It’s good that the Wichita Police Department has apologized for using a Taser on a severely hearing-impaired Wichita man last month and that it is reviewing the incident to try to prevent such a mistake from happening again. But as Wichita State University criminal justice professor Brian Withrow told KWCH, Channel 12, there is growing concern nationally that officers are using Tasers as a first choice.
In this case, Donnell Williams had just stepped out of his bathroom, wearing only a towel, when he was confronted by police officers responding to a report of a shooting (which was false). He was shocked with a Taser after not complying with police orders to show his hands — which he couldn’t understand because of his disability.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- george on Health care reform would save state money
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on So they said
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- JWink on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
46 Comments
Being deaf and hard of hearing for 45 years, I can’t tell you how many times that I have run into communication problems.I would advise the WPD to understand that before humans had developed verbal communication, all communication was done by a visual action, grunting and making noises in aggressive and cooing expressions.A deaf person that has never learned how to speak, sadly likewise appears like a caveman when trying to communicate, but that is the trouble with modern understanding, there is more then one way to communicate then just verbally speaking.I will tell you that communication is a two way road, maybe William’s action too were not appropriate when he was first confronted by the police officers.It will be difficult to figure out how to address these kinds of situations.
Let’s see, a nake guy wrapped in a towel that poses a threat to armed police officers. Yeah right! and nothing will be done for the abuse. WPD at their best.
I think that in some cases they are a bit too quick to whip out the taser gun. A taser should be used only when, in the judgement of the officer, the suspect is unruly and will not comply or respond to mace and when the officer is alone and unable to to physically subdue the suspect. In all cases a verbal warning should be given if possible. We have an ongoing case here in Georgia where a man was tased while he was handcuffed and he died. And they have a video of it. So yes the police need more training on these but I am not going to take away the tasers from our police nor am I about to put my judgement in the place of the office in harms way. We need to stand behind our police and only question them when there is a clear and convincing case of wrong doing on the part of the officer. They deal with some of the worst creeps in the world. They deal with them so you and I won’t have to deal with them. They stand between them and civilized people. They must be given wide lattitude to do their jobs.http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7622314
By all means..let’s second guess the police until they are so wrapped up in regulations that they cannot do their job.
this is ONE incident. A sad and regrettable one, yes, but one out of how many? Would people prefer the police shoot a suspect than use a tazer? Police have to act on a spur of the moment to protect themselves and others. Monday morning quarterbacking after the fact is a fine mental exercise–but walk a few miles in their shoes before you judge them so harshly.
Would people prefer the police shoot a suspect than use a tazer?
Never a choice in real life; if the police are in danger, they shoot; they taser to subdue people who won’t listen to them.
Nice assumption there, door, but incorrect. Police use tazers when they are in danger. Try riding along a few times and see for yourself–do some actual research instead of making assumptions.
Yes.
While many times a tasar is used correctly. I think that at times some members of police departments seem to forget that a tasar is a potentially lethal weapon and it should be used as a last resort. They should have a definite sense of being threatened before one is used. This tool can and has caused people to die.
NO this isn’t one incident. About 275 people in the United States have died after being tasered.
This is a tool that should ONLY be used when the officer’s safety, another’s safety, and the suspect’s safety is in question. NOT merely for gaining compliance nor as a first tactic. You were taught to use your words, so use them.
This is a case where I”m actually more surprised that officers didn’t have their guns drawn…and why didn’t they? There needs to be strict protocol for use of the taser, and also strict post use protocol that involves medical intervention ASAP.
And don’t say I’m trying to limit police and their abilities or that I’m against police. My father was an officer, my best friends are police officers and they’re my coworkers.
I also believe that dispatch should have a place on their screen that brings up information for an address or vehicle tag, where the public can call in and add tags like “diabetic” or “deaf” or “autistic” or “known mental illness”, so that dispatch can give that information to the officers immediately.
The WE Editors must have enjoyed the discussion yesterday to bring the subject back today.
I’m still surprised at the hostility toward the police. I’ve never had a problem with local authorities. When I’ve dealt with them, they’ve always been polite and professional.
