Guard tasers man holding newborn baby !

[anabolicrhino]

HOUSTON (AP) - In a confrontation captured on videotape, a hospital security guard fired a stun gun to stop a defiant father from taking home his newborn baby, sending both man and child crashing to the floor. Now the man says the baby girl suffers from head trauma because she was dropped.

"I've got to wonder what kind of moron would Tase an adult holding a baby," said George Kirkham, a former police officer and criminologist at the University of California-Berkeley. "It doesn't take rocket science to realize the baby is going to fall."

The trouble began in April when Williams Lewis, 30, said he and his wife felt mistreated by staff at the Woman's Hospital of Texas so they decided to leave. Hospital employees told him doctors would not allow it, but Lewis picked up the baby and strode to a bank of elevators.

The elevators would not move because wristband sensors on each baby shut off the elevators if anyone takes an infant without permission.

Lewis, who gave the video to The Associated Press, said his daughter landed on her head, but it cannot be seen on the video. He said the baby seems injured since the episode.

"She shakes a lot and cries a lot," Lewis said, noting doctors have performed several MRIs on the child, Karla. "She's not real responsive. Something is definitely wrong with my daughter."

It was not clear whether the baby received any electrical jolt.

Child Protective Services has custody of the baby because of a history of domestic violence between Lewis and his wife, Jacqueline Gray. Agency spokeswoman Estella Olguin said the infant seems in good health.

The hospital and the Houston Police Department did not immediately respond to calls seeking comment.

David Boling, an off-duty Houston police officer working security at the hospital, and another security guard can be seen on the surveillance video arriving at the elevators and trying to talk with Lewis. Lewis appears agitated as he walks around the elevators holding his daughter in his right arm.

video of news report

 

[bioman]

Ohhh, there'd be a serious security guard smackdown if one did that to me and my daughter.

Fortunately, he would already be IN the hospital so that'd be taken care of.

 

[DefTek]

Unless one of the electrodes struck the child there would be no electical discharge into her. A dry stun would have been a better choice all things considered - that and a tad bit better verbal judo... It's hard to say tho what anyone would / should do unless you're actualy there making that split second decision in the heat of the moment - not sitting at your computer sipping coffee trying to come up with a witty reply.


"David Boling, an off-duty Houston police officer working security at the hospital, and another security guard can be seen on the surveillance video arriving at the elevators and trying to talk with Lewis. Lewis appears agitated as he walks around the elevators holding his daughter in his right arm. "

Dont know about anyone else but this is a cops worst nightmare - how do you protect the child / public / suspect /and yourself without hurting anyone... you cant. Had the father complied and allowed the incident to de-escelate then this article would not have even been written. If anything - the parents are the most responsible and should be speaking to a judge in reference to child endangerment issues... but that wont happen because the hospital and now the Houston PD (and probably the individual officers) have deep pockets from which a tasty lawsuit can be filed against.


(not directed at any posters just a general observation)

 

[anabolicrhino]

Cops have a difficult job, if you watch the video the suspect looks like a maniac, but something about taser and baby in the same sentence makes you wince.

I thought it was interesting that the babies ID bracelet disables the hospitals elevators, so that babies cannot be taken without permission, that's a great use of technology

 

[jomi822]

thats probably a situation you try to diffuse before escalating

 

[DefTek]

Very much in agreement with you both - but sometimes verbal judo turns into real judo and this happens. It is very telling of the state we exist in that we have and need such security measures as the bracelet and "less" lethal options. Twenty years ago the only option was a big stick or your wheel gun...

 

[Jayhawkk]

If the threat to the baby was percieved to the point that they were trying to take the baby from that guy then you are left with few options and none of them are risk free. If you approach the guy, he could use his anger on the baby. If you taser him, then you risk him dropping the baby in a manner to cause harm. If you do nothing you risk him hurting/killing the baby and others.

It really comes down to experience, perception of the event and options to deal with that situation. You can always second guess something but it's a different world when you are the one making that decision and you have to make it now.

 

[zbtboy]

If the threat to the baby was percieved to the point that they were trying to take the baby from that guy then you are left with few options and none of them are risk free. If you approach the guy, he could use his anger on the baby. If you taser him, then you risk him dropping the baby in a manner to cause harm. If you do nothing you risk him hurting/killing the baby and others.

It really comes down to experience, perception of the event and options to deal with that situation. You can always second guess something but it's a different world when you are the one making that decision and you have to make it now.

Very well said! :clap2:

 

[jomi822]

If the threat to the baby was percieved to the point that they were trying to take the baby from that guy then you are left with few options and none of them are risk free. If you approach the guy, he could use his anger on the baby. If you taser him, then you risk him dropping the baby in a manner to cause harm. If you do nothing you risk him hurting/killing the baby and others.

