Park Ranger Girl tasers man in the back for... walking his dogs

[yellowtail3]

A man was walking his little dogs, off-leash. Against rules, that. Park Cop Girl confronts him, and 'deploys' her taser against him as he walked off. I'll guess we'll hear a claim of officer safety sooner or later.  Those things are supposed to be defensive weapons, aren't they? Or are they 'you will comply weapons'? Someone fill me in...


Sound to me like should could use a good hard smack.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/park-ranger-shoots-man-stun-gun-walking-dogs-182637393.html

A California man walking his two small dogs off-leash was arrested after a park ranger used her stun gun on him.
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Gary Hesterberg was walking his two small dogs inside Rancho Corral de Tierra, which was recently incorporated into the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. For years, the park has been a refuge for owners who let their dogs run off-leash. However, all national parks have on-leash laws.
"It was really scary," said Michelle Babcock, who said she witnessed the incident as she and her husband were walking their own dogs. "I just felt so bad for him."
The unnamed park ranger reportedly confronted Hesterberg about his dogs. Hesterberg, who said he wasn't carrying his wallet at the time, allegedly gave a false name. The ranger asked him to remain at the scene but Hesterberg instead attempted to leave before he was shot in the back with the taser.
Babcock said Hesterberg had repeatedly asked the ranger why he was being detained. "He just tried to walk away. She never gave him a reason," Babcock said.

After Hesterberg left the scene, the ranger"pursued him a little bit and she did deploy her" electric-shock weapon, said parks service spokesman Howard Levitt.
"That did stop him."

[Swift One]

The unnamed park ranger reportedly confronted Hesterberg about his dogs. Hesterberg, who said he wasn't carrying his wallet at the time, allegedly gave a false name. The ranger asked him to remain at the scene but Hesterberg instead attempted to leave before he was shot in the back with the taser.

Babcock said Hesterberg had repeatedly asked the ranger why he was being detained. "He just tried to walk away. She never gave him a reason," Babcock said.

He was way wrong and she was probably a little wrong.  She should have told him why he was being detained, but why did the dude just get up and basically flee the scene if he had nothing to hide?  Thats a text book  example of how to get tased legally I would think.
 
How big was the man in comparison to the female officer? was back up in the immediate area? The fact that the dude was acting so cagey in the first place probably put her on high alert. If she jumped him, was he armed with a knife or gun?  Close quarters combat gets ugly quick.  Distance is the officers friend with so many unknowns.  He didnt get tased for walkin his dogs either.  He was tased for fleeing a law enforcement official.

[quickdtoo]

He was arrested, sounds like she done good to me.

Tim

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h0-01IUJaLEaW1onn5N7jfgP-r6A?docId=9247362d616d480e929322e092a983c7

Ranger uses stun gun on man walking dogs off-leash
(AP) – 41 minutes ago 
MONTARA, Calif. (AP) — A man walking his dogs in a federal park overlooking the Pacific Ocean was hit with a stun gun and arrested by a park ranger who accused him of not tethering the animals, astonishing passers-by who say the reaction was excessive.

The ranger deployed the stun gun on Gary Hesterberg after he gave a false name and then tried to walk away from the encounter Sunday, the National Park Service said. Hesterberg was allegedly walking his dogs without leashes in violation of the rules of Rancho Corral de Tierra, which was recently incorporated into the Golden Gate National Recreation Area.

A witness, Michelle Babcock, told the San Francisco Chronicle (http://bit.ly/y9rHph) the ranger never gave Hesterberg an explanation as to why he was being detained and then hit him with the stun gun in the back.

"He just tried to walk away," Babcock said. "She never gave him a reason. ... It didn't make any sense."

Calls to the park service and a listing for Hesterberg were not immediately returned Tuesday. No one answered the door at Hesterberg's home in Montara, a coastal community in San Mateo County with about 3,000 residents.

A neighbor, Judith Rosenberg, said she heard about the incident from a woman who claimed to have witnessed it. Rosenberg, who was walking her own dog when she found out, said she complained in an email to federal park officials.

"I was very concerned they are Tasering people just for not having their dogs on a leash," said the 55-year-old. "It just seems really excessive."

Rosenberg said the chief ranger for the recreational area replied with some details of the incident. In the response, which she shared with The Associated Press, Kevin Cochary said Hesterberg was "not compliant, tried to run away and lied to the investigating ranger about his name."

