Cops taser pregnant woman

Katherine - posted on 05/17/2012 ( 65 moms have responded )

65,420

232

5195

Next week the U.S. Supreme Court will be meeting to decide whether to hear an appeal from three Seattle police officers on the future of "a useful pain technique," commonly known as the use of a Taser.

You may recall the case of Malaika Brooks, a woman in the third trimester of her pregnancy, who had Seattle police use a stun gun on her while she was driving her 11-year-old son to school. Brooks was stopped for a moving violation and agreed to accept a ticket but refused to sign it, thinking that it would be an admission of guilt.

Failure to sign a ticket for a moving violation is a crime in Washington, so the police officers placed Brooks under arrest. Brooks refused to get out of the car, telling police officers that she was pregnant and had to use the restroom. Because Brooks posed no immediate threat, the officers actually had time to discuss how to handle the situation.

These three geniuses came up with the idea of applying a Taser to Brooks' leg, arm and finally her neck, at which point she collapsed.

Brooks, who was convicted of refusing to sign the ticket, sued the officers whose use of the stun gun left her with intense pain and permanent scars. The officers won a split decision in October in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. The majority believed that the officers used excessive force but could not be sued because the law was unclear at the time of the incident.

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski said that Brooks had been "defiant" and "deaf to reason," which caused the incident to occur, and that the officers deserved praise and commendations for their actions. Although the officers won the case, the court informed them that "some future use of Tasers would cross a constitutional line and amount to excessive force." The officers appealed the case to the Supreme Court to "clear their names" and preserve their right to "a useful pain technique."

So these police officers, who basically got away with using a Taser on a pregnant woman, now want the Supreme Court to tell them they were right after a circuit court already has? I don't know about you, but I would feel pretty ashamed and embarrassed if I had used a stun gun on a seven-months-pregnant woman over a refusal to sign a ticket.

Instead of hiding their heads in shame, they want to push this case to the Supreme Court, even after the city of Seattle has said there is no reason for the appeal and accepted liablility for injuries incurred during the Brooks incident. So who is being "defiant" and "deaf to reason"?

The police officers couldn't think of any other way to address the issue? Yes, Brooks was defiant, but she posed no danger to the police officers, and she was pregnant. What is the likelihood that police officers incapable of defusing a situation like this would know the effect that a Taser could have on a fetus? I would say slim to none, and yet they did it anyway. Where is the pro-life movement when you need it?

Did it occur to police officers to explain to Brooks that signing the ticket is not an admission of guilt? Did it occur to them to allow her to use the restroom (which pregnant women in their last trimester do constantly) and then seize the vehicle? Are there no procedural guidelines for what to do when someone who poses no immediate threat refuses to sign a ticket for a moving violation?

This case clearly reflects a fundamental lack of common sense on the part of everyone involved, because using a Taser on a pregnant woman seems excessive to me. Even if Brooks was wrong for not signing the ticket, did her "defiant" behavior justify the use of a Taser? I think not. Just what did three male police officers think that one pregnant woman was going to be able to do to them? In the words of Diddy, this is more a case of "bitchassedness" than the right to Taser people indiscriminately.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: What society says about mothers and how mothers are treated are two different things. Tasering a pregnant woman is unconscionable. Pushing the case after you've won it so that you can justify the use of "a useful pain technique" is just sad. What is the world coming to when three police officers need a Taser to arrest an unarmed pregnant woman?

http://www.theroot.com/buzz/should-pregn...

This seriously hit home for me. I have 2 kids and if I was tasered for something as trivial as this you bet I would be suing! Did she deserve it? Heck no! Are you joking? The woman could have lost her baby, how horrible. And to have the court decide it was reasonable just makes me even more mad.

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Mary - posted on 05/18/2012

3,348

31

123

On first glance, this story sounds absolutely outrageous. Taser a pregnant woman?? Seriously?

And then I thought about it some more. As ridiculous as the the whole thing seems, I'm still stuck with the fact that she brought this on herself. It all seems ludicrous, but really, what exactly were these cops supposed to do? Let her go, and ignore the law, just because she was pregnant? Yes, they could have just forcibly dragged her out of the car - but I have a feeling that wouldn't have been received any better, and would have left them open to the possibility that she would have physically resisted that attempt by hitting, kicking, biting, or whatever. That's a reasonable assumption, since she was already being defiant, and resistant to obeying the law.

I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but a huge part of me thinks it's a bit hypocritical for her to make a huge cry about the potential harm to her unborn fetus (which, btw, was born completely healthy two months later) when, in truth, she had it in her power to prevent the situation from escalating to the point it did. They did warn her ahead of time of their intent to use the taser if she continued to refuse to exit her vehicle. Just sign the damned ticket, or willingly get out of the fucking car. She was speeding - she got caught. Being pregnant does not make you somehow immune to the laws of the land, or free of any repercussions that may ensue for continued defiance of law officers.

