April 30, 2004

Update

First up after the mid-morning recess is Thomas Forsyth. After him comes one more witness before lunch. Later this afternoon, Officer Sery will testify, as will Chief Derrick Foxworth.

Forsyth is a Portland police officer, for fourteen years. He is with the training division, research and development officer. He has worked on the Taser project.

He researched around the country into policies, database reports, use of that tool around the country, and put into effect a pilot project. About sixty Tasers are currently out on the street. The pilot project included 20 evaluators trained as instructors. Everytime they used the Taser they filled out a database report. Criteria for Taser use was palced at the physical control level similar to the use of pepperspray and control holds.

It would be used when there is a resistance to a lawful police action or to overcome a suicide. There are 138 operators, including original instructors. Ten-hour training course, held last year in February and April. Classroom pprtion, Powerpoint presentation on the tool through policy and tactical considerations. Drills with the device itself. Scenrario roleplaying as well.

All officers certified are Tasered themselves so they udnerstand how debilitating it cane be and udnerstand its limitations.

Forsyth is showing a Taser to the court, saying he will keep the safety on. It's carried in a support side holster so a less-lethal system is not confused with a lethal system. Tool itself designed to be ergonomically similar to a firearm because officers have experience witht hat shape. High voltage but low amperage. Danger level is negligible he says. Basically just a circuit board encased in plastic. Laser dot shows where the top probe will go. Straightened number 8 fish hooks on wire which is 28 feet long.

It will run for rfive seconds and then stop unless the trigger is held down.

For each trigger pull a chip inside records the date and time.

Both probes need to impact to be effective? Yes and no. Sometimes a one probe impact will be effective, depending on what surface the missed probe lands on. Testimony says one probe hit Perez and the other hit the seat. Would that be effective? Most likely it would be ineffective but if there was enough movement that the person sat on it or rolled onto it, it could work.

During the deployment it's importance to assess the effectiveness which is not always easy because people react differently. They teach to constantly asses that efffectiveness. Either reload and deploy again if need be, or if not safe to do then just cotninue delivering energy until there is another force option available or until you gain compliance of the effect you need.

Variation of effectiveness? The Taser interrupts the brain's ability to communicate with those muscle groups. They will lock up. Depending on where energy is delivered you'll get different responses.

Forsyth has observed people being hit by the probes. He's seen people yell and scream, some people don't utter a sound. Some will fall to the gorund, some will lock in place.

The chip in the Taser and it's information is the date and time of each trigger pull. Downloaded and pritned out.

Forsyth examined Macomber's Taser and prepared a report, which he has with him for his testimony. Forsyth performed a function check and determined it was not operational, which is not unusual because more than ten cycles continuously will genrate heat which damages the unit.

He downloaded the information from the chip. There was 47 registered entries -- 47 cycles of 5 seconds each, for a continuous runtime of approxiamtely three minutes.

Macomber is certified to use the Taser. What would three minutes do (one probe in Perez, one on seat)? Forsyth says Macomber was assessing effectiveness and not gaining what he desired. Seems as if the tool was not effective because the probe placement. Another way to assess effectiveness is the sound. When cycled without probes delivered it makes a loud cracking noise, energy arcing through the air. If good attachment, the sound is like a soft snapping sound.

Several witnesses described bug zapper sound. Forsyth says that indicates there is a training phrase: "Silence is golden." The tool was not effective because the energy was arcing through the air rather than into the target.

Forsyth says he has never heard of a Taser deployment after a shooting incident. Unusual but not necessarily outside of training.

Schrunk asked if it were possible to deploy in the courtroom but Forsyth says there is not the proper setup to do so at this time.

Forsyth says there is one manufacturer of the Taser device. Since May of last year, the same has designed a new version which is the tool they are going to. There will be a recertification process.

Question: Close range shot effect subject's ability to retreive a weapon from a pocket or armrest and aim and shoot? Clothing is an issue, aim and spread is an issue. Not necessarily as effective at a close range.

Could convulsing of Perez given we only had one probe hooked up to Perez be caused by Taser? Forsyth says he does not know. Possibly but he doesn't know.

How many departments across country using Tasers? Around 3,500 using or testing.

Question: During training ar eofficers trained in verbal commands announcing use of Taser? Forsyth says they train a couple different announcements. Before deployment to let other officers on scene know it's being deployed. The other is to the subject which comes from a court ruling, if practical subject should be warned of impending less-lethal force. Such as for officer: "Taser Taser Taser." For subject: "Stop doing what you're doing or we'll use a Taser on you."

Update

Next witness before lunch recess is Richard DeLand. He is a Portland police officer, has been for fourteen years. He is a patrol officer in NE precinct, dayshift. Was a training officer for three years.

DeLand was a cross-trained instructor.

He was on the staff that trained Sery and Macomber. He is explaining the "slumper scenario," which is one of the scenarios officers go through in simulation training. I most cases it's the first time officers are addressing a dealy force encoutner.

In this scneario they are sent out by themselves. The call is a person alseep at the wheel. Car running, driver slumped over the wheel asleep or passed out. That's all the information they have. It's a check on a regular type traffic stop.

