There is a lot of talk among law enforcement and a few medical examiners, who choose to explain the deaths of, (sad to say), mostly men of color, while in police custody with the term “Excited Deliriumâ€. But what exactly does this mean? Well, you will not find this term in a medical dictionary because not even the American Medical Association has recognized this as an actual medical condition. But, to hear some medical examiners tell it, anyone who is high on cocaine, methamphetamines, is highly intoxicated, etc. will become extremely agitated and once they come into contact with the police, their heart will begin to race, their body temperatures rise so fast that their organs fail and lo and behold, they are no longer breathing.
The interesting thing is these victims have been in police custody while this has happened. And 9 times out of 10, there has been some excessive force on the part of the arresting officers, including the victim being tased, or hogtied or beaten with a baton. Sound a little strange to you? Well it does to me as well. Because this sounds an awful like the blame being put on the victim as opposed to some accountability being put on the officers who were at the scene.
Now, if an officer who has been trained to recognize when someone is intoxicated or having a mental crisis, comes into contact with an individual displaying signs of being in this altered state of mind, does it really make sense to use the same tools of apprehending this individual as you would someone who was lucid and sober? Does it make sense to use tools that knowingly will exacerbate health conditions when a person is in this state? And how do you explain the individuals who weren’t high or intoxicated but still died at the hands of the officers?
Just food for thought. I don’t have any answers, just more questions. But this is something to think about the next time you hear of someone dying while in police custody, Just ask yourself did they really die of an overdose, or could it possibly be that the blame needs to be placed with the last individuals the victim had the misfortune of seeing before their life was taken away.
8 Comments
Well since you have only questions with no answers, I’ll answer them for you.
Your first “comment” is a perfect example of complete bias, or simply ignorance. You mention that most deaths in police custody are “men of color.” That’s because men of color are the majority of who are committing the crimes. Don’t believe me? The numbers prove it.
Secondly, you throw out the bandwagon term “excessive force.” That’s just another uninformed catch phrase used by anyone who has no idea what police work entails. Why is it that if a police officer gets punched in the face on duty, it’s just part of the job, but if he punches back, it’s suddenly “police brutality” or “excessive force?” That’s the kind of hogwash that organizations like the Ella Baker Center, the NAACP and the ACLU perpetuate. People who do what they’re told when officers respond to an incident do not get hurt. I guarantee that. Tasers, batons, pepper spray and ripp hobbles (leg restraints) are all tools that are used to get people under control who don’t want to be brought under control. Tasers are a fairly new addition to the mix, and they’re great tools. When tasers are used, the officer generally doesn’t have to use striking techniques against the aggressor, which is preferred. However, most police departments don’t have tasers, and even of those who do, some of them have pepper spray come before tasers in the use of force continuum. Does that mean that an officer has to spray someone before tasing? No it doesn’t. It all depends on the dynamics of the particular situation. Let’s assume an officer doesn’t have the luxury of a taser. That leaves pepper spray, hands, feet and a baton (and gun). When an officer arrives on the scene of a disturbance and the person refuses to calm down, an officer doesn’t have the option of saying “okay” and leaving. If a person does not calm down, the officer has to bring them under control, and saying “please” doesn’t work. I promise. That means the officer has to put his hands on the person, who usually then immediately begins resisting. If the person is resisting but not throwing punches, such as trying to break free and run, then pepper spray is generally preferable to striking techniques. However, pepper spray is usually ineffective against people who are high or intoxicated, and guess what condition most people are in when the police have to deal with them? That means the officer has to subdue them by means of striking techniques. Now the officer can punch the person, but he runs the risk of injuring his own hand, and possibly being out of work for some time. That makes the baton preferable over hands. You’ve obviously never had to fight someone who’s on PCP, which is probably one of the worse drugs someone can be on if the police have to fight them. The only way to subdue someone on PCP is to kill them (imagine the fall out from that) or by striking them with batons until they submit. (Keep in mind that if they hadn’t been doing what they were doing to begin with, the police wouldn’t be dealing with them.) That’s why the blame IS put on the “victim,” or an even better term, the SUSPECT. Even after fighting with and subduing (hopefully) someone in that condition, the officer still has to consider seeking medical attention for the suspect, if it’s warranted. Let me tell you something, I’m going to make sure that I and the other officers are not injured before seeking first aid for the scum that just fought with me and tried to hurt me.
Next, yes it does make sense to use the same tools on any person who is breaking the law or is acting irrationally, because there are no other tools for controlling people. Trust me, if police officers could “will” people to just calm down and rationalize, they would do it, always. If an officer has dealt with someone before and knows that this particular person is susceptible to seizures which make him scream, flail his arms and take his clothes off, (I know such a man, which is why I use this example) then the officer will attempt to make concessions for this individual. If he’s at his house and not bothering anyone but his family who knows how do deal with him, then that’s one thing. However, what if this man is on a bus and has innocent bystanders blocked from the exit while he’s on his tirade? Then obviously, more expedient measures are called for, such as restraining techniques, a taser or possibly even striking techniques. (Pepper spray on a bus wouldn’t be a good idea.)