"We will look into this matter in depth," Cochary wrote.

Hesterberg was arrested on suspicion of failing to obey a lawful order, having dogs off-leash and knowingly providing false information, Howard Levitt, a spokesman for the park service, told the Chronicle.
Levitt said the ranger asked Hesterberg to remain at the scene, and he repeatedly tried to leave. The unidentified ranger was able to stop him after deploying the stun gun, Levitt said.

The ranger was trying to educate residents about the leash requirement, he said. The recreation area has proposed tougher rules for dog walkers, including requiring leashes in open spaces where dogs currently roam untethered and closing some popular dog-walking areas to canines.

Park service officials and environmentalists said they want to protect some 1,200 native plant and animal species, including the Snowy Plover, a federally endangered shorebird

[Cuts Crooked]

Hmmm? Seems to me the man got tased for failure to comply and for giving false statements to a federal officer. The first is a simple misdemeanor, the second is actually a felony.

AHHHH!! Got it! he got tased for "going stupid with intent"! 

[no guns here]

Sounds to me like he was tased BEFORE he was told he was under arrest or apprehended.  Sort of like a vehicle stop, if I'm not under arrest then you have to let me go.  You can't just go around tasing and/or shooting everyone who doesn't do everything you say.  There was no real crime being committed.  There was no threat presented.  Would go easier for everyone if the little girl had just let him walk away and called for backup.  Once there was numerical superiority, he would probably have been more cooperative.  She let herself get out of control and tasered him for no reason.  Stupid girl.
 
NGH

[Casull]

There was no real crime being committed.

 
 
Actually, as Cuts Crooked pointed out, there were two crimes committed.  The guy just thought he was too important to follow the rules.  Happens frequently.

[Swift One]

A California man walking his two small dogs off-leash was arrested after a park ranger used her stun gun on him.

The whole misleading of the title by the san fran chronicle makes me wonder what else was left out of the story.  Im with the ranger on this one until i get proof of otherwise.

[yellowtail3]

So, anyone here in law enforcement that can spell out the rules? If cop says, 'wait here' and hasn't arrested you, and citizen walks off... are they liable to get tazed. How about shooting? Are the rules different for tazering, than they are for shooting?


Lying to cops is a felony? Hell... they lie to citizens with regularity, if they think it'll get 'em some evidence. Doesn't seem quite fair. Once again - best thing to do when accosted by LEO, is to tell him (or her, if it's a girl) NOTHING (but they might taze you for it)

[hillbill]

how did she know he gave a false name?  before she tased him?if she had seen no id, then i seriously dont think that was even known until after he was put down.
if he was not under arrest, then was he legally obligated to stand still?

[Swift One]

She was wrong for not advising him of the situation.  Thats needs to be dealt with.  But im betting when he walked away, he was given several orders to stop, if he wasnt given those orders, then she would be wrong for that too.  Like I said, I wonder just how much of this story is twised or left out- based on the title of the article.  There are enough bad cops out there to expose, lets not throw the few good ones down the drain with them.

[hillbill]

i think it was a bit harsh. the proper thing to do would of been to advise him of the rules and ask him not to do it again.
in my experience, women really get mad when you dont do what they want you too. he should of known that!

[Swift One]

You are too funny hill bill.  Women get mad.........so true!!!!!!!!!

[ironglow]

 Maybe he walked funny, and she wanted to see what he looked like spazzed out !    

[Hodr]

Let me get this straight, This man was detained without being charged.  He attempted to leave because there was no charge made against him.  At that time with no warning, none mentioned in article, he was shot in the back by a Forest Ranger. If this is standard protocol, then the US is going to get sued big time and deservedly so.
 
Hodr

[Cuts Crooked]

Let me get this straight, This man was detained without being charged.  He attempted to leave because there was no charge made against him.  At that time with no warning, none mentioned in article, he was shot in the back by a Forest Ranger. If this is standard protocol, then the US is going to get sued big time and deservedly so.
 
Hodr

Not likely! It's perfectly legal for an officer to detain someone for questioning for a reasonable length of time That was hammered out by scotus a long time ago. And a detention may, or may not, escalate into an arrest situation

Now, I am not trying to justify the officers actions, because I don't know the totality of circumstances....the guy might have actually threatened the officer during the brief exchange, no way I can know at this point, but I am trying to clarify that the officer had a right to make the detention and might have done something perfectly legal and needful in tasing the guy. We get these "abuse by cop" stories all the time and the information is always lacking, as noted by the previous poster, "none mentioned in the article"...that's why we have courts, to get to the truth of the matter.