They are showing a videotape of this scenario. He participated in this scenario with Sery and Macomber, apparently.

Background of scenario is the slumper has a warrant, which the officer may or may not discover. Slumper is sitting on a gun. This will show "real world" action-reacton, DeLand says.

Before officers go through this, they do not know what is going to happen in the scenario. It is kept as secret as they can keep it, but they can tell when it's been leaked. DeLand has reservations about doing this inquest (because it will now be known) but he thinks it's important for the jury to see.

Schrunk says that given the seriousness about the investigation and issues of training, it was important for this jury and the public to observe this.

DeLand is stepping down to describe the exhibit video as it runs. Anxiety is elevated since they do know they are being tested. DeLand is the slumper in this video. Officer -- Macomber -- is yelling out, from near his car, to try to wake him up. Then walking up and banging on the roof of the car. He wakes up and they are talking about the driver wanting to take a little nap. Officer gets him to turn the car off. Tehy are discussing the driver's id, officer is keeping an eye on the motion of wallet retreival, but the driver says it's in the trunk.

Driver has no ID in the car, but says he does have registration. Officer gets date of birth and name and walks back to car, watching slumper, who so far has been completely cooperative so it brings the officer back to a nomal level. Officer asks to get into the trunk. Asks if driver has any tattoos (at this point he has found the warrant information, apparently, back at his car on the computer). He is continuing to talk to the driver. The scenario is over, and the driver left. The officer did not properly check for the tattoo. DeLand says this often happens when an officer just wants the scenario to be over because he doesn't know what to do.

Dispatch is giving him more information and sending officer back to teh car and asking driver to lift shirt up further. Officer thanks hm for all his patience and goes back to his own car to talk to dispatch. He walks to be behind his own car while on the radio. With more informatio he goes back to driver's car.

Officer says he needs to ask more questions. He asks the driver to step out of the vehicle for him to get into the trunk. Driver has a gun, officer backs up, there's a pause, yells "Drop the gun drop the gun," dirver goes down and officer pauses thinkkng it's over. But it's not, he takes cover behind his own car. More shooting. Driver mad maintained gun in hand and started to get back up so officer fires two more times. Driver had his back to the officer.

Now showing another scenario, this one is Officer Sery.

Sery gets out of his car, stands behind door for a moment looking at the car. Walks up to car, never saying a word. Knocks on car calling for driver to wake up, saying he is police. He hits rear fender not top of car like Macomber did. DeLand says that's not very loud inside the car.

Sery asks driver to shut car off, he does so. Rolls down the window when Sery asks him. Says to put his hands on the steering wheel. river asks if there is a problem. Sery asks what he's doing. Sery's radio was on the wrong channel. They are talking about what the driver has been up to. They are conversing about driver's working late and what he did last night, and wanting to pull over when driving home to get some sleep to be safe.

Sery asks for driver's license. Should be in his pocket. Sery asks him to get that out for him, watches. Driver says it must be in the trunk not in his pocket. Sery asks him to step out of the car. There's the gun, Sery sort of not paying attention, then notices, shoots, gets behind his own car, his gun malfunctions, driver is still moving. Sery shoots from behind his car. Radios shots fired.

Schrunk wants to talk about teaching of control tactics and traffic stops. DeLand says they do classroom training and then go out and practice stop after stop after stop, every violation they can think of, to practice vehicle positioning, getting out of car quickly, approach, use of lights, honing conversation.

Normal positioning of officer is there's one officer versus two, and what verbal commands normally given? Position of vehicle is a "straight offset." Car provides protection from traffic, lights mor edirectly on driver and mirror of driver. Teach to use take-down lights.

When making approach, typical asking for drivers license proof of insurnace. Ask to turn car off normally. Ask them to keep hands on wheel unless you ask them to get something.

Person making contact takes position rearward of driver tight against car, against doorpost, view into the car but driver has to make largest motion possible if they are going to attack. Forces them to look up over shoulder to talk to you. Alternative emthod to stand in front, officers get to try both to see what they are comofrtabel with. In generla, prefer behind door post. And our webcast cut out.

Picking up train of thought via radio now.

DeLand's opinion that it's better to keep driver in the car, their mobility is limited.

Different procedure if it's known to be a high-risk traffic stop from the outset, but that would be a minimum of three or four cars and officers.

DeLand says cover is defined as an object that will stop the rounds coming at you. Cars are not good cover, but the engine block itself is. Doors, etc are better than nothing, however.

Question: Describe how trainees are taught to physically control seated drivers is necessary. DeLand says the primary method is tell driver to palce hands on wheel and offciers will reach in to gain control of left hand, then apply a wrist-lock through the open window if the car. DeLand is going to demonstrate this, but the KGW webcast continues to be down so we will not be able to see this demonstrated.

Update

Schrunk is calling for the lunch recess. After lunch, at 1:00 PM, Dr. Loomis from the medical examiner's office will testify, then several witnesses will testify via audio from another room, followed by Sery and Foxworth from the courtroom itself. Schrunk says things are on schedule and the inquest should be concluded today.