Quite frankly, it sounds to me like she did think that her pregnancy made her "special", and that the officers weren't going to pursue her compliance just because of it. I think people are so caught up in the mindset of "Oh, how awful that a poor pregnant woman was tasered" that they are forgetting the very simple, yet relevant facts here. She broke the law by speeding. She then refused to sign the ticket, and then refused to get out of the car when requested. To me, the fact that she was pregnant is irrelevant.

Actually, the taser probably represented the option that was least likely to cause harm to her baby. Physically forcing a non-compliant pregnant woman out of a car runs a pretty high risk of abdominal trauma - just a hard knock of her belly against the steering wheel at that gestational age would warrant a trip to L&D for blood work to rule out the presence of fetal blood cells circulating in the maternal bloodstream (and a shot of rhogam if she was RH negative), as well as up to 24 hours of continuous fetal monitoring.

[deleted account]

Here's my story. I have a friend, the kind who will do anything for anyone to the point of trying to take over your life to 'make it better.' I love her very much but have to take her in small doses. One day she was giving a friend a ride to a local courthouse. She dropped her off at the front and sat there, parking. The signs all over the place say, "NO STANDING." So she waited. Office #1 pulled up and told her she had to move her car. She told the office no, she's not standing, she's parking so she's not moving. He told her that if she didn't move, she was goign to get a ticket. Fine, she took her ticket and put it in her purse. Then continued to sit there. He told her again to move, she refused saying she had her ticket and that's fine. He called his supervisor (officer #2 -female) who again ordered her to start her car and get moving. She refused saying she had her ticket. They had enough and told her to get out of the car. She refused. Officer #1 reached in to take her keys, she smacked his arm. (well there are 2 different versions of how his arm was hit). That was that. They opened her door and yanked her out (she had bad knees and fell to the ground). She was handcuffed and frogmarched down the block to the holding center.

And my friend actually felt like she was the injured party because they bruised her on the way.

So after hearing her story, I'm always a wee bit doubtful that the people in the car were totally guilt free.

Becky - posted on 05/22/2012

2,892

44

93

I saw this story a few days ago and thought it was awful on the part of the cops, but, the more I think about it, this woman is an idiot, and I daresay, not a very good mother either. Seriously, what kind of mother pushes a police officer to the point of tasering her when she is a: 7 months pregnant, and B: has her child in the vehicle with her?! One who is not particularly concerned about the wellbeing of either child, if you ask me! She was warned of the consequences of not signing the ticket, and then of not exiting the vehicle, and she chose to continue to refuse. I think she was looking to cause a stir.

I got a ticket when I was 7 1/2 months pregnant. I had my other 2 boys in the vehicle and we were going Christmas shopping. I was going 130 km. in a 100 km. zone. I was pissed and hormonal and broke down crying in front of the cop, but I knew I deserved the ticket. Let me tell you though, being pregnant and having my 2 little boys in the vehicle, even had I thought I didn't deserve the ticket, I would not have been doing anything to risk arrest or risk traumatizing my boys or harming my baby! I would've taken the ticket and fought it later. Therefore, I think this woman is a moron. I'm not crazy about the fact that they tasered her, because it could have harmed the baby - fortunately it didn't - but thinking about it, I"m not sure what other viable options they had either. She was breaking the law, pregnant or not, really, really had to pee or not. And honestly, I think she was probably being an ass from the get go, because sometimes if you are nice and compliant - and get the right cop - they would let a very pregnant woman (or a very pretty woman, LOL) go in that situation.

Mary - posted on 05/19/2012

3,348

31

123

Well, the good news is, they now have a documented case that tasering does not automatically equal harm to an unborn fetus or cause preterm labor ;-)



Seriously, there will never be any documentation or studies about the "safety" of using a taser in pregnancy. Who the hell is going to volunteer for that study? I can tell you that in severe cases of depression and suicidal tendencies, ECT therapy has been used on pregnant women, and has been found to be safe in all three trimesters. (http://www.ect.org/resources/pregnancy.h...)



Both a taser and ECT are forms of electroshock, so really, it's not an unreasonable jump to say that the use of a taser on a pregnant woman is not unduly risky to the pregnancy. As I said earlier, I think that a physical confrontation, or just dragging her ass out of the driver's seat with that steering wheel sitting there against her belly hold a greater potential for harming the fetus. Any type of abdominal trauma - even something as stupid as ramming your belly against a shopping cart - can have repercussions for the pregnancy.



