Mesa AZ Police Department: A Comprehensive Analysis of Force Use Policies and Ethics

Recently, a video surfaced online showing an incident involving the Mesa, Arizona Police Department (PD). This video, a combination of security and body camera footage, provides a clear, synchronized view of what transpired. The protocols and policies in place regarding the use of force are under intense scrutiny. This article delves into the specifics of the incident and the potential factors the departmental review will examine.

Understanding the Incident

The incident began with a verbal command to the suspect not to leave and to sit down. When the suspect refused, the responding officer requested backup. This is a standard protocol and thus, demonstrates professionalism in the initial approach.

Use of Verbal Techniques and Back Up

The responding officers arrived, and verbal techniques were used to gain compliance. However, the suspect remained uncooperative and braced against the wall, posing a potential threat. At this point, the incident escalates to physical force.

Questions Raised by the Use of Physical Force

When considering the use of physical force, particularly in the form of punches, several questions arise. The first question is whether the use of a Taser could have been a more appropriate and less harmful option. Officers are trained to escalate their response appropriately, and in this case, the decision to use fist strikes raises questions about the necessity and justification of each punch.

Justification of Fist Strikes

Each punch thrown must be justified, especially when the suspect is still standing and resisting verbal orders. However, the review will likely focus on the final punch, which was thrown after the suspect had already started to fall. This particular punch could be seen as potentially unnecessary, given that compliance had already been achieved.

Spit Guard and Head Slam

The incident also involved an attempt to spit on the officers, justifying the head slam into the elevator door. It is unclear why the spit guard was not used before the head slam. This tactic could have been employed immediately after the reported first spit incident to prevent further escalation.

Use of Hobbles and Pressure

Another aspect to examine is the use of hobbles, a technique that specifically targets the suspect's legs. While the application itself is not the issue, the change in the technique to where the hobbles were used to put pressure on the upper body, and the positioning of officers' knees on the suspect's chest, raises concerns about positional asphyxia. This is a significant risk and should be carefully reviewed to ensure no harm results from the application.

Review and Policy Compliance

Mesa PD's Use of Force (UOF) policy is under scrutiny. The review will determine if the officers adhered to the policy, particularly regarding the use of hobbles and the position of officers. It is important to ensure that the methods employed do not exceed legal and ethical boundaries.

Media Response and Legal Consequences

Incidents like these often lead to significant media attention. Once the UOF review concludes, there will likely be investigations by the Arizona authorities and/or the FBI. The final legal outcome will involve a court case, where the officers may cite the suspect's earlier resistance as justification for their actions. However, the use of excessive or unnecessary force can lead to legal violations and is not justifiable.

Conclusion

In summary, the incident raises serious questions about the appropriateness and justification of the physical force used by the Mesa AZ PD. The review will focus on specific aspects such as the use of Taser, the justification of each punch, the use of spit guards, and the application of hobbles. The policies in place must be strictly adhered to, and any deviation from them may lead to legal and ethical consequences. While the use of force is sometimes necessary, it must always be proportionate and justifiable.