Original Article Posted on Fri, Jul. 22, 2005 Police board backs two firings in taser use KC officers jolted handcuffed man By CHRISTINE VENDEL The Kansas City Star The firings of two police officers who used a Taser on a man five times, four while he was handcuffed, were upheld Thursday by the Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners. The decision was not unanimous. Three board members said termination was just and proper, but board member Karl Zobrist dissented, saying he favored a substantial suspension and mandatory training. Police Chief Jim Corwin recommended firing Officers David Easley and Matthew Howell because of an Aug. 10, 2004, incident at 19th Street and Chelsea Avenue. A patrol car camera recorded the entire incident. It began with Howell questioning a suspected car thief. The 24-year-old suspect tried to run away, and Howell fired a Taser to his back. Howell fired four more times while the man was handcuffed. Three of those times the man was on the ground. The fifth jolt came while the man was standing, after Easley said, Hit him again. Easley who had been holding the man, let go of him before the final jolt, allowing him to fall to the ground. Corwin said that the first Taser use was justified, but that the next three were questionable. The fifth use violated policy and prompted the firings, Corwin said. When someone is handcuffed, theyre in our care, Corwin said. We can never, ever abuse anyone in our care, or stiff discipline will apply. Im not going to tolerate it. The officers appealed the firings at a July 13 board hearing. Board members then met for 70 minutes Tuesday, when they decided to uphold the dismissals. The decision was announced Thursday afternoon. Larry Rebman, who represented Easley, 34, a seven-year veteran, and Howell, 39, who has been on the force about two years, said the punishment was too severe. He also said Easley planned to appeal the boards ruling in Jackson County Circuit Court. Zobrist also thought firing was too stiff, based on the officers commendable records. I felt like a policy violation occurred, but I was willing to impose a substantial amount of suspension time, he said. These officers had virtually no disciplinary history. Zobrist said the deputy chief who reviewed the case also recommended suspensions: five days without pay for Easley and 15 days without pay for Howell. No one else came near termination, he said of other commanders recommendations. Board President Angela Wasson-Hunt said using a Taser on a handcuffed man was simply too much. You just do not Tase an individual once theyre in handcuffs, she said. And it wasnt just once. It was four times. When asked whether a suspension with mandatory training would have been adequate punishment, Wasson-Hunt said: We did train them. And they clearly violated our policy. Corwin said the decision to fire the officers was difficult. Im concerned about these officers and their families, but Ive got to think about the rest of the community, he said. Ive got to think about what I can do with regard to discipline to make sure this doesnt happen again. Corwin said the officers jeopardized the availability of the Taser for all officers because their bad decisions reflected negatively on the department. The investigation into the incident began when the suspected car thiefs attorney requested the patrol cars videotape of the arrest. Corwin said police officials reviewed the tape before releasing it and immediately started an investigation. The tape showed Howell and his partner, who was not facing discipline, wrestling the suspected car thief to the ground after the first Taser use. The partner then checked to see whether the car was stolen. The man is heard yelling and cursing several times as Howell tries to get him on his feet. At one point, he tries to pull an electrode from his back, and Howell fires the Taser again. Another time, the man appears to roll away from Howell as the officer searches him, finding a knife. That leads to another jolt. Easley arrived on the scene driving a patrol wagon and is seen standing near the man. The officers tell the man to be quiet, and one of them is heard telling the suspect he would get it again. Moments later, Easley tells Howell to hit him again, and the man falls backward onto the pavement. Easley was on the scene 34 seconds before he made the statement to Howell, Corwin said. Rebman said Thursday that the punishment was out of line for the offenses of which the officers were accused. Essentially, these guys had a miscommunication, Rebman said of the officers. Easley had argued that his call for the suspect to be Tased again was a bluff to bring him into compliance. Howell, who had struggled with the suspect, said he thought the man still was resisting. Rebman argued during the board hearing that the incident occurred just two months after the department changed its policy on Tasers. Before the change, officers could use the device on someone passively resisting, including not following directions. In addition, Rebman said, the board disregarded its own policy in firing Easley, who is no relation to former Police Chief Rick Easley. Department guidelines state that deputy chiefs, not the chief, have the final say in disciplining officers if the suggested penalty is five or fewer days of suspension. Corwin said Easley was two days away from being promoted to sergeant when the incident came to light. Corwin, as chief, is the only one who could pull Easley from the promotion list. Corwin said the promotion decision opened up the entire incident to his review. Staff writer John Shultz contributed to this report. To reach Christine Vendel, call (816) 234-4438 or send e-mail to cvendel@kcstar.com.