Again, I still submit that the whole fucking thing never had to happen if she had just behaved like every other normal person and listened to the officers in the first place. I've gotten a ticket or two before in my life, and signing the damned thing is standard. No one likes to get a ticket, and almost everyone swears that they weren't going that fast, or gripes about it. However, the vast majority of us aren't stupid enough to sit there and argue with the cop about it (that's what traffic court is for), or get belligerent, or let it escalate to the point it did with this woman. She made this situation become the clusterfuck that it was, and pregnancy is not an excuse for her stupidity.

Jodi - posted on 05/19/2012

2,694

52

175

You ladies make it sound like that because she was pregnant...7 months pregnant, that she must be this sweet lady, incapable of doing anything wrong. First, she was speeding, then she refused to sign the ticket (I'm sorry, but as a citizen isn't our responsibility to know the laws anywways? Especially something as frequent and benign as traffic violations and procedures?), refused to exit the vehicle, was warned of the fact that she was going to be tasered. I mean, just because she's pregnant doesn't mean she's not hopped up on drugs, doesn't mean she doesn't have a gun in her console, or under her seat, or a knife, or a syringe.

the cops assume anyone is capable of being a threat, including pregnant women, but especially ANYONE who is defiant, unreasonable and resistant. She should have listened and followed their orders, if she didn't want to sign the ticket, she didn't have to...but in that event she was to be placed under arrest...which she resisted. I don't think they used excessive force at all, I think that it's very possible the court ruled that way under public scrutiny and outcry at the events. If I did exactly what she did, in exactly the same situation, I fully expect repurcussions, be it being dragged from the car, pepper sprayed, tasered or what have you. If you act like a criminal, you will be treated like one.

65 Comments

View replies by

Erin - posted on 07/06/2012

195

0

6

This is what happens when citizens don't demand imprisonment of abusive police officers. We must stop allowing cops to use force it's almost always unneeded and rediculous, actually no one has the right to taser a person for refusing to be arrested. It's barbarian and draconian. The law itself to sign the ticket is rediculous it is an admission of guilt regardless of the fact the person is told they can ask for a hearing. These cops are dirt, the courts are a bunch of dirt bags protecting dirt bags. The supreme court is now full of dirt bags.

Mommy - posted on 07/02/2012

328

18

2

I feel like the presentation of this article is one sided. I read further, and the woman was not as complacent as she seems in the OP's article. (No offense to the OP). But when I was reading it I was imagining a woman quietly sitting in her vehicle and politely declining to sign the ticket. According to other reports this was not the case, and she was being defiant towards the police. I don't think police always make the right decision, but I do understand that they have to have a uniform protocol for how they handle situations, and in almost all cases they have to assume that suspects are guilty for their own safety, or else they could easily be caught off guard and fatally injured or wounded.

I have gotten pulled over while pregnant, and was not happy with how the police officer spoke to me. I remained quiet and polite, and I filed a complaint immediately afterwards. She outwardly defied a command from a police officer, so if she received a consequence from that I believe she is partly responsible.

Anonymous - posted on 06/24/2012

51

0

0

Becky,

Well put - You took the words out of my mouth! I agree with you wholeheartedly.

Stifler's - posted on 05/20/2012

15,141

154

604

I agree with Jen. Also some pregnant women out there feel like they're immune to the law because what are they going to do to a pregnant woman. I feel like there's probably more to this case than "the officers were brutal for no reason".

Beth - posted on 05/20/2012

178

0

8

I just read a story about a cop kicking a pregnant woman. What the hell is going on with law enforcement in this country? SERIOUSLY.

Jodi - posted on 05/20/2012

2,694

52

175

From my research, the stun drive mode, or touch mode of a taser gun is the equivalent of a stun gun.



*edit to add: the difference I have come up with is that personal devices work ONLY as a stun gun, not a probe taser while police tasers can work either way.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/20/2012

3,377

8

66

Ahh, from what I read, the personal ones (like in your link) are not the same as the ones used by Police. So, I am not sure, if what you provided is accurate to what occurred. Since I also read up on Taser Guns and my info slightly differed.

Jodi - posted on 05/19/2012

2,694

52

175

"As a general rule, a one-half second contact can repel and startle the attacker, giving some pain and muscle contraction. One to two seconds can cause muscle spasms and a dazed mental state. Over three seconds can cause loss of balance and muscle control, mental confusion and disorientation."



"The electrical shock that emits from the stun gun will not pass from the person being stunned to the person doing the stunning. The effect is localized only in the affected area and does not pass through the body. Even if you or the attacker is wet or standing in water, you will not get shocked by the stun gun. "





No, no projectiles are used, nothing sticks in the body. The prongs are just pressed directly to the skin. She may not have believed she was guilty. "No, they did not explain that part to her, otherwise, I think she would have signed it." Well, I would bet money they DID explain it to her, numerous times even. I would bet money she was just being flat out unreasonable, refused to hear what they ahd to say or just plain old didn't care. You can argue over and over again how you think they didn't explain it or she would have signed...and I can argue over and over again how I think they did explain it and she didn't sign...but she was warned she would be tasered...she still didn't comply. signing the ticket or not...wouldn't you avoid getting tasered by getting out of the vehicle? Pregnant or not?