As for your last comment about police being the last ones the suspect sees before he dies, did you ever consider that the police were there because someone else called and told the police about this individual?? Sometimes police officers locate people acting this way by chance, but most often, they’re called to handle this person since no one else can. That is part of the job, after all, and I’m not complaining about that. If you feel the police don’t deal with these people correctly, then perhaps you should show up at the next incident and offer to “talk the person down” for the officers. Then, when you’re getting seriously assaulted by the suspect because the “feel good” approach didn’t work, have the common decency to not judge the officers for their actions taken to protect the public (ie. you). Perhaps you just need to become better informed or maybe just a little less judgemental. Better yet, you can always apply to your local police department and try to get an education first hand about what it is that police have to deal with.
scum ? sort of shoots holes through your viewpoint chris . I don,t envy you or enjoy your line of work , mabye you do , ps howcum a 100lb 5′2″ nurse can control these guys ? I think it,s got something to do with conflict management ?
chris: i had a hard time reading your comments. paragraphs that long leave my wee brain a bit fatigued. nonetheless, when i was able to slog my way through your diatribe, you talk of these things in a vacuum.
know that there are many avoidable deaths of men of color who die because cops lose their cool and use — here it is — excessive force. sometimes, the innocent die because they resist an unlawful arrest. sometimes, the innocent die because the police use force, tasers, and then hog-ties. this combination often proves lethal. is resisting arrest punishable by death?
perhaps you believe a few dead innocents is an acceptable price to pay, but i do not. your view of the realities faced by suspects and peace officers alike proves right the adage that a “skeptic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.” people are dying who should not be dying because poorly trained and poorly vetted officers are confronting situations for which they are, in one way or another, ill-suited.
Officer Chris:
you have a hard job. and its probably fair to say that when the police do a good job in a difficult situation thats not going to make the evening headlines. However let’s be honest about a few issues:
1) Police officers choose their line of work. Why would anyone wish to have a job where you have the right to hurt someone in a situation where you know your life is not being threatened? The same curious question can be made of people who choose priesthood as a line of work. Why would someone commit their life to celibacy and the dull life of teaching religion?
ANSWER: Because some people have other agendas who find that they can hide behind their uniform of employment. These agendas usually fit into the emotional needs that gives them a sense of power or self worth.
Of course there are many who have no agenda however its not these people i’m talking about.
2) When an individual joins the police force being paid by tax payers money we all assume that this person has taken on the dificult task to serve and protect the community. But its also to serve the people employed in the court systems, lawyers, defenders, and jails under the mission of law enforcement. What better way to fight police brutality then to show people who are making the dumb mistakes and getting arrested that we can actually reduce police employment by reducing the need for law enforcement by simply helping those around us obey the law. How about a voluntary curfew intiated by the communites of Oakland where everyone agrees to stay off the street between certain hours of the night. the idea would be passed on that this tactic would lower crime and hopefully put pressure on the city to decrease the need for cruising patrol. this would make honest police officers pleased that the community has improved itself. it would make those with other agendas perhaps a bit frustrated.
3) Policeman have orders. like our young boys and girls in IRAQ they are being told to perform a duty where having some degree of hate for those you must encounter is almost a job prerequisite. These orders do not come from the majority of the people but from the same politically financially motivated agendas that get us into wars like IRAQ. while performing a duty is honorable, it does not mean that all sense of human morality and respect is tossed out the window because of pure self-absorbing paranoid fear. nevertheless there lies a systemic attitude among officers that seem to escalate fear and thus use of force as if they can’t wait to do it. perhaps this is a script to fill the privatized prisons?
perhaps its an indicator that our police force and military have become cowards where dropping bombs on defenseless people, torture,
and shooting unarmed people is a personal sign of weakness. or perhaps brutality is an order from upstairs to instill a sense of lawlessness and fear among the people of these communities. Ask yourself this question? would a former Klan member make a good police officer in Oakland?
Answer: This is where we conduct research in the community and see what they say about this question.
4) the media- when the news media reports another drive by shooting it serves the purpose of promoting a profile of Oakland as the wild wild west of gang warfare. the real crime is the news media fails to reveal any real information about the victims. from talking to good police officers they feel a sense of helplessness because many of these kids getting shot are NOT gangbangers as the media would have you assume. these kids getting shot are usually in the wrong place at the wrong time coming from decent law abiding families. the media presents the victim as just another body having no other purpose, family, or career in life other than being just another black person who got shot.
