Tuesday, May 29: Supreme Court refuses to hear case of Malaika Brooks,33, who was shocked by the police in 2004 for refusing to get out of the car after being pulled over for speeding. This rejection puts the verdict of the Ninth US Circuit in standing, which states that the police are protected by qualified immunity and hence cannot be prosecuted for violation of the 4th amendment (which states freedom from excessive use of force).
When seven month pregnant Malaika Brooks refused to sign a speeding ticket for driving 32 miles per hour in a 20 miles per hour school zone with her 11-year old son in Seattle, she was asked to step out of the car, when she refused this, she was shocked with a Taser gun three times. Brooks sued the police for violating her right to freedom from excessive use of force, endowed to o her by the Constitution. The police's defense was qualified immunity. However, federal judges ruled against the police and the law suit proceeded to trial. The Ninth Circuit, however, ruled in favor of the police.
The refusal of the Supreme Court to hear the case assures the victory of the police by de facto. The Brooks case is one of two cases filed against the police with regard to reckless use of Taser guns.Both cases have resulted in favor of the police. But, the Brooks case highlights the copious use of Taser guns by security forces and rekindles the debate about the appropirate time, place and circumstance of its use.