ETA the link from which I quoted the above information.



http://www.womenonguard.com/how_work.htm

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/19/2012

3,377

8

66

Jodi---Placed in the neck, even a stun gun, or a taser placed at touch mode could interfere electrical impulses from the brain to the rest of the body enough to collapse a person.

It is NOT suppose to. I just finished edumacating myself on it. ;) The drive stun mode is used on passive situations ONLY. It is meant for pain compliance ONLY. There are NO electric projectiles used. Nothing sticks in the body, while using the drive stun mode. So, if it was a passive situation, then no need to taser her three times.

She did NOT believe she was guilty! She was willing to accept the ticket. However, she felt as though they stopped the wrong person. She said "It was the car in front of her", thus why she caused somewhat of a ruckus. She did not want to provide an admission of guilt, by signing. No, they did not explain that part to her, otherwise, I think she would have signed it.

Jodi - posted on 05/19/2012

2,694

52

175

Placed in the neck, even a stun gun, or a taser placed at touch mode could interfere electrical impulses from the brain to the rest of the body enough to collapse a person.

"So, again. What was their problem, that they had to taser her three separate times in three different places?" Why didn't she comply after being warned she was going to be tased? Why not comply after being tased the first time? Why not after the second time? Why should the cops have had ANY problem with her to begin with? Why should the cops have had to resort to ANYTHING other than "Have a nice day and drive safely ma'am." after walking away with her signed ticket? This is all on her. HER actions, from speeding all the way to non-compliance to get out of the vehicle led to the consequences she received.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/19/2012

3,377

8

66

If the taser was set to only affect that one area, then why did she collapse? A taser in "drive stun mode" is meant to produce pain ONLY. The projectiles from the air cartridge are not used, rather the taser is placed directly on the body. Drive stun mode is intended to cause pain and not incapacitate the subject. It is significant pain, which IS why she had scars thereafter. It does not explain why she collapsed, since this mode is NOT intended or suppose to do this.

So, again. What was their problem, that they had to taser her three separate times in three different places?

Jodi - posted on 05/19/2012

2,694

52

175

If you read the link I supplied earlier, they DID reach in and remove the keys, but dropped them on the floor. And moving the taser to the next level would have meant sending the electric current through her entire body, not just keeping it localized to the spot on her thigh, arm or leg. her whole body, including her womb. And I wholeheartedly believe they DID explain to her that signing the ticket was not an admission of guilt. From her behavior, it is not a far leap to assume she was unreasonable.

Lastly, what would you call NOT excessive force? Physically dragging her from the car, but I can easily believe she would have fought that pretty ferociously too. Dragging her from the car could have resulted in abdominal injuries. So then we're left with pepper spray, a baton or a gun...

Sal - posted on 05/19/2012

1,816

16

34

She wouldn't eign a ticket she wouldn't get out of the car why would she Give them the keys

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/19/2012

3,377

8

66

Well, are you saying they couldn't tell her to give them her keys? Come on now. This is something they commonly do. If she wouldn't do that, well reach in and take them, you know, like they did to tase her.

Sal - posted on 05/19/2012

1,816

16

34

She did have a weapon her car if you deliberately drive at someone you are using your far as a weapon

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/19/2012

3,377

8

66

I guess I cannot get my head around having to aign a ticket. It is just something we do NOT have to do here. If you are thought to have been speeding, they pull you over and write you a ticket. You are then on your merry way. No signing involved. Yes, that IS a stupid law. However, no, it doesn't matter whether I think it is stupid or not, if it is law, then it is what it is.



I am not going to change my stance though. I do not think they needed three officers and three different tasing sessions. If it was on the lowest mode and they had to do it three times, well then maybe it should have been on the next mode and only had to do it once. Although, again, I do not agree it was reasonable or justifiable.



Just explain to her that signing the damn thing is not an admission of guilt, for christ sake.



I have also said, she is an idiot. She should have just obeyed. Yes, she did bring a ot of it on herself. Whether she is an idiot or not, though, does not mean she required being tasered. The cops seriously need to have better training on how to overcome an unruly person without excessive force. Again, what was she going to do to them? If she had had a weapon, she would've used it from the get go. Why would she sit there and argue with them, then them have enough time to decide on what to do with her and then she pulls out the weapon? Yeah, I don't think so.



