown Court)
Facts:
Officer Steele used a taser on a motorist who was already lying face-down after a minor traffic violation.
The taser discharge caused a seizure, leading to hospitalization.
Judgment:
Found guilty of grievous bodily harm (GBH) under Section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
Sentenced to 2 years in custody.
Significance:
Illustrated the increasing criminal accountability of police officers for disproportionate use of tasers.
⚖️ Case 9: R v. Harvey (2022, UK)
Facts:
Civilian Harvey possessed and used a taser disguised as a torch in a public place during an argument.
Police found multiple illegal stun devices in his home.
Judgment:
Convicted under Section 5(1)(b) of the Firearms Act 1968 (unauthorized possession of a prohibited weapon).
Sentenced to 5 years imprisonment (mandatory minimum).
Significance:
Confirmed that civilian taser possession without authorization is a firearms offence, carrying severe penalties.
⚖️ Case 10: Estate of Darryl Tyree (Civil Case, California, 2021)
Facts:
Darryl Tyree died after being tased for over 40 seconds continuously by sheriff’s deputies while in custody.
The taser use exceeded manufacturer guidelines and departmental policy.
Judgment:
The county settled a civil wrongful death lawsuit for $6 million.
The court condemned “reckless disregard for human life.”
Significance:
Highlighted that excessive taser duration can lead to civil liability and wrongful death findings, even if criminal prosecution does not occur.
⚖️ Key Legal Principles Established
| Principle | Description |
|---|---|
| Proportionality | Tasers must be used only when necessary to prevent harm — not for compliance or punishment. |
| Civil Rights Protection | Misuse under color of law violates constitutional rights (U.S. – 4th & 14th Amendments). |
| Criminal Accountability | Officers may face assault, battery, or manslaughter charges if taser misuse causes injury/death. |
| Civil Liability | Victims or their families can claim damages for excessive or unjustified taser use. |
| Training & Policy Duty | Police departments are obligated to train officers in safe and lawful taser use. |
| Illegal Possession | Civilians possessing tasers without license can face firearm-related charges. |
🧩 Conclusion
Taser misuse prosecutions demonstrate the fine balance between law enforcement power and individual rights. Courts across jurisdictions have ruled that tasers are serious, potentially lethal weapons, not mere tools for compliance.
Officers and civilians alike face strict criminal and civil consequences when tasers are used irresponsibly, excessively, or unlawfully.
RELATED Blog
0 comments