Travis County Commissioners Court
June 6, 2006
Item 28
28, consider and take appropriate action on the continued purchase and use of tasers by Travis County peace officers. This is a matter we discussed in the work session a couple of days ago. And just as a reminder, the 60 second overview from the sheriff's office is now.
>> I知 with the Travis County sheriff's office. Next to me is --
>> congratulations oz your promotion.
>> last week I got some paperwork together and provided each of you with a folder of information on the use of tasers within the Travis County sheriff's office both within the correction bureau and the law enforcement bureau. We have this money in a block grant to purchase approximately 20,000 dollars' worth, so we're just trying to add to our inventory of tasers that we already have and already utilize. I think it's an important tool, and with the statistics that we have and the training that we have, it is proven that we utilize it in a safe or the safest manner that you can. And that we've had positive results. We don't overview the device. And every device is documented and reviewed by the chain of command and the training academy to make sure we adhere to all policies and procedures and guidelines. And I can say without hesitation that we will stay on top of any training -- new training that comes out with the taser and we'll change our training if we have to on the latest policies and procedures regarding this device. So all's I知 asking is permission from y'all to utilize the funds that we already have set aside to purchase an additional 20 devices.
>> [ inaudible ].
>> the benefit we've found in the last month or so is we've met with dr. Rock, and there are a group of medical individuals who are specifically reviewing this from a law enforcement and e.m.s. Perspective, their focus being on the medical components, and in discussion with him we were -- we felt that their support from a medical viewpoint -- and continued review of it was important for us. We have to rely on those medical individuals to provide advice and guidance on matters. I think -- that helps us drive our policies and procedures. Should things become apparent through those individuals that we need to change our modify the way that we utilize this tool, we would certainly do that.
>> john, I appreciate the stuff that you got to me and I did read it. The pages don't have page numbers, sorry, but in the background in terms of jeff frazier's article, it talked about how tasers should generally not be used against a pregnant woman. How does an officer know from looking at a female between a certain age bracket if they are or are not pregnant?
>> to a police officer in a confrontation, and let's say it's in her second or third month may not be able to. I don't think anybody could tell during a confrontation. If she's obviously pregnant, then they would make a decision based on that. If she was in her seventh or eighth month and obviously showing, then they would certainly take that into consideration. But to not know somebody's medical condition, I mean, how could you know that anyway?
>> how many women do you know of that's been taserred? Do we have any record of that?
>> our records at least for the last two years that I reviewed don't indicate that we've had to utilize them on --
>> that's one of the points here. It talks about this shouldn't be used against pregnant women. Well, you don't know that. The next page it talks about tasers -- there's a lot of questions about tasers related to being in a state of excited delirium as a result of drug use or mental illness. And that bad things happen because of a pharmaco logical intoxication. How does an officer know looking at them that somebody has mental illness and may be on certain meds because of that or drug use that could prove to be a fatal reaction? I知 just trying to understand how you could know that, anything other than after the fact.
>> to answer the question as best I can, if that person is presenting a threat where an intermediate weapon or higher has to be used, you're going to have to make your choice between your weapons of what you're going to use to stop that aggression or stop that threat. This is just another tool to help you do that. Whenever you deal with mental health consumers or anti-social personalities where they're aggressive to us and a threat to us and we're having to take physical action to detain them, apprehend them, arrest them, then we're going to use the level force that is necessary and no more. This is just another tool that will help us do that. Do we know the history of everyone we deal with? No. Most of the time we know that after the scene is safe. This is another tool to help us make that scene safe.
>> judge, I do have some questions for executive session. I prewarned david escamilla that I had questions and hopefully he researched them so he will have very quick answers to them.
>> so what options do you have for weapons when force is required?
>> well, you have just your mere presence. You have soft and empty hand control. You have different types of intermediate weapons, expandable baton, oc spray, this device that we're already using now, all the way up to lethal force. I think we have shown throughout history that we utilize the proper amount of force necessary. The number of taser deployments in all of 2005 was only 17. In 2006 so far there's only been four deployments and they've been used appropriately. We've followed all policy and guidelines. The one I知 very aware of is one of my officers last month used it last month on a mental health consumer that was carving his arm up with a knife. There's no police training in the world that's going to train you how to go up there and disarm someone with an edged weapon. This was the perfect situation that that taser not only saved that mental health consumers life, but it saved those officers from having to go hand in hand with someone with an edged weapon. Which you are not trained to do. Most of the time you are trained to keep a distance of at least 21 feet, present your lethal force, and if that person makes a an aggressive move towards you, then your only option is lethal force. This taser gives us another option. I plead with you don't take that option away, but an option that we're already utilizing. We're not asking for additional funding. We already have the funding. I知 just asking permission to write the check.
>> so the most lethal is the handgun.
>> sir?
>> the most lethal weapon is the handgun.
>> yes, sir.
>> then next to that would be the taser. What would be third?
>> expandable ba to ton or the spay.
>> so you go from the expandable baton to the spray.
>> yes, sir.
>> so the taser came up to fill that void to give you a weapon that was stronger, I guess, than the baton and the spray, but not as lethal as the handgun. The problem is that if you don't use the taser correctly, problems may result. Some defendants have unknown problems, I guess, where the outcome could be a lot more serious or deadly than the officers want.
>> correct, your honor. I mean, the taser is just adding another level. If you take away that level, your last option is lethal force. I think another tool in our tool box to utilize and do a better job, a more professional job.
>> judge, I might add that in discussion with Austin e.m.s. That -- and I think that their soon to be published report will show a lot of documentation. Their initial findings have been that tasers in our community have saved lives and have significantly reduced injuries both to individuals exhibiting behavior where it was used upon them as well as to the staff utilizing those. If an officer would choose to go hand to hand with someone with an edged weapon, the likelihood of our officer getting hurt and severely injured is extremely high. Again, the only other choice they would have would be to use lethal force and we know the circumstances that would result from that. I agree that this fills a gap in there where at a distance an officer can protect themself as well as hopefully protect the citizens in the area as well as the individual by utilizing the least force they need to.
>> okay. And we have legal questions that we need to discuss in executive session, so it would be after that before we make a decision today.
>> okay.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, June 7, 2006 12:54 PM