OMBUDSMAN’S REPORT
Complaint Investigation & Findings
OMB09/0014 – July 13, 2009
Reader Advisory
This report contains language which some may find offensive. The original language present on an audio recording created during the incident has not been edited, nor have euphemisms been used.
EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW
The Complainant alleged that a Boise Police Department (BPD) officer (Officer #3) used excessive force during the Complainant’s arrest. Specifically, the Complainant alleged that, after he was handcuffed and while offering no resistance, he was tased three times by Officer #3, once on the wrist, once on the lower back, and once on the inside of his right buttock. In addition, the Complainant alleged that, while he was handcuffed and prone on the floor, Officer #3 pushed the Taser in between the Complainant’s legs and up against his anal and genital regions. Finally, the Complainant alleged that Officer #3 accompanied his actions with taunts and threats to tase the Complainant “in the ass” and “in the balls.”
Due to the nature of these allegations, and based on a preliminary review of the evidence, the ombudsman determined that there was credible evidence to suggest that a criminal offense may have been committed by Officer #3. In accordance with the Policies and Procedures of the Office of the Community Ombudsman, the ombudsman requested that an outside law enforcement agency conduct an investigation to determine if there was any criminal wrong doing on the part of Officer #3. The matter was investigated by the Idaho State Police, the results of which were reviewed by the Ada County Prosecutor’s Office, who declined to pursue criminal charges.
OMB09/0014
Ombudsman’s Report – Complaint Investigation and Findings
July 13, 2009
The ombudsman’s independent investigation determined that Officer #3 tased the Complainant only twice, once before he was handcuffed and once after being handcuffed. The first use of the Taser was applied to the Complainant’s lower back and came moments after the police came into direct contact with the Complainant. There was credible contradictory evidence regarding the extent and nature of the resistance shown by the Complainant at the time of the first use of the Taser. As a result, there was no clear preponderance of evidence to support a finding of either Exonerated or Sustained. Therefore, a finding of Not Sustained was issued.
The Complainant was handcuffed when Officer #3 activated the Taser the second time. Although the Complainant was still moving and was not totally compliant with the officers’ commands to stop moving, he was not resisting or behaving in a way that would justify the use of a Taser on a handcuffed individual. The evidence clearly shows that, not only did Officer #3 threaten to put the Taser against the Complainant’s anus and genitals, Officer #3 acted on his threats and pushed the Taser between the Complainant’s legs and against that area of his anatomy. Officer #3’s Taser left burns on the inside of the Complainant’s right buttock. The preponderance of the evidence clearly supports the conclusion that this second use of the Taser by Officer #3 was neither reasonable nor necessary given the totality of the circumstances. Therefore, a Sustained finding was issued.
Two recommendations, one for a policy change and the other for training, were also made as a result of this investigation.
http://www.boiseombudsman.org/InvestigativeReports/2009InvReports/09_0014PublicReport.pdfAnd he wasn't even fired!
:banghead: