Police Taser Great-Grandmother During Traffic Stop (VIDEO)

In what looks to be a case of police brutality, a 72-year-old great-grandmother was tasered after apparently refusing to sign a ticket during a traffic stop. Police insist that they were doing everything by the book, but using a taser on a senior citizen at a traffic stop strikes one as excessive use of force.

[WATCH]

Comments

[Cytrode]

On the one hand, the woman, despite how elderly, disobeyed laws and was non-compliant with the police officer about her ticket, possibly hoping to play the "But I'm old" card.

On the other hand, that was flagrant unnecessary use of force. We're getting to the point where it's expected for a police officer to taser someone? That's just wrong. Not too long ago, a policeman shot someone to death and claimed he "accidentally" pulled out his firearm instead of his taser. The cherry on top was that the suspect was later found to have done nothing at all, and just happened to vaguely fit a description of the person they were looking for.

They're both in the wrong here.

[addie24]

The taser should be used when one feels one life is in danger. This cop looked to be over 6 ft tall and was probably over 200lbs. He used this because he was mad at her not because he felt she would harm him. Shame on him,. Sure she was abusive but there was absolutely no reason that this action should have been taken. He also instigated this. So she refused to sign the ticket and she got out of the car. The ticket could have been mailed to her. He could have called for back up. He used poor judgement. I see a law suit. And I see him being fired.

[Dave Ash]

Who cares how old she is. Many senior citizens think they're above the law. She was non-compliant, tase her old butt. Remember, we are all lifetime learners.

[AndyWright68]

So you think we should all be compliant. You like being obedient to your masters? Did you know that we do not have to comply to a corrupt system? Wake up and stand up for what is right. She deserves a medal! He deserves to be fired!

[bogeyman]

Interesting slant - you think the cop was completely in the wrong by enforcing the traffic laws of the state of TX? This entire problem started when the woman did not want to sign the ticket. She deserves a medal for not signing a ticket and being verbally abusive to the cop? So, if I were to get verbally abusive to you, then I should get a medal for standing up to what I believe to be a corupt system being you?

She can stand up for what is right by fighting the ticket. More interesting is that the woman is no longer "standing up" for her rights when the contents of the dashboard video were revealed. Now, this seemingly innocent person has hired an attorney and refuses to answer any questions to the media. Sounds very innocent to me.

[thoughts2]

This is what happens when police are trained to go for the weapon whenever they encounter difficulty, no matter how unthreatening. This was NOT a dangerous situation for the officer. Despite the obvious fact that this elderly woman had been speeding and should have simply accepted her ticket, the way the officer handled the situation is APPALLING. She was angry and uncooperative, but there ARE peaceful ways to handle such a situation appropriately, and police should know them and talk such people down peacefully, not escalate the situation by reacting with greater anger and force. Aren't they trained in WHEN to use force and when NOT to? Very stupid.

[mihknotyu]

I'm no fan of the Police, but, everything this woman did from start to finish was wrong and escalated the situation. From only hearing the story on the news I thought the Officer over-reacted. But, after watching the video, with the lady being uncooperative, resisting arrest and even trying to get away from the Officer on the side of a highway after he told her she was under arrest - I have to side with the Officer.

She would allow him to peacefully arrest her so was he to wrestle her to the ground or chase her around the car??? They are supposed to re-gain control of the sitation as quickly as possible. There are plenty of examples of over-use of power and out right police brutality. My point is that this ain't it.

[OpposingViewpoint]

Nope, you are wrong. If this was my grandmother, this would qualify for the old equal but opposite reaction option, expeditiously excercised. No ambuguity, no arguments, no debating, just the reponse.

[AndyWright68]

Moderators, if you are not going to allow this comment please tell me why.

Why do we need police? They don't keep us safe. They don't keep the peace. They only show up after the crime is over and when they finally get there they intimidate everyone at the scene. They spend most of their $70 an hour days hiding out and waiting for someone to break a traffic law (a victimless crime) so they can intimidate, aggravate and abuse another citizen to condition them into being obedient to them and then they levy their tax (fines). If anyone stands up to them they are tazed, beaten and charged with resisting. They really have no purpose. If you need to report a crime then you need an experienced investigat­or/detecti­ve not an ignorant, abusive, overpaid, well fed, uneducated thug with a gun and a tazer. I mean really why do we have police? If we were all armed like our founding fathers insisted on there would be little to no crime anyway. The police are simply well funded, well armed gangs of abusive morons with the cities, counties, states and courts behind them. We're screwed!

[AndyWright68]

Moderators please post this.

Why do we need police? They don't keep us safe. They don't keep the peace. They only show up after the crime is over and when they finally get there they intimidate everyone at the scene. They spend most of their $70 an hour days hiding out and waiting for someone to break a traffic law (a victimless crime) so they can intimidate, aggravate and abuse another citizen to condition them into being obedient to them and then they levy their tax (fines). If anyone stands up to them they are tazed, beaten and charged with resisting. They really have no purpose. If you need to report a crime then you need an experienced investigat­or/detecti­ve not an ignorant, abusive, overpaid, well fed, uneducated thug with a gun and a tazer. I mean really why do we have police? If we were all armed like our founding fathers insisted on there would be little to no crime anyway. The police are simply well funded, well armed gangs of abusive morons with the cities, counties, states and courts behind them. We're screwed!

[footinface]

Because the government controls us, and if it wasn't for police they'd be using the army... But that would cause too much backlash. :P It's only a matter of time before all of North America merges to create a communist super power... They already have the ameros made up, after those go out then they'll initiate martial law. Anarchy looks better and better everyday, not that it didn't look great to begin with. Not the kind idiot tweens go around pushing, smaller communities who control themselves instead of being forced into a large, complicated system in which everything gets passed back in forth between large, faceless groups. And when they do have a face, it's usually all lies.
Viva la revolution!

[AndyWright68]

It could happen.

[ashncole]

Forget age, no one should be going 60 in a 44 mph construction zone. And I'm tired of hearing about using other force. No matter what the officer did, people would complain.

[AndyWright68]

60 in a 40? Who is the victim? Where is there a crime?

[bogeyman]

It's called speeding and it is a crime. More so in construction zones i.e., potential injury / loss of life, property, etc.. So when you blow past a copy doing 75 in a 55 zone, you feel there is no crime and you should not get a ticket? Will we be seeing you on a dashboard video while you fight with a cop? Love to see that one!

[AudibleSilence]

Yep.

[ashncole]

There were construction workers out. The police are more likely to enforce speed laws in construction areas and take serious actions. Think of the safety of the workers. Besides, I cannot believe she acted the way she did. I believe the officer acted accordingly. She would not have been tased if the had listened. I even asked my grandmother what she thought, and she agrees with me. The woman, according to my grandmother, seemed like an "old fruitcake".

[footinface]

This lady obviously has some issues. She's 72 and has god knows what mental health issues. She probably doesn't even deserve to drive, but at the same time... That officer should have been trained to deal with situations like that one. I haven't seen the whole video, but he should have cuffed her as soon as she got out of her car if he wanted to arrest her. He took advantage of the power he had over the situation. It's no secret that not all cops are good cops. The system isn't the valued protection service it use to be, and I'm sure every officer realizes that and finds it hard to give hoot one way or another at times; especially one who can taser an old woman who's mind is clearly deteriorating. If he's willing to electrocute her, he should be more than willing to give her a bruise getting her into a pair of hand cuffs. Automatic arrest you say? Sure didn't look like it.

[Zak Richardson]

He was trained to deal with the situation, and he followed the training. All the people out there claiming excessive force, what, would you rather he'd punched her or thrown her to the ground? He followed his training and did his job. By the law, she was resisting arrest, and he had every right to tase her

[Fern Porras]

Uhm, he did throw her to the ground! Was that excessive force on a 72-year-old woman? You betcha! Anytime a cop has to resort to using a taser on a great-grandmother to force her to comply, something is really wrong. The taser was given to cops to be used in extreme situations where a gun would have previously been used, in order to prevent the police from killing people unnecessarily. The police forces of America are becoming more and more a place for bullies to go to act out their fantasies. (My apologies to the good cops) If this cop can't do better than this- he should definitely find other work. Hopefully he will have that decision made for him.

[AndyWright68]

He had NO right to torture her with electrocution.

[footinface]

Um, no. He stood around like an idiot not handling the situation until he got bored and went overboard with the taser. As soon as she said she wouldn't sign the ticket, he should have automatically cuffed her. Instead, he mucked around with what was happening and let it escalate. He's obviously stronger than her, it couldn't have been that hard. Hell, he could have waited til she turned around and wasn't looking to do it. He could have kept his cool and remained polite and quiet when the old lady started getting pissed off... I don't care what his job or how annoying it is giving people tickets all day, if you can't handle someone being rude, find another job. I'm sure mall security could use some people right now.
If he "has every right" he should have exercised those rights before it became an issue of her rights.

[Fern Porras]

Actually, this woman's mind is sharp as a tack.

[AndyWright68]

And she stood up for herself. Give her a medal!

[zizyphus]

This taser stuff is out of hand already, and now the cops want to carry AK-47s in their cars. The next video will be one of them sawing old ladies in half with bullets.

[KatarinaNolte]

This officer like so many is clearly mentally unfit for the job. The woman appears tiny, weak and afraid of the overly aggressive officer who should be chasing criminals instead. People like him are simply abusing their positions to fulfill sadistic urges.

[SpookyOps73]

This guy is not a "police officer", rather he is an over aggressive full-of-rage excuse for humanity that wears a badge, carries a gun, and possesses a real fondness for tasers. I think he should be subjected to numerous personal "experiences" with his weapon of choice.

[tmo9556]

Under normal circumstances, I consider myself a liberal, and do not think that law enforcement should get a free pass on their actions. But in this case, I think that this cop was completely justified in his actions.

1 - This woman (regardless of her age) made choice to refuse to sign the ticket which in Texas is an automatic arrest.
2 - The officer has a responsibility to protect her safety as well as his own so he keeps himself between her and traffic.
3- The woman is one person who keeps escalating the issue, using foul language, arguing with the officer. At point does personal responsibility come into play?
4-What did you want the officer to do? Physically subdue her? He is large man, and in his mind, there could have been a greater chance of physical injury to the woman if he tried to restrain her physically.

Then she lied about it on TV until the video was released. According to her statement to the Fox News afflicate in Austin, TX, she was as sweet as pie. Bull. You want the privilege of driving, follow the rules!

[citizensrus]

Sounds like he lost his temper.

[madmaddox]

I'm sorry. But your #4 point just doesn't make any sense to me.

A death is MUCH more likely to occur with the use of an electroshock weapon than if he used his hands.

If you're trying to argue that he didn't want her to get injured, there are many lawsuits stating that tasers cause serious injuries.. (Even police officers themselves in at least five states have filed lawsuits claiming the were seriously injured while being shocked during training.)

Also the chance of a secondary injury is extremely high. This is a 72 year old woman falling on concrete!

In a way, shooting her with the taser in worse than just walking up and pushing her over. At least in the latter situation, she would have normal human reactions that could lessen the severity of a fall.

A taser disrupts the nervous system so that these falls are "uncontrolled." A person at this age could easily fall in a way were their knees get locked underneath them, snapping their brittle knee joints. She could have broken her hip, or fallen onto her head, resulting in a concussion.

So the officer knew there was a chance that his actions could kill her. And that there was a high likelihood that she would suffer an injury that could be permenant because of her age.

Officer McCain acted with both malice and cowardice.

So please don't tell us that he did it "for her own good."

[shehaditcoming]

ALL YOU NAY-SAYERS: DID YOU KNOW THAT IN 2007, TEXAS LED THE NATION IN COPS GETTING KILLED WHILE MAKING A TRAFFIC STOP? Either they were run over by a fleeing suspect, hit by ongoing traffic or shot because the suspect was carrying.

Cop had reason to take the situation with the old broad very seriously.

AND if he had used his 6'2" frame to 'force' her cooperation, then the press would have been howling that he was bullying her with his bulk... omg, make up your minds!!! She had choices, the traffic stop was going just fine until SHE decided she didn't feel like cooperating anymore.

She had it coming.

I know, I know... she said she would sign the ticket. If you think that he should have allowed that to pass, I don't want to know how you discipline your kids. If a child had refused to go to bed and then got verbally abusive w/ parents, they would have to lay down some discipline for disobedience and disrespect. If they backed off because the child then elected to go to bed, they would invite disrespect over every issue, every argument.

This witch with a capital 'B' deserves absolutely no sympathy, no respect and she will definitely never get a day in court. She blew her argument when she lied on television about the events and her level of cooperation.

She had it coming. 'nuff sed.

[joy316]

You sound like the MSNBC guy

1. Show the rest of the tape--obviously the tape did not start after the women was removed from the car
2. Look at the traffic and listen to what the officer says--no cars appear near the "white line" and the cop is angrily shouting out orders, never does he indicate any concern for her safety
3. When the woman gave up as stated that she would sign the **** ticket, why didn't he just let her sign it??

How many more incidents with tasers before something is done?? This guy is a "certified trainer" in the use of tasers but clearly has little self-control and is willing to tase anyone, including a rude senior citizen.

[bogeyman]

The woman broke the law by speeding. The woman refused to sign the ticket and got beligerent with the officer and refused to comply with any of his requests before he had to start yelling at this woman. Being 72 is not an excuse-sorry, I forgot how to drive responsibly? Others have already indicated that he should have handled her physically instead of tasering her. And how do you physically control a 72 year old woman without being slammed with a harrassment suit for touching her inappropriately or possibly break an arm, etc. because of his size/mass differential over the woman? So to those people who believe otherwise, perhaps he should have just slammed her up against the hood of the police cruiser, handcuffed her and then frisked her before placing her into the back of the squad car? We can all pick out the lawsuits here based on his action or inaction but the bottom line is this: she broke the law, told one story to the press and then recanted it when the video came to light. Yes, the officer was wrong but was trying to work with a 72 year old woman who had no right to be beligerent in the first place. All she had to do was sign the ticket and move on - she choose not to and she is in this situation of her own making.

[ivnic8]

She refused to follow a simple request by not signing the ticket, and then told him (twice) to arrest her and take her to jail. When she got out of the vehicle, she was directed at least nine times to step back away from the road. This is another simple request. She tried repeatedly to walk around the officer, taunting him and daring him to Taser her. She is an adult, and should have behaved like one. I’m not a police officer, so I don’t know if Tasing was the best choice, but she was agitated, upset, and combative, all of which could have lead to her being injured if he tried to restrain her and she fought back. It is unfortunate that she chose to behave in such an irrational manner; she refused to follow a simple request, demanded to be taken to jail, then continually refused to comply with the officer’s lawful orders. And, what’s the deal with her changing her mind and offering to sign the ticket after refusing to? That’s a common tactic used by third-graders everywhere. I have little sympathy for Ms. Winkfein. Being 72 does not excuse such behavior. Add to this the fact that she lied in her original interview: she complained to a news reporter about how she had been treated, denied being argumentative and combative (I’m guessing she didn’t know she had been recorded), and then when the video proved otherwise, she suddenly is now unavailable for comment.

[AndyWright68]

aw the whole story. He had no right to threaten her with arrest. He had no right to endanger her life by asking her to exit her vehicle. He had no right to touch her when she wanted to go back to her car after realizing she should not have gotten out in the fist place. He had no right to scream in her face. He had NO right to tase and torture a 72 year old woman even if she was kicking his ass!

She had every right to be upset with his bully tactics. She had every right to defend herself. She had every right to go back to her vehicle. She has every right to MILLIONS. And he has every right to be FIRED for not being able to reason with and/or calmly control a 72 year old great grandmother.

[ivnic8]

Obviously, I disagree. What source do you use to arrive at the opinion that a police officer doesn't have the rights to threaten arrest, ask someone to exit a vehicle, prevent a person he is arresting from storming off, or to subdue a maniacal person who is resisting arrest?
I don't know where you are from, but the rights you say he doesn't have (and the ones you claim belong to her) are just not rational thoughts in the US.

[tmo9556]

Sorry to tell you, but in Texas, if you don't sign the traffic ticket, it's an automatic arrest. It' their way to getting you to acknowledge receipt of the ticket.

[joy316]

Where in this video do you see her getting out of the car???

[ivnic8]

NBC News has a much longer video on their website, starting with the officer approaching the vehicle.

[citizensrus]

According to Amnesty International, more than 300 individuals have died after stun gun encounters in the US in the past nine years. Seriously, the term non-lethal is a lie.

[Michael Brown 2]

Of that 300, how many of those people had heart or other pre-existing conditions that led to it? If you are going to post a statistic please provide all of the info behind it :)

[AndyWright68]

1 death is too many. Electrocution with these tasers are being used by the police to keep us all in fear of them and obedient to their every command. Nobody should have that much power over the people. They were sold to us that the police would not have to use their guns as much. They use tasers where they would never use their guns. More people have died from tasers in situations where they would have easily been subdued with an arm twist or simply cooperated at the end of the officers pistol. Now, even after a suspect is lying on the ground and handcuffed, the police can't resist hitting them with 50,000 volts to "teach them a lesson". TAKE THEIR TORTURE DEVICES AWAY!