FBI statistics clearly show that homicide on a national level is down since 1995 levels. While the violence in Oakland is up its all too obvious that there are many people who benefit from rising crime: more police jobs, bigger prisons, less money for education, decreasing educated black males, creating cheap labor in prisons, etc.
The real opportunity is showing the black community that we can take money out of the system of law enforcement but its going to take a big effort with good legal representation, community involvement, and the music business showing folks that there is no future in thug life.
I would hope that this and my other suggestions would make the police officers job much easier. the only question that remains to be answered is why would a society spend more money to keep someone behind bars for having some small quantity of an illegal substance than to educate him from childhood? Why would a society have different laws for cocaine users than crack users?
Answer: Because our society fears that the news will get out that black people have been treated unfairly to promote an agenda. that as long as these communities are maintained as unstable in the richest country in the world then it will appear to be a community issue instead of an American issue of making sure people get the bad cards in the deck. while to some extent people have to find a way to beat the odds and except some personal responsibility- the poverty brainwashing is powerful.
Just like people faulting those who lived near a flood plain during Katrina claiming that the were unprepared and chose to live there, remember the World Trade Center already had one attepted failed attack before 9-11 and yet people still returned to the WTC to work? why would they do this?
No one asked these people why would they return to the WTC that had already been a target of a failed bomb attack? instead all we heard was heroes, after heroes, after hero stories. funny thing. didn’t hear many hero stories after Katrina. wonder why??
Our USA has many in the military and the police confronting an enemy that exists for a purpose. after all how many police publically campaign for better schools in urban neighborhoods? names please. while any police officer should protect himself by any means neccessary let’s not make excuses for those who wait in line with eager anticiapation to torture the enemy.
peace
excuse me, Chris – “men of color are the majority of who are committing the crimes. Don’t believe me? The numbers prove it.” These statistics (assuming for discourse’ sake that your “facts” are true) prove only that these men (who are also usually of lower socio-economic status) were arrested and/or convicted of crimes. Can you provide statistics on how many affluent, mostly white men with highly paid lawyers are let go for crimes the police know they did but the DA can’t win the prosecution? Anecdotal evidence abounds with stories of how white teenagers speeding are cautioned and sent home but black and Mexican teenagers are arrested and their cars impounded.
Medical/mental health professionals are taught techniques to control “wacked out” and violent patients in a manner which is safe for both the patient and themselves. They aren’t given the option of hog-tying or doing anything which might physically compromise the person so they don’t do it. And their employees remain safe when these protocols are followed.
I am a small Chinese woman. The car I drive is my son’s, who is not, but appears to be, Mexican. He gets stopped at least once a week for purely made up reasons. The police don’t stop me because I don’t fit their “profile”. It is common in Oakland to be stopped for the offense of “DWC” (Driving while colored – variation DWB-driving while black).
By the way, excessive police violence is not limited to California. There’s an article in the April 2007 issue of Maxim on this subject. In the ultimate example of what happens when “organized violence” goes unchecked, there were police who raided an 88 year old grandma’s home and shot her to death. And re: non-lethal forms of control – It’s interesting to note that 20 people died in 2006 as a result of tasering and that tasering is used for such things as “failing to provide a photo id”.
I do respect and honor those men and women of our police forces who “protect and serve”. It is not an enviable task to put your life on the line for a public that would rather not remember you exist unless they need you or to know that there are those who might shoot you just for wearing the uniform. But these things don’t give officers carte blanche to use excessive force. They must be held to a higher standard of conduct. A civilized society protects its weakest citizens (the poor, the mentally ill, the addicted, the homeless).
I am 100 percent behind Chris’s comments. All you anti-police types would not survive in a police-free nation so shut up please.
Chris makes some valid points. Officers put their lives at risk and have to make life or death decisions in an instant. On the other hand, they also have a great responsibility to uphold the law and proper treatment of suspects, all of whom aren’t criminals.
Also, there is another key point here that Chris doesn’t differentiate from. Taking drugs in excess and becoming agitated is a choice that someone makes, and the use of appropriate force in these situations may be warranted, but for the man with the seizure disorder, to blame him for his “tirade” and use force to subdue him makes no sense. Someone with a physical condition or disease, which they have to suffer with through no fault of their own shouldn’t be treated this way, especially if the officer is aware of the condition. I would hope an officer would call an EMT to deal with someone with a medical condition. Would you beat/taser/restrain someone who was having an asthma attack, kicking and flailing and gasping for air, blocking the bus exit from innocent bystanders?
I don’t know if I agree with you here. See you do make a good point, I don’t think you’ve actually given plenty of thought to the other side of this argument. Maybe I can write a guest post or a follow-up, just make me aware.