Item B: Eugene Police Department Taser Policy

Home Browse Search

Data from the pilot project compared injury rates from OC spray (pepper spray) to the rates for individuals where the Taser was activated or a warning was given that the Taser would be used. The large portion of Taser incidents resolved simply with a non-contact display and preliminary data from the department showing a decrease in injuries to subjects and officers was both encouraging and consistent with academic studies on the use of Tasers in the United States. The department’s Taser report outlined specific next steps in moving forward with the use of Tasers by EPD, including an emphasis in training in non-violent techniques to de-escalate potentially violent situations. Existing training opportunities such as crisis intervention training and “Verbal Judo” offer good examples of de- escalation techniques. Recent Commission Involvement Another element of the report’s conclusions included the need for the Police Commission’s review of the Taser policy. The Use of Force Committee took on this task in June 2009, with a specific focus on assessing the data from the pilot project. The committee created an aggressive work plan to review the Taser policy, meeting twice each month. In March 2010, the committee completed its review of the Taser policy and forwarded its recommendations to the full Police Commission. The full commission spent two meetings reviewing the committee’s findings and in April approved an amended draft of the Taser policy. The two sections of the policy receiving the most attention were authorized and restricted uses. The threshold levels of authorized use were critically examined by the commission. Specifically, the use of Taser must meet the following requirements: a credible threat of serious physical injury; or an immediate credible threat of physical injury and active resistance to a lawful police action; or a subject who is fleeing and is involved in a felony or certain misdemeanors; or a person assaulting or attempting to assault a police officer. Similarly, the commission spent considerable time reviewing the restrictions of Taser use. The commission accepted the committee’s recommendation that a Taser shall not be discharged against a person engaged only in passive or static resistance. The recommendation also states that a Taser shall not be discharged at a demonstration or other event for crowd control purposes. The full commission voted 10-2 to forward the final Taser policy recommendations to Police Chief Pete Kerns for his consideration. Some members of the Use of Force Committee also put together a “minority report” on the policy recommendation. This supplemental document is a compilation of considerations from individual committee members on specific areas of the policy where consensus was not met. This report is part of the commission’s recommendation to the Chief, and is provided here as Attachment C. Community Involvement The Use of Force Committee met over a period of 10 months to review the Taser policy, including two months at the full Police Commission level. Other Police Commission members not on the committee also attended these meetings, as well as the Police Auditor, City Councilors and Human Rights Commission members. Significant community involvement was also part of the review process as each meeting included a public comment and public dialogue portion of the agenda (the public dialogue part of the meeting is a unique aspect when the committee invites all members of the audience to engage in an open conversation at the table.) In June 2009, the Use of Force Committee held a public forum to begin the discussions on the pilot project policy. On May 4, 2010, the Police Commission held a special Taser Public Forum to present the final recommendations to the community on the Taser policy. The purpose of this forum was to educate the public on the recent changes to the commission’s Z:\CMO\2010 Council Agendas\M100614\S100614B.doc