[plzchuteme]

If the electric chair was outlawed for use on convicted murderers, after trials, appeals, etc., doesn't it seem a bit backwards to summarily execute suspected perpetrators by similar means without the legal benefits? You can't tell a person's medical condition or history by just looking at them. This woman was obviously a senior and much more likely to suffer from some complicating medical condition. The officer used extremely poor judgment. It appeared that instead of trying to diffuse the situation, he continued to escalate it beyond the point of common sense.

[Emalee Russell]

The thing here is that it doesn't matter how many had pre-existing heart conditions. If any of them would have said, "I have a pre-existing heart condition! Don't tase me!" how many police officers do you think would a.) believe them or b.) go ahead anyway because they have "no other choice" of restraining a suspect? And how about the people who may not be aware that they have a heart condition?

But about the story.. Jesus, that woman could have broken her hip! I don't understand why it is such a big deal to get someone to sign a ticket -- especially if they have it on camera. If the woman refused to acknowledge that she was pulled over, BAM! It's recorded and she has no excuse. Are they really that desperate for money these days?

[citizensrus]

What does the condition of the victim have to do with the statistics. This is supposed to be non-lethal. There are 300 dead. Does the victim having a pre-existing condition somehow make it a non-lethal weapon? A police man can't tell if the person has a pre-existing condition...do we really want those high risk health given the death penalty for a traffic stop?
Somebody lost their life. When did life stop being a matter of concern to our citizens? Oh, well, he/she probably had a pre-existing condition. Taze on, bro. Have a good laugh about it. If someone dies..the authoritarian cowards will defend your bullying. Defend This:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYMKyJRAabE

[joy316]

Yes, they link the deaths to "pre-existing conditions" that only occur in victims of tasers

[Michael Brown 2]

NM I did the job for you. From Amnesty International's Web Site:

# Those who died were generally subjected to repeated or prolonged shocks

# Use of the Taser was often accompanied by the use of restraints and/or chemical incapacitant sprays

# Many of those who died had underlying health problems, such as heart conditions or mental illness, or were under the influence of drugs

# Most of those who died went into cardiac or respiratory arrest at the scene

----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­---

Looks like those that died DID in fact have either an existing health condition, drugged up, or pepper sprayed before hand. Dying from the shock of the taser alone is not as frequent as dying with from taser shock w/ other complications. This isn't to say that it isn't sad that some folks have died, but really what would you have the officers do? Get hurt themselves? Lose control of a situation?

A good amount of the people shouting against the police are ironically the first to call the cops when something bad happens to them.

[AndyWright68]

Thank you for making my point. These people would be alive today and all you are concerned about is whether the police may have possibly hurt themselves. BS! Ban police from the use of tasers to electrocute and torture the public!

[citizensrus]

NM I did the job for you. From Amnesty International's Web Site:

# Those who died were generally subjected to repeated or prolonged shocks
Nothing about a pre-existing condition in this reason.
# Use of the Taser was often accompanied by the use of restraints and/or chemical incapacitant sprays
" Officer induced pre-existing condition"
# Many of those who died had underlying health problems, such as heart conditions or mental illness, or were under the influence of drugs
This is disgraceful and if you look it up you will see that many of those tased had no way to communicate, so was considered hostile. Actually they were ill. Do YOU defend these deaths?

# Most of those who died went into cardiac or respiratory arrest at the scene
The heart like any other muscle is controlled by electrical impulses from the brain..and the tasing was a direct cause of death.

I defend life. You can excuse these deaths. I don't.

[madmaddox]

Michael,

This sounds good, other than the fact that it's not true.

Of course Taser International (the manufacturer) and Police Departments are going to try to pass the deaths off as being caused by "other factors."

It is true that they can be exacerbated by heart conditions and age. This is one of the reasons they are not supposed to be used on the elderly, such as 72 YEAR OLD GRANDMOTHERS!

But there are also many cases of "unexplained" deaths that occurred in otherwise completely healthy people in their 20s and 30s.

Perhaps you're referring to the "excited delirium" argument, which has been rejected by the AMA (American Medical Association) and Canadian Medical Association Journal as something completely not based in medical reality. It's something police officers came up with to "explain" deaths that otherwise have no explanation.

Furthermore, you stated that "most of those who died went into cardiac or respiratory arrest at the scene."

Were you attempting to defend taser use with this statement? How is this in any way a statement about how safe they are?

You then do exactly what I said (in an earlier post) people taking your position always do. You jump to: "What would you have the officers do? Get hurt themselves?"

At what point in this exchange was the officer in any danger of being hurt?

Let's be honest. This cop didn't shoot her because he was in any real danger. He shot her because he lost his temper!

[Michael Brown 2]

Put your pitchforks and torches down..then watch the ENTIRE video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxhYaUjZUI0

She was non-cooperative and believed that she should receive preferential treatment because of her age. She was speeding/reckless and she thought the officer should have given her a pass because of her age? Really?

He warns her 5 times to please go back to the front of the car and out of traffic/harms way. He is courteous and tries to be respectful. She TELLS him that she is going back to her car when he tries to arrest her for non-cooperation. She assaults him by trying to push past him.

The officer didn't hit her, didn't tackle her, didn't mace her, he tazed her to keep control of the situation with someone that was being overly hostile and dramatic. If he had let her walk back to her car and she got smeared by a passing truck, you'd be complaining that he didn't maintain control. If he had tackled her and she broke bones you'd be complaining about that.

Do yourselves a favor going forward. BEFORE you complain and scream for someone else to lose their job, absorb the entire story. Only a fool forms an opinion based on the information he or she is given at face value.

~Mike

[citizensrus]

Gee, what did the police do to subdue septagerians before tasers? Did they cower in fear? Did they shoot? Did they use their baton? Did they call the swat team?

[Michael Brown 2]

Probably the same thing they did to sesquipedalians....

[AndyWright68]

Saw the whole story. He had no right to threaten her with arrest. He had no right to endanger her life by asking her to exit her vehicle. He had no right to touch her when she wanted to back to her car after realizing she should not have gotten out in the fist place. He had no right to scream in her face. He had NO right to tase and torture a 72 year old woman even if she was kicking his ass!

She had every right to be upset with his bully tactics. She had every right to defend herself. She had every right to go back to her vehicle. She has every right to MILLIONS. And he has every right to be FIRED for not being able to reason with and/or calmly control a 72 year old great grandmother.

[RageCage]

Well obviously he did have the right as a law enforcement officer because nobody is trying to bring up charges on him. He was right, she was wrong. There are consequences to the actions we take.

[Andy Long]

AndyWright68:
From what you're saying, anyone who doesn't want to get arrested shouldn't be arrested. She broke the law. It wasn't set in place as an arbitrary guideline, giving police an excuse to terrorize the general public. The speed limit in the construction zone was set to keep the workers safe, and exceeding the speed limit in the construction zone decreases time for the driver to react in an environment where visibility may already be poor. The officer pulled the woman over, and issued her a citation for recklessly ENDANGERING the lives of those working at the construction site. In response, the woman REFUSED her citation. If a judge sentenced you to prison for killing a man, would you be allowed to walk away because you didn't want to be punished? Of course not.
Under Texas law, those that refuse to accept their citation have to be arrested. I'm sure the officer didn't go out there that day looking for an old woman to arrest. Once he encountered that situation, he had to follow policy. After asking her to step out of her vehicle, the woman REPEATEDLY assaulted him (yes, shoving is an assault. It doesn't matter if you're 27 or 72.) When she resisted his arrest, what was he supposed to do...just allow her to walk away? An officer CANNOT allow someone to go free because they refuse to be arrested, that's a ridiculous premise.

[joy316]

Why didn't he just give her the ***** ticket to sign???

[AndyWright68]

He wanted to show her who is the master. She stood up for herself and he needed to show her that he controls her.

[Obamawinsman]

Complaints to:
1. Richard McCain, Constable Precinct 3
Constable Precinct Three
8656 B West Highway 71, Suite E
Austin, TX 78735
Criminal Division:
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Travis County Sheriff
Sheriff Hamilton
512-854-9770

[comicfan76]

Thanks for posting this so I can call them up and commend the officer.

[AndyWright68]

Only if want to support abusive police.