If they were concerned she had a weapon, they would have pulled their guns and forced her out of the car. They weren't worried of this. It would've went down a whole lot different if they were worried.

Jodi - posted on 05/19/2012

2,694

52

175

Oh, and the LAW of Washington states that if you dont' sign the ticket, you get placed under arrest. The cops have to abide by the law just like everyone else. So, no, giving the ticket and not making her follow the rest of the law would not have been right. Whether you and I think it's a stupid law is irrelevant. There are a lot of stupid laws, but I still abide by them.

Jodi - posted on 05/19/2012

2,694

52

175

"lets tase a pregnant woman, that has no weapon" Well, that would have been an awefully huge assumption on the cops part would it...until they ahd searched the woman and her vehicle.



From MY readings, the touch mode of a taser delivers about the same amps as a single christmas bulb. From further readings, the low of an amp would not have been likely to cause harm to the fetus. Obviously there are exceptions to every rule, I'm sure some people have died touching a single, frayed cord of a single christmas bulb. So, I am still suggesting that tasering her was probably safer than the alternatives, for all parties involved. (remember, the cops dont' KNOW she doesn't have a weapon stashed under her thigh and when they grab her she'll whip it out.) The safety of the cops has to be taken into consideration too. Anyone who assumes that a pregnant woman can't possibly bare any threat is just ignorant...and probably an idiot.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/19/2012

3,377

8

66

Jodi--- Are you telling me you have any clue of what the taser can do to the unborn child? Sure, she had a healthy baby 2 months later. Was it luck? Will this be the same outcome for the next pregnant lady because she was speeding? We don't know, now do we.



The cops weren't even sure exactly how it affects an unborn child. Otherwise they wouldn't have sat there and contemplated on what to do. They even said, "OK, just don't do it in her stomach". Sounds to me, they weren't fully sure but went ahead anyhow. From my readings on how it affects an unborn child, law enforcement is still unsure. Do you think they tested it on pregnant women when in the testing phases? I highly doubt it. So, perhaps in theory they think it is safe but they don't know from "fact" now do they?

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/19/2012

3,377

8

66

How about they give her the ticket, without it being sigend and then add to their paperwork, that she was defiant and would not sign the ticket, therefore she gets another charge? You know, obstruction of justice! Then, she can go and fight that in court. Otherwise, she can have a warrant out for her arrest, if she does not comply to the ticket and additional charge.



Seriously, there are other things they could have done.



I also am not advocating that just because you are pregnant you should get away with everything. This was a speeding ticket! How trivial! Yeah, lets tase a pregnant woman, that has no weapon because she wouldn't sign the damn ticket. Can you say "ignoranus"? If she had done a more severe crime, then yes, taser the bitch. I just do not agree that being tasered three times is ethical, due to failure to sign a ticket.

Jodi - posted on 05/19/2012

2,694

52

175

MeMe, they would have most likely dragged her out of the car, risking more serious damage to the fetus than they did with the taser. So are you telling me you would prefer they risk more serious injury by pulling her from the vehicle (possibly fighting) and possibly dropping her on her stomach and causing more serious injury than tasering her, letting her collapse and being able to safely remove her from the vehicle?

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/19/2012

3,377

8

66

Tell me what would have they done 13+ years ago, when there were no such thing as tasers? How about they do that?



How about they use their defensive training and use that?



How about they learn to correctly talk and explain the complete situation to the person. I still don't think they explained that she was not admitting guilt, by signing.

Mary - posted on 05/19/2012

3,348

31

123

"Sorry but hormones are raging at 7 months." ???

Bullshit. Hormonal shifts of pregnancy are not an excuse for breaking the law or continued defiance and non-compliance with law officers. If she (or ANYone) is that mentally or emotionally unbalanced, they have absolutely no business being behind the wheel of a car or being in charge of another child. Pregnancy is not an excuse, nor is it a mental of physical disability for the vast majority of women. If she actually was that unhinged, that is even more justification for those cops to remove her from that vehicle by whatever means necessary to ensure the safety of herself, her kid, and other cars or pedestrians nearby.

Again, those of you who are so outraged by this have yet to provide what you think would have been a suitable alternative for getting her out of her car. I've already explained why, from an obstetrical point of view, just physically trying to drag her out of the driver's seat would not have been a "safer" option for her or that baby. Unless you think that merely being pregnant is an automatic allowance for disregarding the laws that the rest of society has to follow?

She was doing 32 in a 20mph zone. That says to me she was either in a school zone (during peak school hours, since that's where she was taking her kid) or in a neighborhood filled with pedestrians. I'm guessing you wouldn't be as understanding if it was your kid, or a kid you knew, that she ran over when her "hormonal, raging" ass was zipping along. Nope - you'd be sitting her bemoaning the fact that the cops aren't vigilant enough in maintaining those speeders in residential areas, and blame them for not preventing whatever accident.

A police officer's job is to uphold and enforce the laws of society. It is not a requirement that they unnecessarily put themselves at risk of any level of bodily harm to do so. If there is a way that they can minimize that risk to themselves, it is reasonable that they do so. The fact that she was mom or that she was pregnant does not negate the possibility that she had the potential to do so. A pregnant woman is perfectly capable of inflicting physical harm upon another human - trust me, I've seen more than a few pregnant women do some pretty aggressive shit, and cause plenty of harm to another. Based on her persistent defiance of the cop's verbal requests, an expectation of combatant behavior on her part was not unreasonable.

**Jackie** - posted on 05/19/2012

953

1

18

lol I'm so sorry if I'm on edge lately. I started my new diet. BACK OFF!!! lol

Sal - posted on 05/19/2012

1,816

16

34

Ohhh the other thing I did nt say is that a car is a weapon, there are many police killed hurt or attempted to be hit by cars dilberatly in seemingly minor traffic stops, if she had decied to take off she could of hit the police another person or car or got involved in a pursuit And put herself innocent road users her baby and son all in harms way and that's not acceptable yo me

Sal - posted on 05/19/2012

1,816

16

34

I'm sure they didn't sneak up and taze her, I can only imagine they warned her that if she failed to comply they would taze her yet she chose to defy the requests to either sighn the ticket or get out of the car and Put her self literally in the line of fire.... Hard as it might be to swallow just because a lady said she was preg dosnt mean she wasn't hiding something like carrying drugs or stollen goods, If someone is being difficult they make themselves look suspicious and they get treated accordingly

Sal - posted on 05/19/2012

1,816

16

34

I'm sure they didn't sneak up and taze her, I can only imagine they warned her that if she failed to comply they would taze her yet she chose to defy the requests to either sighn the ticket or get out of the car and Put her self literally in the line of fire.... Hard as it might be to swallow just because a lady said she was preg dosnt mean she wasn't hiding something like carrying drugs or stollen goods, If someone is being difficult they make themselves look suspicious and they get treated accordingly

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/18/2012

3,377

8

66

SHOUTING IS FUN!! Jackie, don't you know that yet??!!! heheheheee

**Jackie** - posted on 05/18/2012

953

1

18

Brianna, why are you shouting? I have already posted (first I think) and expressed how, to say the least, outraged I am about this story. Yikes, hun.

I am fully aware that when you do something to a pregnant woman, you are doing it to the baby but your comment made it seem like they took a taser to a baby not a pregnant woman with a baby inside of her. She had a healthy child by the way. Let's just stick with the story.

Katherine - posted on 05/18/2012

65,420

232

5195

I completely agree Meme and I stand by my decision to say that even THOUGH she reused to sign the ticket and EVEN though she fought them on it, they should have had another way to deal with the situation. Just like the girl in handcuffs. I mean come on! It's not like she was knocking these cops out! She simply didn't sign a F****** ticket.

Sorry but hormones are raging at 7 months. Who knows what kind of damage could have been done to the fetus? It could have started early labor. Think people THINK! That's to the cops BTW.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/18/2012

3,377

8

66

I would like to know what three police officers thought an unarmed, 7 month pregnant woman, was going to do to them. They seriously could not figure out a better plan? You know, I have very little faith in some law enforcement and this just makes it that much harder for me to chew.



Yes, she was wrong to not just do as asked. But, she did not think she was the one speeding, she told them it was the car that was in front of her and that they pulled her over by mistake. She was willing to accept the ticket, she was just not willing to accept guilt, which she thought signing the ticket would do.



I honestly think, the police officers should have just a wee bit more training on how to correctly manage an upset, 7 month pregnant woman. What would have they done if the taser was not available? You know, like 13+ years ago? Would they have drawn their guns and shot her? Yeah, I think they are a little "taser" happy!



The officers won a split decision in October in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. The majority believed that the officers used excessive force but could not be sued because the law was unclear at the time of the incident.



Uh Hum... The majority thought they were wrong but because the laws were unclear at the time, they had no choice but to drop the case. I am with this majority. Pregnant women that pose NO threat, should not be tasered! Give her the damn ticket and send her on her marry way. They would still have proof of the ticket. Having to sign it, is just stupid anyhow. I would think that was an admission of guilt, as well. Otherwise, they would just give the damn ticket already.

