Deseret News | Reader comments: Trooper cleared: State says Taser use justified, but other agencies to review traffic stop

Reader comments
Trooper cleared: State says Taser use justified, but other agencies to review traffic stop

198 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
4
Next >

Janey | 12:55 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Thank goodness there will be investigations other than the UHP. When they make comments like Gardner has such a good record and complaints were unfounded, then maybe it's because YouTube was not available to those complainants. Something just must be done about this other than approval of Gardner's conduct. I am extremely disappointed that Davenport only protects the "officer" and could care less about the justice and unfair treatment of Mr. Massey by a fully armed, taser-ready "trooper."

Bill | 1:58 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

As a former UHP trooper I agree this situation could have been handled much better by both people involved. But there IS fault on both sides. There should have been better communcation prior to Mr. Macey being asked to exit the vehicle. But once he is given a lawul order to put his hands behind his back he is not free to turnaround and return to his car. You just can't do that. At that point the officer does not know the intent of the violator and he can not allow access to the car. He may be going back to sit and wait for another officer to respond but he could just as easily be going back to get a weapon or flee the scene creating the potential for a high speed chase. The officer is not required to wait and see which option it will be. He is obligated to prevent that from happening using only the necessary force. Verbal commands obviously were not working. Deadly force is not an option. That means he can tackle him or use the taser. Believe it or not, the taser is the least harmful option for for Macey and the officer.

Mike F | 1:59 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

This is completely bogus. They need to get Gardner off the highway--he should not be interacting with the public with a badge and uniform. This is disgraceful.

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 2:00 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

This is sad the brass in the UHP are allowing the trooper to get away with this.

(Retired Highway Patrol)

Janey | 3:10 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Bill, are you not aware that tasers have caused death for quite a few people? Also couldn't Gardner simply have let Massey go and then call for a warrant to be issued for resisting arrest? Do you think, as a retired officer, that Gardner's life was in danger? It is no wonder that people resist such Gestapo treatment only to have their lives taken by armed officers. It is either do what they say or get shot or injured even if it was for nothing. A well-trained officer would know the difference. I am starting to get a little tired of hearing about the officers' lives being endangered which gives them the excuse to hurt, maime or kill. Not so many officers lose their lives in the line of duty as in other professions. I am hoping that most officers put on that uniform with the intent of helping and protecting us. But some will shoot right through a little baby to get their guy as was done in Denver. Or shoot an unarmed driver to death with passengers in the car. The rogue cops need to be dismissed from the force and their superiors need a sabbatical.

Use logic | 4:15 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I am sick and tired of people like Jenny and Mike making vague comments with no specific complaints. What do you th ink Gardner did wrong? What woudl you have done as an officer? I just do not see what he did that upsets people so much. It was just so stupid of Massey to walk away after he had been ordered. Good luck trying to sue. And good luck trying to find fault with what the officer did. Again I ask, what would you have wanted the officer to do?

Bob G | 4:35 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

The 'Blue Code' wins again. As for citizens it's my opinion that we are not denied our right to self protection, even from an unrully and offensive officer. The uniform does not give them the right to abuse that uniform or the people they claim to protect and serve. It happens to be their peers they protect and serve. If the officer had just shown the driver, at his initial request, to see the speed recorded the whole issue would not have escalated in to a street brawl that a citizen cannot win. Citizens still have the right to fight an oppressive government and its representatives. Laws protecting police have gotten out of control and abusive to citizens and their rights.

didgusted citizen | 5:04 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Can you spell whitewash and cover up. Pull your head out of the sand Troopers. You do not tasar someone for this.Shame on the Utah Highway Patrol.

Marie | 5:08 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I'm not one to scream for lawsuits but Massey should consider one. This is what gives officers a bad rep.

Arlyn | 5:17 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Why did You-tube get a hold of the video?

utah motorist | 5:18 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Of course they would clear him. Lets hope the right people look at this situation and this so called officer is permanently removed from his job. Maybe there's a nice safe coal mine for him to work in. He obviously has few proper communication skills that can easily be understood and is quick to lie to justify himself to those who would blindly take his side. Then smugly joke about it at the victims expense as well. Just what we need out there extorting the motoring public. Massey should get a 7 figure settlement at Utah's expense but should constantly be looking over his shoulder when on the roads. This same group knows how to retaliate. Massey was told to get out of the car but wasn't clearly told why he should remain at the back of the vehicle. Hope Gardner's ego got the big boost he so desperately needed.

Jim | 5:19 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

So the police are investigating a policeman eh? How cosy.

