Portland Police are using their Tasers almost twice 26 percent more against people with mental illness as they were in 2006 according to a new report. A use of force report released by the city in November 2006 showed only 26% of force used against people with mental illness was Taser use, but a new use of force released yesterday puts that statistic at 52%.
Update, 1:59pm: There were 110 Taser uses against people suffering with mental illness in the most current reporting reporting period, November 2007 to November 2008, and in a previous 12-month period between October 05-September 06 there were 87 uses of Tasers against people suffering with mental illness. 
Original post:
“While officers appear to be using force on fewer mentally ill suspects overall,” reads the report, “reported Taser use on this population is up…Additional analysis would be needed to evaluate the possible causes of data fluctuations in this area.”
The report said understanding those fluctuations would be beyond its scope. You can download the whole thing here.
“Without raw numbers, it is hard to compare one-on-one,” says Portland copwatch activist Dan Handelman. “But the report explicitly states that Taser use is up against those identified as having mental illness.”
That data has mental health advocates concerned.
“Having a Taser pointed is a particularly traumatizing experience for someone with a mental illness,” says Jason Renaud of the Mental Health Association of Portland. “The person may not be able to respond to a police officer appropriately.”
The police bureau introduced new Crisis Intervention Training for its officers in dealing with people suffering from mental illness following the death in police custody of James Chasse, a man suffering from schizophrenia, in 2006. But while the bureau says it has now trained all its officers, mental health advocates are concerned that there is no way to measure the success of that training.
“There’s concern that the CIT is not sufficient,” says Renaud. “There’s still no measurable evidence of the success of this program.”
Numbers released last year also showed cops using a disproportionate amount of force against African Americans—a trend that continues in the latest report. You can read my article about Taser use here in Portland written last November by clicking here.
The report is not all bad news. It shows a drop in most uses of force by cops between November 5, 2007 to November 4, 2008:
Complaints about uses of force are down 58% since 2004, from 118 to 50.
A police bureau spokesperson is yet to return a call for comment, but Police Chief Rosie Sizer is scheduled to present the report to the city’s Citizen Review Committee this afternoon at 5:30, at city hall. Hopefully the chief will announce plans to probe this issue further.
Update, 2:07pm:
“In July 2006 Officer Paul Ware who was then in charge of the police bureau’s crisis intervention program came to a citizen forum and told the group that yeah, sure, we’ll talk to them for thirty minutes but if they’re not complying then we’ll just Taser them,” says Copwatch’s Handelman. “I wonder if that’s what’s happening here. But it’s also possible that officers are better trained to recognize mental illness and are reporting it more.”
Handelman would like to see more research done into the reasons behind the increase.
Handelman is also extremely concerned about police apparently using the Taser as a compliance tool. Tasers were used 61 times against people who “failed to comply,” and 18 times where no resistance was indicated on the use of force form.
“For the benefit of the doubt, it could be that the officer did not write down the amount of resistance used,” says Handelman. “But it also could be that there was no resistance.”
This just in – people with mental illness unable to distinguish proper etiquette in public, get tased.
Why is this news? Did Captain Obvious waste all the $ for this study?
Are you seriously trying to push the allegation police purposefully ~target~ the mentally ill?
This:
> A use of force report released by the city in November 2006 showed only 26% of force used against people with mental illness was Taser use, but a new use of force released yesterday puts that statistic at 52%.
Does not necessarily mean this:
> Portland Police are using their Tasers almost twice as much against people with mental illness as they were in 2006
Especially when:
> [the report] shows a drop in most uses of force by cops
Poor journalism. Implies intention, which seems fabricated at best. There is nothing in the data to show anything besides the fact that crazy people require more tazing than non-crazy people. How is this evidence of any type of bias?
I think you mean the “mentally diverse”
“Having a Taser pointed is a particularly traumatizing experience for someone with a mental illness,”
I find it interesting that no one seems to care that having a 200 lb man cranked out on meth charging a police officer can also be a traumatizing experience. What percentage of these “mentally ill” individuals who were tazed were also under the influence of substances?
Spartacus,
Good point.
Since the police officers are paid employees of the city and have both chosen their work and are both fully informed about the dangers and compensated with a reasonable salary, almost infinite overtime, an excellent pension and an ironclad union contract, our pity for their circumstance is nil. If officers are developing a mental illness caused by their inability to perform the tasks set before them, perhaps post traumatic stress disorder, they can join us as advocates for more and better services. Trauma is treatable – but you have to accept help.
As for what percentage of those who were shot with a Taser (“tazed” is not a word) were drunk or loaded or insane, it’s hard to tell from the limited data released by the Bureau. Who made these medical assessments? Cops? Is this self-disclosed information? EMTs? Is it defined by jail nurses or ERs admit records? The data is unclear and this would be worthwhile information to know.
pdx97217, “tazed” certainly comes up with a lot of google hits with nearly identical usage. You’d have to be a hell of a prescriptivist (or just loaded down with agenda) to honestly say it’s not a word.
Tased is as much of a word as ‘Tweeted’
And pdx97217, your compassion for those protecting your a$$ is inversely comparable to their compassion for someone trying to kill them while doing so.
Walk the talk, you wouldn’t survive an hour outside of your sensitive bubble in the real crime jungle of the streets.
Mon ami, you leave my argument unaddressed, and reveal too much of yourself.
According to the company who makes tazers, you are not supposed to use them on people with medical or mental illness, the elderly or children, as they may cause death. Tazer’s should therefore, not be used on folks with mental illness unless they are dangerous to someone and warrant possible death. If the police had proper training, they would know that.
ok, before anyone else mentions it, I spelled taser wrong. Unfortunately, taser is not in the spell-check.
I have regular contact with the police officers who work with the mentally ill. Overall, they go above and beyond in trying to avoid harming anyone. They are more likely to be hurt themselves. I know of one officer who was bite in the testicles by a mentally ill person. He was told by the DA not to bother pressing charges because the person was mentally ill. Sorry, but it’s priviledged arrogance to assume that just because you get paid peanuts and have EAP that you’re asking for it.
Until you’ve been in a situation of “it’s them or me” you have no right to judge. Period.
Spartacus,
Again, good points.
I agree. In the dozens of incidents I have witnessed of officers both interacting and arresting persons with mental illness (albeit few in the past five years – so most without CIT), my observation is Portland officers are typically professional, observant, polite, restrained, and orderly.
If officers, police administrators, their representing unions, various bureaucrats and politicians, all resent being a portion of the default mental health system, why don’t they come to Salem and advocate on behalf of a better, more robust, more responsive treatment system? They don’t, and it undermines their credibility.
The argument, “you’re not one of us therefore you can’t understand / be critical of us,” is juvenile and unworthy of you. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Work on this and come back next time.