iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Seattle Police Who Used Taser On Pregnant Woman Seeking Appeal To Supreme Court

The Huffington Post  |  By Posted: Updated: 05/21/2012 10:53 am

Pregnant Woman Taser

On May 24, the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to decide whether to hear an appeal from three Seattle officers who used a Taser on a pregnant woman several times for refusing to sign a speeding ticket, The New York Times reports.

In 2004, Malaika Brooks was seven months pregnant and driving her son to school, the Associated Press reported at the time. Police pulled Brooks over for going 32 mph in a 20 mph school zone; she maintained it was the car in front of her that was speeding.

When Brooks declined to sign the speeding ticket, the police warned her that refusal would result in arrest, according to testimony reported by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. The officers called their supervisor, who told them to proceed with the arrest if Brooks didn't comply.

When Brooks didn't get out of the car as requested, police allegedly warned her by clicking the Taser in the air. The woman said she wasn't aware what the device was at the time and was later shocked three times -- on the leg, neck and arm -- even though the officers knew she was far along in her pregnancy.

According to The New York Times, the officers then laid Brooks on the street face-fist and placed handcuffs on her wrists.

The mother was later charged with refusing to obey an officer and resisting arrest.

At her 2005 criminal trial, Brooks was convicted of the first charge but not the second. Brooks remained steadfast that the officers used excessive force and soon filed a lawsuit.

When the case went in front of judges at the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2011, they ruled in favor (2-1) of the officers, stating the police were justified in making the arrest, according to the Associated Press. They also ruled the officers could not be sued for using excessive force because Taser laws at the time were unclear.

In 2005, Seattle introduced guidelines regarding the use of stun guns on pregnant women, children and the elderly.

Still, the three officers are looking to the Supreme Court to receive confirmation they were justified in using the Taser, and their decision to do so is stirring controversy all over again.

Mary Fischer, a mother and writer for Cafe Mom's "The Stir," said she hopes the Supreme Court looks down upon their appeal.

I was lucky if I could make it up the stairs in my house during my last trimester, and there's definitely no way I could've outrun a cop. Don't these men realize that by shedding more light on the incident, they are only making themselves look like a bunch of wusses?

Similarly, Jezebel's Cassie Murdoch wrote that although Brooks could've cooperated in the first place, the officers are going too far in trying to justify their actions.

What's odd is that the police ultimately won the court case that ensued, but they've appealed to the Supreme Court because the lower court ruled that while they did use excessive force, they were immune from Brooks's claim. That's not good enough for them because they feel the ruling restricts their ability to use a taser on other people in the future.

Update 10:43 a.m.
The three Seattle police officers involved in the case are Steven L. Daman, Donald M. Jones and Juan M. Ornelas.

FOLLOW PARENTS

On May 24, the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to decide whether to hear an appeal from three Seattle officers who used a Taser on a pregnant woman several times for refusing to sign a speeding ticket, T...
On May 24, the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to decide whether to hear an appeal from three Seattle officers who used a Taser on a pregnant woman several times for refusing to sign a speeding ticket, T...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,505
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (37 total)
06:43 PM on 06/07/2012
Sorry, using any force on a woman that is pregnant in an arresting situation is assault, be it taser, be it club, be it pistol whipping them. At that point you are trying to hurt two people just not one. We still don't know what effect a stun gun has on a fetus to begin with. Talk first then attack, don't they teach that to police anymore?
09:26 AM on 05/30/2012
conservative supreme court rules that if you repeatedly taser a pregnant woman you are using excessive force but you can't be sued. Five more good soldiers in the republican war against women.
03:28 AM on 06/07/2012
no. they ruled that way because the law was unclear. You know, that's like if the people who smoke marijuana before it was illegal were arrested for smoking it. It wouldn't be fair.

Same with these cops. It wasn't illegal to excessively taser a pregnant woman. So it would be unfair with punishing them for something that wasn't illegal at the time.
10:30 AM on 06/07/2012
Too bad common sense isn't legal
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:19 PM on 05/29/2012
So, just to clarify, if a woman is pregnant, the police need to have special procedures regarding the use of Tasers, but if she wants to abort the baby, that's fine? I know this is going to be an unpopular comment, but I'm commenting more on the hypocrisy of rabid pro-choice people more than anything. I am reluctantly pro-choice (because I would love a world where abortions are not many peoples' first choice for birth control), but I DO suppot the right to choose.
02:31 PM on 06/08/2012
Your comment is completely ridiculious. What on earth has 'pro choice' 'abortions' and 'birth control' and 'right to choose' got to do with this woman being tasered at 7 months pregnant. If you want to bang your drum and stand on your soap box go and do it on a relevant site.
09:31 AM on 08/04/2012
You are a dolt. You should consult with a neurosurgeon. Perhaps he'd be willing to attempt to transplant a fully-functioning brain into your skull to replace the tiny, liquid-filled nubbin that currently rests atop your spinal column. It'd be risky, no doubt, but the upside is tremendous should it succeed.
05:37 PM on 05/27/2012
What the police did meets the definition of torture (look it up before speaking please). The courts sided with the police, i am shocked by that. She should press charges or sue them for using torure methods on her.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FloB
05:45 PM on 05/25/2012
Next time, do as the police say. Going that much over the limit she must have known that she was speeding and might get caught. And why is a pregnant woman who can't obey the traffic laws or the policeman driving the kid to school? He should be on the bus and she should be on the way to work.
02:35 PM on 06/08/2012
How do you know that she wasn't on her way to work after dropping her child off at school? There is no mention in the article as to what the woman had planned to do after dropping her child off at school. Totally irrelevant remark and pointless post.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jake Gerstein
Romney is physically unable to tell the truth....
05:24 PM on 05/21/2012
Cops are just getting worse and worse. These days, it seems like being a police officer is a really good job for petty, mean, unintelligent bullies.
11:28 PM on 05/20/2012
private cops work for us.....union cops work for themselves....privatize the cops and let the pregnant woman go about her day.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
land2341
Follow me on https://www.facebook.com/ThinkingLber
02:10 PM on 05/22/2012
Ok say this again? Private cops work for US? Who exactly is US? Private cops work for shareholders and CEOs. Public employees work for us even if they are unionized. Privatize police! Are you outta your mind? Xe on every street corner? yeah, that'll protect our rights!
photo
TS69
Obama2012
10:31 PM on 05/20/2012
criminal_
03:25 PM on 05/19/2012
How stupid is this and some of the comments. Both the supervisor and the "arresting" officer could have simply sent the ticket in the mail as they do on the numerous traffic cams around Seattle. The only reason they wanted to arrest her is to show their response for the lack of respect she showed them. The stupid part is that we are wasting tax money and the time of the Supreme court to clear an idea that is moot now. Both parties received what the courts thought were appropriate so why protect some future use of a right to use excessive force when they already have it. What did the Feds say about Seattle and their use of force ?
07:06 PM on 05/18/2012
Everybody is in a hissyfit over a few light taps on her limbs from the taser versus getting physically dragged out of her car. The latter presents a lot more danger to her pregnancy than some extremity hits from the taser. The prosecution missed some charges. Child endangerment for her unborn child and if still in the car for her other child. Women should not be allowed to hide behind their unborn child as a means to commit atrocious criminal behavior. Also the the writers of some of the lead ins to this article state that the police used the taser to coerce her to sign the ticket. Wrong! it was used to effect her apprehension for not signing! Yellow journalism at its worst!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:17 PM on 05/18/2012
Are you kidding, atrocious criminal behavior? She didn't want to sign a speeding ticket and didn't want to be arrested. You seriously think the cops behaved rationally? The point isn't that she shouldn't have been punished, she was it's the accessive use of the taser that's the issue here. Cops are far too fast and loose with tasers and definitely should show more restraint. What if the woman or her unborn child had an unknown hear condition?
09:15 PM on 05/18/2012
So being pregnant is an excuse and a free pass to disobey an officer of the law? So what if the woman or unborn child had any medical conditions? That was HER responsibility to comply - not the officers to sit and baby her and poo poo her to ask how she was feeling that day. If she disagreed with the speeding ticket she had the same legal recourse we all do, sign it, shut up, move on and fight it in court. She was warned several times to sign the ticket and move on or be arrested. If she resisted arrest than they did what they would have done to anyone else. Just like the similar instance with another pregnant woman interfering with her BF being arrested and getting kicked AFTER being warned three times to stay out of it. Doesn't anyone believe in personal responsibility anymore? They both had the responsibility to not put themselves in those positions. Sick to death of people crying and whining after THEY cause their own problems
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kathie Hansen
09:40 PM on 05/18/2012
Atrocious criminal behavior? Are you serious?
05:43 PM on 05/18/2012
bullies
05:18 PM on 05/18/2012
Both sides were wrong. The woman refused to get out of the car when asked by the officer. He fired the taser as a warning for her noncompliance. She did indeed resist arrest though previously warned.

The police officers should not have used a taser on a pregnant woman. They should have simply forced her out of the car with their own hands-however, this could also become a messy situation if she continued to resist.

Lastly, I have to wonder how stupid this woman is. Why would you disobey the officer after being warned? sign the ticket and appeal later with a court date.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thedesertpig
05:05 PM on 05/18/2012
Any threat to force a signature is coercion which should never be binding. So why bother with a signature? She would have complied with the citation, had her day in court. Those cops are unreal
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
02:24 PM on 05/19/2012
There has to be something to check off if the person refuses to sign the ticket. Or the police should have assured her that she could still fight it in court if she signs it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thedesertpig
09:57 PM on 05/22/2012
If you are sent a ticket via photo radar trap you don't have to sign it, it just comes in the mail. Why tazzer a citizen, a pregnant one at that, over something that is not uniformly applied. And just issue her a second ticket for breaking the law by not signing the first one. And tell her, you don't sign this one... Let the judge will hand out the punishment, not the cops.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
se72748
05:00 PM on 05/18/2012
Thugs with clubs.Bully's with badges,Bums with guns and they're going to write a ticket ,even if they have to lie.
There are two people in this world,I do not want to encounter,cops and criminals,but at least with a criminal you can fight back.
04:48 PM on 05/18/2012
Be careful, she's waddling faster at us!