Mash | 5:29 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Why are you surprised? This is nothing new... UHP always get away with murder (pun intended).

get of easy | 5:32 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

it dose`nt matter cops always get off its policy. the state of utah knew he would get off. its policy don`t you watch cops on fox and see how fake there storeys are this would be A good one for langly he would ridge the video to show the public how wrong massey was and don`t mess with gardner

Patience | 5:54 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I think we need to withhold our judgment until the investigation is done. Those who use YouTube as a reliable and unbiased source of info are nuts! What kind of response do you think the public is going to have of this? duh?

Fred Jones | 6:11 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

An investigation? Not really much of one, or they watched a different video than I did. The trooper should receive more training and is clearly in the wrong.

Eric | 6:32 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

After reviewing the video, I think that Trooper Gardner was totally justified in using the taser by the way that Mr. Massey was acting. He showed a complete lack of respect for the law and tried to get out a ticket. The problem is, when you act like a loud mouth idiot, then you should be treated as such.

Mike | 6:41 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I still hope the trooper files suit against the immature loony driver.

Who do I want to protect me when I'm out in public? Certainly not someone who has a hissy fit just because he got caught speeding (and with a wife and child in the car, no less).

Has anyone determined if this speeder was even old enough to have a driver's license and have control of a vehicle on public highways?

30 mph over the limit | 6:53 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Massey was endangering his wife, unborn child and anyone on that highway with his careless reckless behaviour.

The officer was polite and courteous until Massey started running his mouth trying to play tough-guy.

Besides that, you don't give orders to the UHP..."first, you're going to show me the sign".... the arrogant scofflaw deserved what he got.

Andrew T | 6:54 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

The UHP's review of this indicates there is a systemic problem with the UHP. This case needs to be escalated to the state legislature to get laws passed that make tasering like this a criminal offense.

The trooper should use the least amount of force necessary. He could have called for backup and waited before acting. He could have called the office and learned that you don't arrest someone just because they refuse to sign a traffic ticket. There were a multitude of less lethal options available.

Another suggestion. Instead of reviews like this being conducted by the UHP, let's change the policy so that these reviews are conducted by an independent group.

Anonymous | 6:59 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

The trooper was obviously not feeling in danger. He turned his back to the suspect several times during the video. If he was feeling in danger he would never have let the man walk behind him. They are really reaching for an explanation.

Tom | 7:07 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

The impudence and arrogance of youths, such as Massey and many of his ilk, who do not understand their responsibility and obligation to exactly follow the orders of law enforcement officers is endemic in our "me first" society. Youths do not accept anyone, other than themselves, are important. This narcissism is endemic in our youth. This boy is lucky the officer had a taser and didn't have to shoot him. Those who bemoan this "tasering" have lost sight of just how lucky Massey was the officer had a non-lethal alternative. When you are arrested, you lose the opportunity to walk away, turn your back or do anything but comply with the officer's demand. If you don't believe me, go break the law and act insolent and disrespectful to the officer's. You'll see the errors of your thinking result in a situation you really don't want to confront. If parents don't teach discipline, society must. It's too bad Massey's parents weren't there to take the punishment they deserve for spawning a disrespectful dweeb.

Mikey | 7:09 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

This has to be a fluke event. My friends and I always behave like this when we're stopped. We never do what the cop says. Sometimes even put our hands in both pockets. Even jog back to the car. Nothing ever happens to us.

Both sides were idiots | 7:10 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

The HP for letting it get to tha point by just shouting demands and really answering questions or allowing a conversation. And Massey for putting his hands in his pockets turning around and walking back to his car. What did he expect? I am not a cop but if I was in that situation and they had there hands in there pocket and turned there back on me to start walking to the car I would have done the same thing as the officer. That was just plain gross stupidity on Massey.

Good for the UHP | 7:14 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Why don't people just do what the officer asks? When I watched the video Massey seemed to be provoking the officer. These poor officers are stopping characters all day long and sometimes their lives can be in jeopardy. Why aren't people just doing what the trooper says? I bet Massey won't smart off again.

just me | 7:22 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

They are still investigating. He hasn't got away with anything yet. I don't like to see what happened but on the other hand I get tired of the public always putting the law in the wrong. The individual was in the wrong and escalated it.

John | 7:27 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Anyone who feels Gardner was out of line would see this completely differently had the driver pulled a gun or had the passenger pulled a gun. The driver was way out of line and if we don't give our officers some latitude to protect and serve - then we are giving wackos free reign.

Anonymous2 | 7:41 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I'm glad cooler heads prevailed in the investigation. Why punish a UHP trooper when Massey himself could have prevented the whole thing simply by complying with directives of the officer. Although Gardner's actions were an overreaction, Massey was responsible for provoking. Did anyone think that perhaps his actions should be investigated? Probably not all the thousands who rush to his defense after seeing it on Youtube. Well, he's had his 10 minutes of fame. Now let's get on with it.

Citizen | 7:47 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

So what Anonymous is saying, as a "Retired Highway Patrol" is that we don't really need to obey orders from a law enforcement officer. Next time I get pulled over, I can just say "What is _your_ problem" and leave.

Could the officer have handled it differently? Yes. Could Mr. Massey have handled it differently? Yes. I agree with Bill...Once the taser comes out and an order is given, Mr. Massey should realize it's time to comply. It's a sad commentary on society when so many are trying to subvert the authority of law enforcement in justifying Mr. Massey's actions. Take responsibility for your own actions.

Reader | 7:57 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

This was an "initial" investigation not the final report. The article notes that Internal Affairs has not finished their investigation yet. This report was issued due to public pressure and interest. I don't think UHP was ready but they had to release something.

"Lawful and reasonable" are not the same as appropriate or ideal. The trooper is not off the hook.

This experience should remind people that the best response to an officer in the field is "Yes Sir." If there is a problem take care of it after you are out of the situation.

maybelle | 8:00 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I watched the video and the officer was justified. The man was disobedient. When he was asked to turn around, he continued toward his car. He saw the officer with the Taser gun and completely ignored that fact. He got what he deserved and now cries about it.

As for people from out of state calling and saying they will not come to Utah. Baloney. If they don't come, who cares? I certainly don't. Our freeways and highways are jammed now and I don't think we need anyone here who is afraid of treatment from our law enforcement officers. We have more than enough law breakers now.

Keep up the good work, Highway Patrol.

Strange | 8:01 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Does the UHP think everyone who saw the video on You Tube is stupid. Everyone saw what happened. It was not appropriate.

Dan | 8:07 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I agree with Bill (the former UHP officer with some experience in these matters) Once the officer has him out of the car, he needs to obey all commands from the officer. The guy getting the ticket was a real jerk, and I don't see why everyone is siding with him like he is some innocent victim in all of this. These guys are trying to protect us and they need our cooperation and support... not to be ridiculed and condemned by the public. I also think that the officer should have just wrote on the ticket "will not sign" and then let the courts take care of him.

Dan | 8:13 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Massey acted like a spoiled child and Gardner acted like a bully, but the police officer puts his life in danger on a daily basis so the child can be safe.

WVL | 8:17 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

The individual should sue the trooper and the UHP. I bet the jury will see it a lot different than the UHP self investigation. Too many officers seem to be on a ego trip--a very dangerous thing for the public.

Both Sides | 8:23 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Initially when I watched the video I was shocked that the officer would have taken it that far, but if you really analyze it from the officer's point of view, that was probably the safest move to make. Massey was walking back to the car with a smirk on his face, had his hand in/around his pockets, and wouldn't respond to the officer's commands. The officer shouldn't be expected to guess what Massey was thinking. Obviously there was a miscommunication intially so it never should have gone that far, but as soon as the officer tells him to put his hands behind his back, Massey needs to drop the ego, follow orders, and dispute the ticket later. Had Massey been someone with a weapon, we would all be praising the officer and this story wouldn't even be in the news. The officer shouldn't have to guess which type of person he is dealing with when the "suspect" was acting the way he did.

impartial review | 8:25 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

What impartial review.Its the fixed ballgame,the rigged casino and it stinks.

Bill is RIGHT | 8:27 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

The officer should have said, "if you don't sign this then I will have to arrest you". But suppose the man had returned to the car and fled the scene that turned into a high speed chase, which resulted in a crash involving another vehicle with a family in it. That family and all the keyboard critics would have said, "the officer is at fault because he should have shot Mr Massey when he had him".

Mr. Massey was the first one to tell the officer what "we are going to do" basically calling the officer a liar. Mr Massey should have greeted the officer with "sir", accepted the ticket and argued it with the judge later. If Mr Massey has talked that way with the judge he would have been put in the slammr for a month or more. He should be glad he was out that day.

Anonymous | 9:02 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Anyone saying the trooper was completely out of line knows absolutely nothing about being in law enforcement. While it appears the trooper should have communicated a little better, he IS fully justified in using his taser on a non-compliant individual who is returning to his vehicle after being asked not to. Once a cop says "Stop" you just better do what he says. If Mr. Massey had simply complied with the troopers verbal commands, this whole thing would have been avoided.

Trooper unjustified | 9:02 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I just watched the video on Youtube and it was OBVIOUS that the trooper was completely out of line!! Police officers need to understand that they are also subject to the laws and have no right to break them or legislate from the roadside.

No one has an obligation to sign a ticket acknowledging fault when they do not believe they are at fault. For an officer to arrest someone for so doing is ridiculous.

He should be demoted or fired for his actions.

Bill VL | 9:03 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

All you people out their complaining about this officer need to get a grip. Get your butts out of your chairs and ask your local police or HP if you can ride along and see what they experience.

After you finish the ride, see if you feel the same.