[Cuts Crooked]

Are the rules different for tazering, than they are for shooting?


Lying to cops is a felony? Hell... they lie to citizens with regularity, if they think it'll get 'em some evidence. Doesn't seem quite fair. Once again - best thing to do when accosted by LEO, is to tell him (or her, if it's a girl) NOTHING (but they might taze you for it)

Almost fergot: Yes the rules are different for tazing, Tazers are not considered lethal forces...at this time anyway.
 
And lying to FEDERAL officials while they are conducting an investigation is indeed a felony. (perhaps not to state and local officials...depending on local laws) That's what the whole Klintoon/Monica thing was all about....not whether he scored some while on the taxpayers dime, but whether he was lying to congressional investigating officials about it. He got off because technically "that's not sex".
In this case it was in a national park system so the ranger would have been a federal officer...don't lie to her when she's questioning you! Perfectly all right to shut up...just don't lie!
 
I agree it's not fair that the feds can lie to you without consequences, but your wonderful elected officials wrote the laws. You don't like it, get rid of them and get some new shysters to write some you like.

[OldSchoolRanger]

Are the rules different for tazering, than they are for shooting?

Lying to cops is a felony? Hell... they lie to citizens with regularity, if they think it'll get 'em some evidence. Doesn't seem quite fair. Once again - best thing to do when accosted by LEO, is to tell him (or her, if it's a girl) NOTHING (but they might taze you for it)

Almost fergot: Yes the rules are different for tazing, Tazers are not considered lethal forces...at this time anyway.
 
And lying to FEDERAL officials while they are conducting an investigation is indeed a felony. (perhaps not to state and local officials...depending on local laws) That's what the whole Klintoon/Monica thing was all about....not whether he scored some while on the taxpayers dime, but whether he was lying to congressional investigating officials about it. He got off because technically "that's not sex".
In this case it was in a national park system so the ranger would have been a federal officer...don't lie to her when she's questioning you! Perfectly all right to shut up...just don't lie!
 
I agree it's not fair that the feds can lie to you without consequences, but your wonderful elected officials wrote the laws. You don't like it, get rid of them and get some new shysters to write some you like.

YT - What "Hesterberg, who said he wasn't carrying his wallet at the time, allegedly gave a false name." wasn't "just" lying to the police.  What he did is an arrestable offense, in NYS the crime is "False Personation".  The Federal Laws regarding this offense may be stricter, an example of this is Conservation Law.  A Conservation Officer's right to search your vehicle, goes way beyond what a regular cop can do.  The comment; "The ranger asked him to remain at the scene but Hesterberg instead attempted to leave before he was shot in the back with the taser." is interpreted in law as the Ranger "arresting" Hesterberg, thus Hesterberg's actions could be legally construed as fleeing arrest (the charge of a Fleeing Felon now comes into play).
   Cuts is correct in stating that the rules for the deployment of a Taser, are not the same as that for a shooting or force.  Tasers can be deployed way before a gun can without violating use of force rules, since tasering isn't considered use of lethal force.
   Can't comment on the Rangers actions, without all the information, but from my perspective, she didn't do anything wrong.

[ironglow]

  The lead line is a bit misleading..." Park Ranger Girl tasers man in the back for... walking his dogs "
 
   Sure sounds like there is a bit more to it than..just walking his dogs..          

[Stillkickin]

When it comes to their "babies", pet lovers are characteristically overloaded with emotion.  For them, feelings carry far more weight than logic or common sense.  Reasoning with them, based on facts and logic, is difficult at best because what they feel over-rides everything else.  There is, without doubt, far more that took place in this incident than what has been divulged.  Passing judgement based only on the info that is currently known is futile and wrong...........but consistent with the mindset of pet lovers.

[sidewinder319]

These young Federal Officers come complete with an attitude. They are filled with the left wing Enviro zeal. The public is the enemy of the Federal Parks.  She was protecting a Golden Plover from an evil human and a domestic pet,bad. She would have used a 9 MM and shot him back for letting his dog run free. No problem. Hell these parks are full of illegal campers, drug use etc. Do they zap everyone Hell no these Enviro Rangers are judge and jury enforcing selective Enviro rules.
 