Pmom…you don’t think there are already ’strict protocols’ in place for using a tazer?? Do you really think it is just an option for the officer depending on his mood or something? There are very strict protocols and guidelines. Sometimes, tho, in the actual moment, it can be a little difficult to make that determination in a fraction of a second.Sitting back and second guessing after the fact is easy. I am not saying police are perfect, but for people who were not there, do not know the details or the exact facts to criticize and condemn is amazing. Sit in judgment without the facts?
In my department all we do is based on protocol with a whole lot of judgement calls, since nearly nothing fits into a tidy neat little box.
But no, I run about 50/50 in taser videos that I see, 50 I believe the officer was right (one was the ‘don’t tase me dude) guy. And the other 50 I believe was excessive or unneccesary. So I don’t believe the training is either good enough, or the wording of the protocol isn’t good enough.
If there were as many reasons to pull a taser as a gun, we’d have a lot more police shootings in a year than we do. It’s because the police know they’re going to get raked over the coals for using their gun, even when they’re correct in doing so. They are careful but make that call in a split second as well. Police should be just as cautious about using a taser.
By the way, my husband is a corrections officer. He is one of three officers in a pod, and only the superior gets to carry a taser and pepper spray. And these are dangerous inmates he works with daily.
This is a tool that should ONLY be used when the officer’s safety, another’s safety, and the suspect’s safety is in question. NOT merely for gaining compliance nor as a first tactic.Posted by: political_mom | December 06, 2007 at 08:02 AM
P_mom, if a subject refuses to comply, what do you suggest the cops do?
Last night I watched a police video where the cops had to deal with a 280 pound man who had too much to drink and had turned violent. They didn’t have tasers. They used Asps (a steel batton-like device). It had very little effect. It took 2 cops a long time to take the guy down and get him cuffed. Since the guy was twice the size of either cop, I’d say they were subjected to needless risk that could have been averted by the judicous use of a taser.
Tasers are a sensible alternative to deadly force. If a cop misuses one, he needs to be diciplined. I know some will say “Blue Wall”. I can understand the Blue Wall mentality, considering some of the hateful and paranoid comments aimed at cops I’ve seen over the last couple of days.
The police aren’t your enemies. A lot of the people they have to deal with are.
Cops today are too fat/physically unfit to handle suspects appropriately without losing the upper-hand, so they tase. FATTIES.
Yes, let’s report all the wrong things cops do and build an even larger mistrust for them.
After all, everyone but cops are perfect and make no mistakes ever right?
Guess if I had a choice between running someone down or tasing, I’d reach for the taser too!
The guy was naked with a towl on, what did the cops think he was gonna do, pull a bouy knife out of his ass.
Law Enforcement Officers need all the help they can get. They face dangers we don’t understand everyday. If they can’t use tazers to set an example to those who try to resist arrest or valid orders of correctional officers, the jails and prisons would be totally out of control. Why, just the other day my neighbor told me about a case in Hutchinson where a man went amok i the jail and was destroying everything in site. Well after they got him back in his cell and the cell was locked he picked up his mattress and started taunting the officers from his cell and hiding behind a mattress. Well, they said put down the mattress or else and so he lowered the mattress to spit at them and they tazed him right through the hole in the door! He deserved it. That will probably teach him a good lesson!
Nice assumption there, door, but incorrect. Police use tazers when they are in danger
B.S. You consider yourself in danger if you have to wrestle a fellow down. You might get a scrap. Instead, you use a potentially lethal weapon on him.
here’s one I dealt with Monday.
http://www.hazink.com
I am gratified to read that the majority of posters here are able to rationalize their way around this subject and recognize the critical deficiencies in the initial post. Some people who’ve posted here obviously have issue with law enforcement or authority in general. Some others just seem to have issues, period.
The U.N. Committee Against Torture expressed some concerns about a specific make and model of taser weapon, not tasers in general. They did not suggest that law enforcement should stop using tasers nor that every use of a taser by a law enforcement officer constitutes torture. Their concerns at their 23-Nov-07 meeting in Geneva were relative to policy development for correctional facilities in Portugal relative to the use of tasers. The argument was regarding the definition of the word ‘pain’ as it applied to torture. But, of course, when the media regurgitates the information it comes out as “… tasers are torture.”