Tracie - posted on 05/18/2012

317

9

1

I don't have words strong enough for those officers, but all I could think about reading this article was her 11 year old watching his pregnant mother be painfully shocked - repeatedly - by the police right in front of him. Can you even imagine how terrified that poor kid must have been? Think it will taint the way he sees police officers in the future? Absolutely sickening. Wish I could taser their nuts. Dominant male monkey cretins. (to paraphrase Dazed & Confused)

Brianna - posted on 05/18/2012

1,915

22

352

they tased a baby because the baby is inside of the pregnant woman!

Brianna - posted on 05/18/2012

1,915

22

352

wow cant believe those cops won! i dont care what the lady did u NEVER DO THAT TO A PREGGO WOMAN like really since when would tazing a baby be ok?

Jodi - posted on 05/18/2012

2,694

52

175

Thank you Mary, you have articulated my thoughts better than I was able! She basically chose to get tasered, should the cops have said "Oh my goodness ma'am, I'm so sorry we pulled you over for speeding in school zone! If only we had realized your condition, we would have let you go on by! Here's a special sticker to put on your plate to avoid further issues with other officers." I don't think so.

[deleted account]

ugh. i would like to apologize on behalf of the US for having really stupid people in charge of enforcing the law.



what a bunch of idiots.



ETA: they laid her face down?????? wtf, sure, let's taser a pregnant woman and then lay her on top of her unborn child that's probably writhing in agony after having electric currents shoot through its body, wtf!!

Jodi - posted on 05/17/2012

2,694

52

175

Another...

The three men assessed the situation and conferred. “Well, don’t do it in her stomach,” one said. “Do it in her thigh.”

Three shots from the taser to her neck, arm and thigh later:

Ms. Brooks fell over, and the officers dragged her into the street, laying her face down and cuffing her hands behind her back.


I'm not sure where you're going with this. That's the point of the taser, to incapacitate a person enough for officers to get the cuffs on. And I would hope if they resorted to tasers, they wouldn't aim it at the stomach of a pregnant woman! lol I see nothing wrong with the above statements. As for the judge ruling it exessive force, I was wrong. I've also said all along I don't see how they were incapable of "dragging" her out of the car by force without the use of a taser gun. But that will remain a mystery I suspect forever. I do still think she had it coming, she was warned. Pay the piper as they say!

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/17/2012

3,377

8

66

Another...



The three men assessed the situation and conferred. “Well, don’t do it in her stomach,” one said. “Do it in her thigh.”



Three shots from the taser to her neck, arm and thigh later:



Ms. Brooks fell over, and the officers dragged her into the street, laying her face down and cuffing her hands behind her back.




http://unicornbooty.com/blog/2012/05/15/...

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/17/2012

3,377

8

66

And obviously the judge didn't actually think this case WAS excessive force, or he would have ruled that way. Whether or not he was uncomfortable with it who's to say?

I disagree, or he would not have finished his ruling as he did. It sounds to me, this was the first time he had a case like this before him, thus giving the cops the benefit of the doubt but it if were to happen again, he warned that he may not find in their favour. This is how I preceive it, anyhow.

Ah, I found another link. It specifically states that the judge did rule that the officers did use excessive force but they were immune of Brooks case. This is why they are taking it to the supreme court. They do not like the excessive force ruling.

http://jezebel.com/5911011/terrible-cops...

However, I do agree that she was rather stupid to not just comply. I am not sure what was going thru her head, apparently not much... ;)

Jodi - posted on 05/17/2012

2,694

52

175

Technically speaking, the point of a taser is to make a person collapse. A taser works in disrupting the brain from communicating with the muscles. So, if the taser hits but doesn't work properly, a person won't collapse. MY question is...why didn't she submit after getting tased the FIRST time? Also, no, you don't have to be standing to "collapse", although most people might prefer to use the word "slumping" when one collapses from a sitting position.

And obviously the judge didn't actually think this case WAS excessive force, or he would have ruled that way. Whether or not he was uncomfortable with it who's to say?

I really think she brought this on herself. The more I think about it and talk about it, the more I really think she deserved it. I can't find much on information about tasering pregnant women and the effects on the fetus, well, anything yet actually, but it sure beats some of the other things they could have done. Although I'm still uncertain how 3 men were unable to get one woman out of a car. But, she knew she was going to get tasered, she still resisted. It's all on her if you ask me.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/17/2012

3,377

8

66

Although the officers won the case, the court informed them that "some future use of Tasers would cross a constitutional line and amount to excessive force."

Obviously, the judge was a bit uncomfortable with the scenario. He concluded that future similar acts would be crossing the line.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/17/2012

3,377

8

66

These three geniuses came up with the idea of applying a Taser to Brooks' leg, arm and finally her neck, at which point she collapsed.

I fail to see why they had to tase her three times, until she collapsed. And if she collapsed, wouldn't she of had to be standing? Meaning, they could have cuffed her. There was three of them and one of her. Come on....