When a lawful order is given you need to obey it. Lastly, Massey needs to brush up on his responsibilities as a driver and just sign the ticket. As usual, someone breaks the law and it is the oficiers fault.

Anonymous | 9:05 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Wow these guys do really have power, we catch them on tape in clear abuse and they still dont get nailed, think of what isn't caught.

Bill, Bill, Bill | 9:05 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

What youï¿½re failing (like your former collegues at the UHP) to recognize is that mutiple wrongs by the officer donï¿½t make for a single right. The authority granted to the officer (which he was more than happy to try and excercise) comes with responsibility. In this case that responsibility included doing heï¿½s job from the moment he began to pursue the motorist. Iï¿½m certain with your experience you could come with a couple of dozen technical and obvious judgment errors made by the officer. The tipping point in this case was when the officer ordered the driver out of the vehicle. Why did he do that?? Iï¿½d dare say there isnï¿½t 1 in 10,000 other officers that would have done that.

Simply put everything that took place from that point forward need not have taken place. To argue to tase or not tase would not even be the question. With the driver safely remaining behind the wheel everything weï¿½re debating today would not have occurred. The burden of the repsonsibility to manage the situation with everyoneï¿½s safety in mind fell on the shoulders of the offficer.

Bill, Bill, Bill - Cont'd. | 9:08 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

The officer needlessly escalated the situation, increased the risk to himself, the driver, the passenger and passer-bys and then compounded the whole thing by deciding to tase. Let me see...I'll escalate the situation so Iï¿½ll have to do something about it (I think they call that justifing oneï¿½s existence - or some may call it stupid is as stupid does!).

The officer should be terminated -- considering his many years on the force and the fact the he still doesnï¿½t understand his responsibilities to the job and to the motoring public is unacceptable.

The fact that people like you and the UHP administration donï¿½t understand that deeply concerns me. UHPï¿½s lack of of understanding how to train and oversee all officerï¿½s conduct combined with the clear lack of judgement concerning this situation really scares me to death..!

David G | 9:14 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Wow, the UHP investigated its own member and cleared him. Surprise, surprise. They cited the "legality" of the response. If this officer followed the UHP rules, then someone needs to investigate (and rewrite) their rules, because those rules are seriously flawed.

PM | 9:23 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

You know this is very, very sad! The excuse is that the officer felt threatened, but he sure must not have felt too threatened to have walked all the way to his vehicle with his back to the "supposed" threatening individual. I agree with Bill, that both could have handled the situation better, but remember, the officer is a professional that is paid to handle these kind of situations and instead he was the one that seems to have let his emotions get the best of him.

Scott | 9:24 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Thank God for the dashboard cam. Otherwise Officer Ego could have claimed that he was being attacked and his actions justified. He wasn't and they weren't. I grew up during the "Leave It To Beaver" era, when we were taught that the police are your friends and will help you. And they were. Today, kids know their Miranda Rights before they can read. FEW officers are like this loser. But in todays world we all know that you have to be a total fool to give the police the time of day without a lawyer present. For most of us, horrible moments of our lives are nothing but unwanted paperwork to be processed. We have the right to fall on concrete when electricity is injected our bodies. We've all seen the routine. They scream the key phrases, then put a knee on your neck cutting off your ability to breath. When your body is starving for air and your muscles are having a NATURAL reaction to the pain being inflicted on your nervous system, that's called resisting. Then you are fair game. And some people die. And HE was "just doing his job." Gardner should "ride the taser", then jailed.

mike | 9:30 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

Since when is complying with an arrest optional?

If Massey didnt want to be arrested, was the trooper to simply forget about it and go find someone who would allow himself to be arrested?

Just walk away and stick your hand in your pocket. Great behavior when told you are being arrested.

idiotic | 9:34 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

This whole thing is just absurd. The trooper WAS FOLLOWING CORRECT PROCEDURE! The guy who posted the video on you-tube should be put in jail or at least be sued - he is responsible for the many death threats against this officer. He needs to have more respect for law enforcement and maybe that would be just the thing..

Offended victim | 9:40 a.m. Dec. 1, 2007

I had a smililar incident happen to me that happened to Mr. Macey and the courts totally uphold the officer's actions as "Lawful".

Most people do not realize that all Police Officers and the "Military Tribunals" are operating under the "Emergency Legislation" declared by the President. They've been given "Military Jurisdiction" over all civilians in the "Emergency" declared by the President. Check it out in the old Utah Code books under "Declaration of Public Policy".

The sad thing is to see all the comments of people who do not understand that "an unconstitutional law is no law at all". Where in the constitution do you find that the President can declare an "Emergency", then place all civilians under his "Emergency or Military Rule"?

It will be interesting to see where this "Investigation" leads to. I'll bet-nowhere.

Page:
1
2
3
4
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.