It’s this kind of irresponsible, selective journalism that creates undue concern and misbeliefs in communities. Ms. Mehler seems to have focused on two almost random words in the subcommittees report, “taser” and “torture”, and then represented the subcommittee’s report in an entirely skewed context. (You can read the subcommittee’s report by going to http://www.un.org. Click on the Geneva Office tab and then the News & Media tab.) Section 2 of the General Provisions of the U.N.’s “Basic Principles of the Use of Force & Firearms by Law Enforcement Oficials” states that police should develop and use less-than-lethal weapons as a preference to lethal force.
“Governments and law enforcement agencies should develop a range of means as broad as possible and equip law enforcement officials with various types of weapons and ammunition that would allow for a differentiated use of force and firearms. These should include the development of non-lethal incapacitating weapons for use in appropriate situations, with a view to increasingly restraining the application of means capable of causing death or injury to persons. For the same purpose, it should also be possible for law enforcement officials to be equipped with self-defensive equipment such as shields, helmets, bullet-proof vests and bullet-proof means of transportation, in order to decrease the need to use weapons of any kind.”
This blog is reminiscent of articles back in the late 1970s where journalists were writing about hollow-point ammunition by police. Journalists, arguing that hollow-point bullets represented a greater danger to bystanders than did conventional bullets, wrote that hollow-point bullets “… would go through a cars engine block.” Of course they don’t, and research indicated that they actually represented less danger than conventional ammunition and actually resulted in fewer suspect deaths by incapacitating suspects faster than conventional ammunition. If journalists can’t get these simple facts straight, how can we trust their reporting on the more complicated science, economic, health and economic issues?
I served as an instructor at a police academy that served a base of 1,100 law enforcement officers for 13 years of a 35 year career. One of my instructional areas was self-defense and mechanics of arrest. That included instruction in the use of tasers, stun guns and chemical weapons (pepper spray). All of these are less-than-lethal weapons developed to give officers an alternative to hard empty-handed techniques and the use of impact weapons. These less-than-lethal weapons present a significantly smaller chance of causing injury or death than do use of hard empty-handed techniques or impact weapons. During the training courses, instructors and students a like received doses and applications of each weapon with which they sought certification. During the high level simulations portions of these courses, I received dozens of shots from tasers and stun guns and dozens of doses of pepper spray. They weren’t pleasant, but I was willing to do that because I knew that I would be back to normal in a matter of two or three minutes (15 to 20 minutes in the case of pepper spray). I certainly didn’t allow students to strike me with their batons. Impact weapons and hard empty-handed techniques risk causing permanent, life-changing injuries to actively resisting suspects -–much more so than less-than-lethal weapons including tasers.
Do tasers belong in schools? The younger the suspect, the less developed his or her cognitive capacities. That means that teenagers are more likely to make the decision to fight with police because they just don’t know what they’re doing as well as an adult might. And because they’re, generally, not as physically developed as an adult, they’re more susceptible to injuries. This is exactly the scenario where the use of less-than-lethal techniques are required. If the actively resisting teenager isn’t as capable of fighting with police, the less likely they are to become injured in the course of being subdued and controlled. When police have a suspect who is more fragile and who’s decision-making abilities are in some way compromised or under developed, the use of less-than-lethal control techniques are indicated.
Yes, people have died after police used tasers on them. But none of the autopsy reports of these people indicated that they died from electrocution from the taser use. Many of these were deaths were due to drug overdoses. Some deaths were due to heart attacks and strokes that were the results of the suspect’s lifestyle. I’m not qualified to say whether or not the taser use complicated the suspect’s diseases – I just don’t know. But wouldn’t you think that someone who had a life threatening disease would take that into consideration before deciding to actively resist police intervention into their criminal behavior? And, yes, there are a few police officers who have used tasers inappropriately and even illegally. No professional discipline has escaped the few bad apples. Not the medical profession, not the legal profession and not government in general. Not even the clergy.
But the bottom line is, as many previous posters have pointed out, if you are reasonable and compliant with police, you need not worry about any complications of the use of any kind or any level force.
Used the way they are intended to be used by competent police officers, taser use does not constitute torture. Hopefully, the Eagle readers are bright enough to recognize and see through Ms. Mehler’s hysterical journalism.
WAR, thank you for a thoughtful and compelling post.