**Jackie** - posted on 05/17/2012

953

1

18

OK, I'm just adding something...what exactly does a cop have to work with? A gun, taser, bat, cuffs, pepper spray...?

They don't know what her deal is, she's acting like a lunatic for whatever reason and all they know is that they haven't patted her down and they'd like to make it home to their parents. If, and I'm not saying she was on drugs, but she certainly wouldn't be the first pregnant woman to be doing drugs. SO they can't shoot her or beat her, and they can't get her out of the car to cuff her so that leaves pepper spray and a taser (and I don't even know if Washington cops can use pepper spray). So they did this because for all they know, she had a weapon....?

Jodi - posted on 05/17/2012

2,694

52

175

"I find it hard to believe that anyone (pregnant and has an 11 year old with them) would put themselves into a predicament, such as she did, while fully understanding the process." Even put this way, I still laugh. Have you seen the video fo the woman with her child in the car refusing to take a ticket from an officer? She then proceeds to taunt him, swear at him and the like. He threatens to arrest her, all the while her child beggin the cop not to do this "again". He eventually lets her go, but people in alllll sorts of situations (even pregnant with children in the car) do STUPID things. I read a story one time of a mother who threw her toddler in front of a taser aimed at her boyfriend. I mean...this is not a far stretch that she was really being completely unreasonable.

I do not think the cops needed to taser her...but they did what they felt best, even if it wasn't. This woman was being stupid, ridiculous, unreasonable and just an ass. Like I said before, if it weren't for the fact that she was pregnant, I would fully support the use of a taser in this situation.

As to others being worried about how her son views the cops...how about how he should be viewing his mom?! She was disorderly, defiant and resisted arrest! SHE brought on the tasering (even if it was a bit extreme). I'm sure he's going to hear all about how bad cops are, I hope someone tells him his mother was completely out of line also so he knows it takes two to tango in a situation like this.

MeMe - Raises Her Hand (-_-) (Mommy Of A Toddler And Teen) - posted on 05/17/2012

3,377

8

66

Jodi--"I find it hard to believe that anyone would put themselves into a predicament, such as she did, while fully understanding the process." Pardon me while I laugh my ass off. People in general are not reasonable at all! Watch one episode of COPS or google arrests on you tube, or just talk to a police officer, and you'll hear/zee story after story of regular people resisting and running from the cops for stupid things like traffic tickets.



I knewwww, someone would read my comment this way and I was "hoping" to have fixed it (a wee bit ahead of anyone, doing just that. I fixed it within 5mins, you're just to fast for me...). Yes, I agree people can be "tards", which is why I was inclined to fix it and state, what it says now. ;)



I am glad I can make you laugh, sometimes, that makes it worth my while. hehehee



Oh, I also agree, that there really is not much info. So, we do need to speculate a little. I just found it odd, that you would comment on how we made assumptions, while making some of your own.



I also agree, that this lady was a bit "looped" to not just comply. It definitely is not the way I would've handled it.

Jodi - posted on 05/17/2012

2,694

52

175

lol MeMe, you make me laugh sometimes. We have to assume a whole aweful lot on this one no matter which side we take since very few facts are actually given...and the fact that the whole article is written by an obviously biased person. I was only pointing out that everyone seemed to agree that the cops had obviously not explained squat to her, which no one can prove one way or another. I was pointing out what I imagined happened, per policy of the cops I know (I have many cops in my family, I have a more than basic understanding of these policies in my area at least).

"I find it hard to believe that anyone would put themselves into a predicament, such as she did, while fully understanding the process." Pardon me while I laugh my ass off. People in general are not reasonable at all! Watch one episode of COPS or google arrests on you tube, or just talk to a police officer, and you'll hear/zee story after story of regular people resisting and running from the cops for stupid things like traffic tickets. Even if she *didn't* understand the procedures, she was warned (I read in a different article) that she would be stunned if she didn't comply.I think you're a reasonable person MeMe, would YOU still be resisting if they told you you were going to be tasered if you didn't comply? Probably not. THAT tells me, this woman was likely unreasonable.

And again, I don't think the cops did the right thing, they may very well be assholes, but this lady is no better IMO, she just didn't deserve to be tasered over this while pregnant.

**Jackie** - posted on 05/17/2012

953

1

18

I was just thinking, (and this is an assumption)...but it might be fair to say that she probably doesn't have any criminal record. Seeing as how she had no idea that signing the paper only meant that she acknowledged it and not that she was guilty.

I just don't see any logical explanation as to why anyone, especially a pregnant woman with a child, would put up that much of a fight over something so trivial.

I just can't picture this cop telling her that all she had to do was sign the paper and be on her way and she can fight it in court and her flipping out and refusing to sign it. Doesn't make sense.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms