December 2, 2005

SJPD issues Taser training guidelines

New rules surpass independent police auditor recommendations

By Kymberli W. Brady
Staff Writer

On Tuesday, Police Chief Rob Davis released new Taser training guidelines that Independent Police Auditor [IPA] Barbara Attard says surpass even her recommendations.

Independent Police Auditor Barbara Attard

The announcement just before the City Council meeting was to discuss Attard’s formal recommendation on Nov. 18 to establish written policy regarding Taser use—one of two she announced at an earlier press conference that would be attached to the IPA’s 2005 mid-year report to the City Council.

In addition to general guidelines detailing recommended situations for Taser use, the report also suggested listing prohibited uses, including the use of warnings when practical; limiting Taser use to deadly force situations in incidents involving vulnerable populations: i.e., young children, elderly persons, and women known to be pregnant; limiting the duration of Taser applications to the standard 5-second cycles, and the number of cycles to two successful shocks, except in extreme circumstances; and using extreme caution when using Tasers on persons under the influence of drugs.

In April, 2004, the department shelled out $780,000 for the devices that use compressed gas, capable of emitting a 50,000-volt blast from 21 feet away—a decision triggered by the fatal shooting the year before of a Vietnamese woman waving a large Asian vegetable peeler at officers and the community clamor that followed.

Since then, Tasers have become a source of serious controversy. Although they have been shown to be a valuable tool and a potentially life-saving alternative use of force for officers, they have also been associated with injuries and deaths that continue to rise in tandem with increased Taser use. Although no deaths have been directly attributed to Taser use, recent altercations, including the Nov. 18 death of a 38-year-old, 300-pound San Jose man have warranted harsh criticism by civilians and organizations, including The Human Rights Commission and the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California. Whether due to equipment malfunction or officer error, some claim that a disturbing number of people are dying as a result of confrontations where Taser devices or “stun guns” have been used.

Attard has maintained since her appointment last January that the police department needs to develop tighter guidelines and a definitive departmental policy with regard to the use of Taser weapons. The two recent San Jose deaths have added longer legs to her cause.

“We do not disagree on the importance of insuring that officers are using Tasers properly and that adequate oversight exists,” Davis says. “Indeed, the San Jose Police Department has taken the lead in ensuring that Tasers are used appropriately.”

According to Davis, the department became one of the first in the country to issue Taser devices to each of its 820 patrol officers due to the requests of community groups and civil rights organizations after reports indicated that officer-involved shootings had been reduced after implementing Taser devices, as were injuries from batons and other impact weapon use. Altercations between officers and suspects had subsided as well.

Davis adds that he shares the concerns outlined in the IPA report, and notes that the department already has been addressing such concerns by conducting its own study in order to track and analyze the efficacy of each Taser use because it is relatively new and untested. Doing so enabled his staff to design and customize oversight of its usage—the results of which have become a written set of guidelines for subsequent officer training.

“Indeed, the department has updated the written documentation provided to officers undergoing Taser training,” he says. “And these additional materials address the concerns raised by the Independent Police Auditor (IPA) about providing written guidelines for Taser usage to officers”

Last spring, the SJPD Training Unit staff developed a Taser update course for the annual training class that each officer is required to attend in order to maintain California Police Officer Standards and Training (POST) certification. The training was implemented in September.

In addition to producing and distributing two reports on SJPD Taser usage, Davis says that the Department will continue to review Taser usage.

“Tasers are an extremely valuable and effective device that have met or surpassed the Department’s expectations, he says. “Indeed, it became evident upon a review of the details of all the SJPD Taser cases that some incidents that most likely would have led to an officer-involved shooting were handled with a less intrusive level of force.”

The written SJPD guidelines also address the Taser usage guidelines recommended by the Police Executive Research Foundation (PERF) that resulted from an October meeting in Houston where police departments across the country discussed such guidelines. Davis noted that SJPD Lt. Gary L. Kirby, commander of the Research and Development Unit, attended the conference and participated in writing the guidelines outlined in the PERF report.

“The manner in which the SJPD maintains oversight of its Taser usage equals or exceeds that of other police departments across the country,” he adds. “The current SJPD polices, procedures and practices serve to regulate officers’ Taser training and usage:”

Although Davis maintains they are not directly in response to Attard’s ongoing petition, the new rules, which will be posted on the internal police website later this week, exceed her expectations.

“These guidelines are inclusive and include a lot more that what we recommended,” Attard said. “I’m very impressed with these.”

While Davis agrees that guidelines should be used and feels that the Department has been proactive in its efforts to train all officers using Taser in proper deployment methods, he stops short of agreeing with Attard when it comes to placing the guidelines in the San Jose Police Department Duty Manual’s Use of Force policy sections, citing too many variables that go into an officer’s split-second decision to use a handgun, shotgun, automatic rifle, baton, Taser, pepper spray, or hands-on force.

“The key to successful use of force policy lies in ongoing and updated training,” he says. “The department directs and encourages officers through policy and training practices to attempt to use the lowest level of force that is reasonable to affect an arrest and to protect officers and other members of the public from harm, including attempts to achieve control through advice, warnings and persuasion. Policies regarding the use of force are intentionally short, clear and concise in order to allow an officer to make decisions in tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving situations. Detailed guidelines into a Duty Manual ignore the fact that one cannot begin to describe in absolute terms and in every circumstance when an officer should or should not use a particular force option.”

Acting on a new motion, the City Council voted unanimously to instruct Attard and the SJPD to come up with a solution as to how and where the new guidelines would eventually be published. They will report back to the council in January.