I strongly believe that we need Law Enforcement officers who have experience (internships – On-The-Job experience), theory (Law Enforcement Academy) and also a four-year interdisciplinary college degree. Law Enforcement officers need to have additional coursework in sociology and psychology and physiology. I think by better equipping our law enforcement officers with education, information, training and the best possible equipment – we will ALL be safer… considering the violence, drugs and well-armed offenders currently in our communities.
I think by better equipping our law enforcement officers with education, information, training and the best possible equipment – we will ALL be safer… considering the violence, drugs and well-armed offenders currently in our communities.
Posted by: Lonnie | December 06, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Agreed, Lonnie, but are we as taxpayers ready to pay for that? I would assume that if the education requirements (a 4-year degree) increase, so would the payscale.
Reminds me of a conversation I had with my 7 yr. old grandson, trying to motivate him to go to taekwondo class. He told me he wanted to be a cop, so I told him better go learn some moves in case he had to restrain someone. He said, well there would be another cop. I said well the other cop might not know how. He said “They have guns”.
WisemanThanks for the personal information.
My brother died of a brain tumor in his late teens. It was first discovered when he was playing basketball at Olatha School for the Deaf.
A few suggestions:
Police should learn some BASIC sign language. It has been awhile, for me, but sign language for “get down” or for “hands against the wall” would not be that hard to teach, or to learn.
Also, deaf people must take some responsibility for themselves. A sign similar to the “medic alert” notices, for prescription drugs, that many people put on their doors would be smart. Deaf or Blind people should make sure that emergency personel know exactly what they are dealing with. These notices should be on the front door, or near the door-bell, just like the “medic alert” notices.
Tasers should be used before a night stick, in most cases.
Yes, there are people with pace-makers, heart conditions and other problems that will have some issues if a taser is used against them.
A night stick or a bullet could cause even more damage, to such people.
“Hard cases make bad law” — this is a sad and troubeling incident, but lets try to address the problem:
COMMUNICATION!
“”"The guy was naked with a towl on, what did the cops think he was gonna do, pull a bouy knife out of his ass.”"”
Put yourself in the place of the officer. The man was coming out of a room that the officer had not viewed and would not show his hands. The officer does not know what is behind that door. May be a gun or a knife there. The officer made a judgement call that the man was not going to comply and that he might retreat to the room or reach for something behind the door. Remember that the policeman was there because of a shooting call so the officer was probably already on high nerves when he arrived on the scene. It was an unfortunate incident but lucky nobody got seriously hurt.
“”"In my department all we do is based on protocol with a whole lot of judgement calls, since nearly nothing fits into a tidy neat little box. “”"”
I don’t know why it is that people do not understand this. The police officer’s job is about judgement. “Do I chase or not?” “Do I draw my gun or not?” or “Do I use less lethal force?”. I have never been a cop but I have really come to appreciate what they have deal with because of the reality TV shows. If people think the job is easy they should watch “Under Fire” on Court TV and see what a misjudgement of even a second can cost. Then they would appreciate what the police have to put up with on the job more. I am not saying all cops are right all the time and there are 4 cops in Chicago that did me dirty and to this day I would like to slap them around a few times. But I will stand by our police. If not for them, you people would not worrying about Christmas shopping this year because a predator would have all you money and maybe your life too.
“I also believe that dispatch should have a place on their screen that brings up information for an address or vehicle tag, where the public can call in and add tags like “diabetic” or “deaf” or “autistic” or “known mental illness”, so that dispatch can give that information to the officers immediately.
Posted by: political_mom | December 06, 2007 at 08:02 AM “
Interesting that this sounds like “Profiling”, good or bad thing?
“Also, deaf people must take some responsibility for themselves. A sign similar to the “medic alert” notices, for prescription drugs, that many people put on their doors would be smart. Deaf or Blind people should make sure that emergency personel know exactly what they are dealing with. These notices should be on the front door, or near the door-bell, just like the “medic alert” notices.Posted by: Econ101 | December 06, 2007 at 11:14 AM “
Econ, I am sorry to hear about your brother and thank you for focusing on the problem about on how to remedy a first contact situation for the Deaf.You have a good ideal but privacy wise you would be leaving yourself open to be taken advantage of, especially by the criminal elements.
WAR, what does your experience tell you of how to approach this kind of situation?
