ACLU taking Taser use to the Supreme Court

According to a release by the ACLU, a petition was submitted to the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday asking the nine Supreme Court Justices to rule that a law enforcement officer’s excessive use of force with a Taser is unconstitutional.

The case offers the Supreme Court its first opportunity to address Taser abuse in an incident captured by a video camera mounted on the patrol car dashboard of the Washington County, Florida Sheriff’s Deputy, Jonathan Rackard.

The petition reports that Deputy Rackard administered three five-second-long 50,000-volt discharges of a Taser to Jesse Buckley with the Taser in “drive-stun” mode, which means that the device was pressed directly against the skin instead of from a distance.

The ACLU lawsuit alleges that the deputy’s actions violate the Fourth Amendment, since his only purpose was to inflict pain upon an already-handcuffed arrestee to make him stand up. 

Buckley’s lawyer, James V. Cook of Tallahassee, Florida, posted the video of the Tasing on YouTube at the suggestion of Judge Beverly Martin, the dissenting member of the Eleventh Circuit panel.

 “The Eleventh Circuit’s ruling licenses police officers to use Tasers as cattle prods to inflict gratuitous pain on a nonviolent handcuffed arrestee, simply to herd him towards a police car.  The repeated and excruciatingly painful application of 50,000 volts of electricity was once the exclusive province of the agents and implements of torture, and cannot be condoned in a civilized society,” said Maria Kayanan, ACLU of Florida Associate Legal Director.

Buckley was arrested March 17, 2004 after refusing to sign a traffic citation during a routine traffic stop. He was handcuffed and voluntarily exited his vehicle and fell to the ground.

The ACLU reports the arresting officer “Tased” Buckley three times with each Tase lasted five seconds, leaving 16 burn marks on his skin, some severe enough to produce keloid scars.

The federal district court held that the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity, but by a split decision, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals panel reversed that opinion.  The 11th Circuit denied rehearing the case before the entire Circuit Court of Appeals, and upon denial the petition to move to the Supreme Court was made.

“The 11th Circuit opinion in Buckley v. Haddock represents a step backwards in police professionalism,” said Mr. Buckley’s trial court attorney, James Cook. “It takes us back several decades to a time when some law enforcement agencies gave officers permission to use old-fashioned electric cattle prods, along with dogs and fire hoses, to control people who were not being violent. We hope the U.S. Supreme Court will have the wisdom to revoke that permission.”

A PDF of the petition can be downloaded at: http://www.aclufl.org/pdfs/BuckleyCert-final.pdf