 

[BUGEYE]

If the guy happened to have an implanted defibrillator, like I do, the tazer could have killed him.
remind me to not walk away from a cop.

[yellowtail3]

Hey, I'm thinking I lost sight of the big picture, here.
This was FEDERAL LAND - well, it recently became federal land - and a subjectcitizen was walking his little dogs on  the King'sfederal property WITHOUT PERMISSION. Until end of December it was perfectly legal to walk the dogs sans leash, but this is federal property now, and peeps need to learn the New Rules. We need order in society, and  subjectscitizens need to know their place.
Or something like that.


Authoritarians can rejoice that Ranger Girrrrrl was there to Maintain Order!

[no guns here]

Like I said... should have called for back up and then he would have cooperated.  Of course a verbal warning would probably have sufficed.  But no... the officer is in charge and gets to make up the rules as they see fit.  He was obviously a very dangerous dog walker who had to be put in his place as a servant of the king.  I'm so sick and tired of the cops getting to do anything they want to the "civilians".  They think in the "them" vs "us" mentality.  They think they are so high and mighty and above the average joe.  They have the guns (and tasers, and batons, and dogs, and riot gear and pepper spray and tear gas and swat teams and automatic weapons) so they get to lord it over all the lowly "civilians" who have to comply.  Freedom is gone in America, we are now a police state. 
 
 
NGH

[guzzijohn]

WAMDO? (What would Andy of Mayberry do)
GuzziJohn

[evidrine]

Lets not forget that what the office stated is completely different from what the actual whitnesses stated. I tend to believe the whitnesses. Unjustified tazzing in my book.

[Blackhawker]

I would have tazed the dogs.   

What is done is done but think about this:  If that guy had some sort of heart problem or epilepsy, he could have died.  If he died, then where would these people be?  The news heading would read: "Park ranger kills a man for walking his dogs and saying his name is John Doe".  I think not!!!!  That wouldn't go over very well, would it??

[guzzijohn]

More and more it appears that both pepper spray and tasers are being used by the police to deliver street justice punishment instead of a last resort before use of firearms used in defense or securing of a violent suspect, which is what I thought they were for. Scary!
GuzziJohn

[no guns here]

At that point the ranger should be sent to prison for murder.  She had other options and should have used them prior to engaging with a weapon that has been proven to kill people.  Tasers are not regarded as deadly force but should be.  There have been numerous instances of deaths occurring from the use of tasers.  They can be deadly and should be treated as a deadly weapon.  A taser should never be used unless there is justification based upon defense of life or a deadly threat.
 
What about when the cops tased the school kid?  You think a cop or cops can't just subdue a kid without subjecting him to a tasing?  It's not that hard.  When my son had violent outbursts at 5-6 years old, our psych taught us how to hold him to keep him from hurting us or himself.  My wife was only 5'2" and 120 pounds and she could easily control him.  A grown man in a cop uniform has to use a taser...  I think the kid was about 6 years old.  You do that to my kid and you would make a real deadly enemy for life.  At some point you would get what is coming to you.
 
I'm just tired of the police state mentality in america now.  They run around in basically full battle rattle and give orders and if you don't comply to their satisfaction they get their jollies off by tasing you or worse.
 
 
 
NGH

[BUGEYE]

More and more it appears that both pepper spray and tasers are being used by the police to deliver street justice punishment instead of a last resort before use of firearms used in defense or securing of a violent suspect, which is what I thought they were for. Scary!
GuzziJohn

.
TV Andy of Mayberry was an Officer of the  Peace first and foremost...today we have Law Enforcement Officers...
And also ditto to NGH.  Hesterberg should not have answered the police. What Hesterberg should have said is, I am a natural person, I am walking or standing here, and entered no contract with the police whatsoever. Tasering is a confirmed form of torture..i.e. electric shock....In petty cases like this employment of tazers should outrage Citizens. If the officer tazered the dogs she would have faced rebuke or even animal cruelty charges, but tazing Citizens in the back is OK....we've come along way baby.
 
..TM7

The world must be nearing an end or something.  I'm actually agreeing with TM7.

[no guns here]

Dang, I agree with TM7 on something.  I must be sick...
 
Not really, just doesn't happen often.
 
 
NGH