Door King, or better yet Cranberry, duh, you’re not privy to statements made by witnesses. That could result in retaliation.
You have to go through the appropriate channels to get information. If you were the way you always act, it’s no wonder the secretary was nasty to you.
“A sign similar to the “medic alert” notices, for prescription drugs, that many people put on their doors would be smart.”
I would NEVER recommend that at all. People look for things like that as well as wheelchair ramps as easy targets for home invasion burglaries. No way.
“Interesting that this sounds like “Profiling”, good or bad thing?”
How is this profiling if the person wants that information known to police?
WAR, you leave a whole lot out in your post about the reasons why people may not comply with police.
I’ve had to battle down patients with head trauma, patients with diabetes…mental illness, even had one try to jump out of the back of my ambulance on the interstate. I don’t get to use a taser, I have to take what comes. I even had a suicidal patient who the police refused to intervene in (he was new), and it took awhile, but I was finally able to convince him into the ambulance.
Last resort.. is when the taser should be utilized. And only when there is danger.
I once heard from some of my coworkers about a police officer that had been on a footchase with a man who needed medical care, my coworkers said they’d get the suspect calmed down to try to treat him, and then the officer would stick his face down and start riling up the patient. In that case, police were HINDERING our ability to provide care. I swear that officer was just looking for a reason to use the taser.
And I still think anytime a taser is used, it should be mandatory immediate medical personnel.
I’ve often said with my son being autistic and scared to death of police cars (the lights and sirens cause him to freak out), he’s likely to run from police if they don’t know him…they will probably think he’s up to something. He’s at risk for being tased- especially since it takes time for him to compute a verbal order. I’m trying to prevent this before it happens to him, as it has to so many other autistic kids already.
pmom
How about a sign that says “resident is deaf. doberman hears just fine”?
seriously, I understand the vulnerability issues.However, the “medic alert” stuff is usually rather small, you cant see it from the street, you have to be on the porch to see those notices. Also, notices for oxygen use and the like are there for the fire department to see.—–Another sign idea:
“Ya, I’m deaf. I won’t hear the sound of the gun that shoots you!”
Door King, or better yet Cranberry, duh, you’re not privy to statements made by witnesses. That could result in retaliation.
P.M. Here are the exceptions to the open records act.
Personnel information of public employees
Medical treatment records
Records protected by attorney-client privilege
Records closed by the rules of evidence
Records containing personal information compiled for Census purposes
Notes and preliminary drafts
Criminal investigation records
The cops claimed the “criminal investigation” exemption. What investigation? What crime? No ticket was issued.
I’ll also point out p.m. that from the accident report I learned all I needed to know if I cared to retaliate.
As usual, when a woman is involved, you automatically think the man is the villian. That is not the case, and in the case of the miserable personal life you so eagerly expose on thse blogs, most certainly not the case.
Yours: Cranberry, campsis, door king, sarah bellum and sometimes, buster hymen and dick holder.
“Interesting that this sounds like “Profiling”, good or bad thing?”How is this profiling if the person wants that information known to police?Posted by: political_mom | December 06, 2007 at 01:52 PM
Pmom -
I am not totally against profiling; I do believe that the police have a right to profile if it serves to enforcements.But I do agree with you, I would probably be one of the first ones to let them know if it is allowed.
Just more inept police work from single digit IQ recruits. even if the the guy wasn’t deaf you have the police breaking and entering, trespassing and roughing up someone who did nothing wrong, take away the fact that their police officers and you’d have justification for using lethal force to defend your home. The city will be lucky if it doesn’t have to pay a multi million dollar lawsuit.
actually Cranberry, I didn’t think anything about anyone’s sex or have feelings of my feminist agenda when I wrote that. But hey, whatever floats your boat.
pmom
How about a sign that says “resident is deaf. doberman hears just fine”?
Posted by: Econ101
Ha! Now I like that one.
actually Cranberry, I didn’t think anything about anyone’s sex or have feelings of my feminist agenda when I wrote that. But hey, whatever floats your boat.
Nor did you think period. Under which exception can the police withold witness statements in traffic accidents? And don’t call me Cranberry. I’m a Muslim now, and I’ve legally changed my name to Door King.
Still obstinant and obnoxious and obtuse. Should have called yourself triple o.
