BOP officer‘s decision to tase man unjustified

The man was being detained in Tauranga District Court when the incident happened in 2019.

The Independent Police Conduct Authority has found that a police officer was not justified in tasering a man detained in the Tauranga District Court cells three times in February 2019.

The officer was charged with assault with a weapon for each Taser discharge and was acquitted by a jury in July 2022.

A man was taken from Tauranga Police Station to court cells to await an appearance, says a statement released by the IPCA today.

"The man suffers from mental illness and was agitated and disruptive throughout the morning.

"He attempted to leave the cell, and the officer involved in this incident, together with his colleagues, had to pick him up and force him back into the cell.

"A Community Magistrate remanded the man in custody, and he needed to be moved back to the custody suite at the Police station. He did not want to go and would not cooperate."

After an attempt to persuade him to come voluntarily, the IPCA says the officer entered the cell with a Taser pointed at the man.

Another police officer and three corrections officers also entered and tried to restrain the man.

The officer told the Authority that he believed the man had hit and pushed away two of his colleagues, and that he posed an imminent and serious threat to himself.

He says the man threatened to kill him, and he believed he was about to be assaulted.

"He was extremely wary of the man's strength and speed. He fired the Taser when the man lunged at him, he said to defend himself and his colleagues," says the IPCA.

He activated the Taser twice more while the man was on the ground. He believed the man was attempting to get up and was armed with a sharp Taser probe that could cause serious harm to himself and his colleagues who would handcuff the man.

The Authority viewed CCTV footage from the cell and footage from the camera mounted on the Taser.

"We spoke to the officers involved as well as the man. We also assessed the evidence from the officer's jury trial.

"There is a fundamental contradiction between the threat the officer and some of his colleagues say existed, and which prompted the officer to act, and what can be clearly seen on both pieces of footage.

"We cannot see any evidence of the officer's colleagues being punched or pushed, or the officer himself in a position of physical threat prior to any of the Taser discharges.

"Despite what he now says, he simply cannot have perceived an imminent and serious threat at the time.

"We have concluded that the officer honestly believes his version of events. We believe he has constructed this story to fit the events after the fact, and he now believes this version to be true.

"This version has subsequently been reinforced through repeatedly watching the footage frame-by-frame in preparation for court. In short, his recollection is unreliable, but not dishonest.

"Because the officer did not believe he was facing an imminent and serious threat prior to each Taser discharge, he cannot have fired the Taser to defend himself or others," says the IPCA.

"Rather, we believe he did so to force the man to comply with instructions and make the extraction easier. The officer cannot rely on self-defence to justify his actions."

Authority Chair, Judge Colin Doherty acknowledges that a jury acquitted this officer of criminal charges.

"However, the Authority has considered the evidence using a different lens and employing a civil standard of proof.

"The man did not pose a threat justifying the level of force used against him, and given the reality portrayed on the footage of this incident, the officer cannot have perceived that this was the case at the time. However, I accept he honestly believes a different construction of events."

The Authority completed its investigation into this incident in December 2019 but delayed the release of its public report until after the conclusion of court proceedings in July 2022.

Bay of Plenty District Commander Superintendent Tim Anderson.

In responses to the ICPA ruling being released today, Bay of Plenty District Commander Superintendent Tim Anderson they accept the findings.

"The man was waiting in the cells for his appearance and was agitated and disruptive. When it was time for him to be moved back to the custody unit at Tauranga Police Station he was uncooperative.

"At this point, our officer entered the cell and pointed the taser at the man while three Corrections officers tried to restrain him.

"During this incident, the officer made the decision to taser the man three times as he believed he posed an imminent and serious threat to the staff."

Tim says police self-reported this incident to the IPCA and carried out a criminal investigation.

Following this, the officer was charged with three counts of assault with a weapon. He stood trial in July last year and was acquitted by a jury.

"Police agrees with the findings by the IPCA and our decision to charge shows how seriously we treated this matter.

"Police now have an ongoing employment investigation in relation to this incident and the officer remains on restricted duties. We are unable to comment further at this time."

4 comments

A policeman's lot...

Posted on 21-03-2023 11:39 | By morepork

... is not a happy one. Maybe excessive force was used; maybe it wasn't. What is indisputable is that if the victim had remained calm and complied with requests, no Tasers would have been used and nobody would have been hurt or had their reputation tarnished. The man had some "mental problems" and played up. Is it fair or reasonable to expect a normal cop to know how to deal with this situation? Under the circumstances, the quickest way to get compliance was to suppress the prisoner. Not ideal. But understandable. It is easy to be judgemental when the guy is not in YOUR face...


IPCA

Posted on 21-03-2023 15:37 | By terry hall

they need to pull there head in , for god sake these are criminal and should be treated as such, what do they want the police to do, give them a cup of coffee, the judges give them a slap on the wrist, no wonder here in nz it is getting out of hand, wild west days shootings everyday, ram raids everyday, armed hold ups, the list goes on, to many do gooders.


@ terry hall

Posted on 21-03-2023 20:46 | By Yadick

Well said Terry.


@Terry Hall

Posted on 22-03-2023 17:54 | By morepork

I don't see "do-gooders" as the problem. In fact I'd rather see people being "do-gooders" than forming lynch mobs or dispensing summary "justice". The problem we have is MISGUIDED "do-gooders"... They are suckers for a sob story, without thinking it through. Judges are lenient by nature (No bad thing... until the community gets the nessage that certain bad behaviours are OK.) We need to have mandatory minimum sentences for certain crimes, that a judge MUST impose and make it clear that it's NOT OK. The primary objective has to be rehabilitation rather than punishment, but that doesn't mean a wet bus ticket is OK. Armed robbery, crimes against children, rape and sexual violence, should all carry mandatory minimum sentences. Underage crime should be answered by the parents AND the kids concerned. Laws mean nothing if they are not enforced.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.