Under which exception can the police withold witness statements in traffic accidents? Which one is it p.m.?
Why were the cops in his home to begin with? Did they have a warrant? A report of a shooting isn’t probable cause. Is it?
Cops have a need to be “POWERFUL” and to be “HEROES”. The God-complex’s and narcissism need to be fed. When you (even seemingly) challenge that part of their psychology disaster ensues. Whenever I have had contact with any police, wherever, there was a single regular Joe and then the rest of them. When you describe them as being “nice”, I’ve noticed that too. But the “nice” always has a tinge of condescension in it.
Why don’t we just issue them giant Chinese finger traps?
A report of a shooting isn’t probable cause. Is it?Posted by: Pleefer | December 06, 2007 at 09:07 PM
You’re kidding, right? Of course a report of a shooting is probable cause.
Wiseman / Politcal Mom …
You raise good and valid points and concerns. Frankly, our training programs taught police officers to error on the side of caution with respect to their personal safety. If it isn’t obvious to the officer that a suspect is disabled in some fashion and unable to communicate or comply, he/she would reasonably employ a less-than-lethal level of force to subdue a suspect. There is an old police addage – “It is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.” It’s just not reasonable to expect law enforcement officers to put their lives on the line just in case someone could possibly be deaf or autistic.
I have twelve years experience on the street. Of course, that was way back in the days before tasers, stun guns and pepper spray were invented. (All we had back then was batons and mace.) During that time I encountered four suspects who were deaf. Two were known to me prior to our encounter and two were not. In each case our suspect assessment easily identified the problem and we (my partner and I) took the suspects into custody without incident. I had at least a couple of dozen suspects feign deafness in order to disarm me specifically to gain a tactical advantage with the intent to actively resist custody. I’ve had a few others feign other disabilities, but deafness was the most common.
I recall being called to apprehend one autistic (older) child who was experiencing some type of crisis and had run into a particularly hazardous (electrical) environment. We were successful and we rescued the kid without physically harming him, but I’m sure he was put off of police (and probably anyone else in a uniform) for quite awhile. Unfortuinate, but I don’t think we had any other reasonable recourse. If I had to, I would use a taser to apprehend an autistic person rather than let him/her risk imminent harm in a dangerous environment or risk being injured by fighting with police. The theory was that it would be better/easier to repair emotional damage than any serious physical damage. I’ve been retired for awhile, and I don’t know if the philosophy on that has changed or not, but it stills seems reasonable to me.
But you are very right – it would be a very good idea for all police officers to learn some rudimentary sign language in order to give suspects who are deaf (or who feign to be deaf) instructions on how to comply with police during a custodial situation. It would go a long way to both avoid problems when a suspect is legitimately deaf and to establish that a suspects true intentions are to resist custody if he/she is feigning deafness.
As far as using a taser on a fleeing suspect – generally not appropriate nor practical. Someone running from an officer is not actively resisting. (Fleeing is a form of passive resistance.) And as you know, tasers have a range of 15 to 20 feet, depending on the model. If a suspect is farther away than that, the officer won’t hit his/her target. If both the officer and suspect are moving, the odds of good target acquisition are pretty damn poor. The only justification for using a taser on a fleeing suspect would be the reasonable belief that by allowing the suspect to move to another environment or escape would place someone, the community in general or the suspect him/herself in danger. Of course, trying to use a stun gun or pepper spray on a fleeing suspect is practically impossible.
You’re kidding, right? Of course a report of a shooting is probable cause.
Posted by: Snuffy Smith | December 07, 2007 at 08:18 AM
Well, let’s say I am a teenager with a penchant for prank calling. I live across town from you and I randomly pick your number. I call the police saying that I heard shots coming from across the street at my neighbor’s house. The police respond to your home and you’re in the shower. You are also deaf. The police officers knock and you can’t hear them, they have to bust in. You hear the crash of the door and run out to check. You startle the already suspicious officers, you can’t communicate (being deaf) you are now treated as a threat and are tased (or worse). I guess my prank call was pretty funny. So, my thinking was, if I didn’t see a weapon or hear the shots myself, then how can it be considered “probable cause”. There is no evidence that a shot rang out, only someones word. Now take my prank call scenario and apply your own. No evidence, no probable cause. But I’m no lawyer.