It really comes down to experience, perception of the event and options to deal with that situation. You can always second guess something but it's a different world when you are the one making that decision and you have to make it now.

id tend to agree but in this situation it seems he was angry at the hospital staff and the percieved threat was to his child....which he was protecting.

if you thought hospital staff was mistreating your baby and or wife what would you do? not busting you chops jay just playing devils advocate. taken to a certain point, i probably would have done the same thing as this guy. there are hospitals where i live that i wouldnt want my wife or child anywhere near.

i wouldnt take a very agressive approach with the man, his intentions for the baby seemed more towards safety than harm. the man wasnt going to take his own baby home to harm it. just letting the man leave the hospital would have been an option on the table if i were that security guard.

 

[EasyEJL]

Yes but if he thought the hospital was full of space aliens trying to suck out his childs brains he'd have the same motive, and no more right. This guy had "a history of domestic violence between Lewis and his wife", so if the guards wouldn't have stopped him and he left the premises with the baby, they'd just be getting a different flavor of having a new ass hole ripped by the liberal media.

Bottom line, the guy should have been sterilized after the first domestic violence incident, then this wouldn't have happened as she wouldnt be pregnant

 

[warbird01]

If the threat to the baby was percieved to the point that they were trying to take the baby from that guy then you are left with few options and none of them are risk free. If you approach the guy, he could use his anger on the baby. If you taser him, then you risk him dropping the baby in a manner to cause harm. If you do nothing you risk him hurting/killing the baby and others.

It really comes down to experience, perception of the event and options to deal with that situation. You can always second guess something but it's a different world when you are the one making that decision and you have to make it now.

wait why would he use his anger on the baby? I thought it was his

 

[EasyEJL]

wait why would he use his anger on the baby? I thought it was his

Why did he previously beat his wife? she was his too

 

[Jayhawkk]

People in those types of situations are usually in them because of their inability to have a rational thought process. I really couldn't answer why, nor could I answer why a lady microwaved her newborn but it happened. You can play devil's advocate and you may be right. I'm only stating that unless you're there, then what may seem to be an obvious choice may not really be.

 

[CryingEmo]

If the threat to the baby was percieved to the point that they were trying to take the baby from that guy then you are left with few options and none of them are risk free. If you approach the guy, he could use his anger on the baby. If you taser him, then you risk him dropping the baby in a manner to cause harm. If you do nothing you risk him hurting/killing the baby and others.

It really comes down to experience, perception of the event and options to deal with that situation. You can always second guess something but it's a different world when you are the one making that decision and you have to make it now.

That makes alot of sense. :thumbsup:

 

[bioman]

I see your points and there's no telling what this guy's mindset really was without being there...but for me it boils down to having the ability to leave a hospital when you choose to. I've had words with hospital staff more than once in the last year so from my side of the fence...there's some real idiots working in hospitals who shouldn't have the power to determine whether I or my loved ones HAVE to stay or not.

This guy was probably crazy or belligerent but I was putting myself in that situation and can see how things could go very bad, very quickly.

 

[Jayhawkk]

I understand and could see something getting out of hand on the part of the hospital but as a father, I can't let the safety of my children get tossed aside, just because i'm pissed. If I was holding my newborn and being directed by police to do something, then i'd do it. Just for the well being of my child.

 

[jomi822]

I understand and could see something getting out of hand on the part of the hospital but as a father, I can't let the safety of my children get tossed aside, just because i'm pissed. If I was holding my newborn and being directed by police to do something, then i'd do it. Just for the well being of my child.

it was a security guard at first i believe.

im not really sure i can agree with that logic....there is no reason a person should believe not listening to a police officer should physically endanger a child. im not sure if a police officer would want to send that type of message. i cannot think of too many situations where i would tase a man holding a baby. i guess im beating a moot point.

 

[Jayhawkk]

The point isn't a moot one. I'm just explaining my perspective on the situation. Not listening to a police officer puts that police officer into a position where he/she has to decide what the greater danger may be, based off of a lot of different variables. We don't know the situation from neither the police officer nor the father who was tased.

 

[Chad]

from what i read on another site the mother and father weren`t happy with the care they were getting and wanted to go somewhere else. the hospital said no. so the father said "fcuk this im leaving anyways." then the super retard guard stepped in and tased him with baby in hand. at no point was the father trying to hurt the baby.

that guard would be a dead man walking if i was that father.

 

[jomi822]

i think the situation is pretty clear if you put yourself in the position of the father

 

[Chad]

i think the situation is pretty clear if you put yourself in the position of the father

:goodpost:

 

[EasyEJL]

i think the situation is pretty clear if you put yourself in the position of the father

Can't seem to find a way to put myself in the position of a wifebeater

 

[bioman]

In that situation..he wasn't beating anyone. The Media will paint you broad brush strokes to make the story more sellable.

 

[Mrs. Gimpy!]

:think:

 

[EasyEJL]

In that situation..he wasn't beating anyone. The Media will paint you broad brush strokes to make the story more sellable.

perhaps you missed this line

"Child Protective Services has custody of the baby because of a history of domestic violence between Lewis and his wife, Jacqueline Gray"

If it was known that he had a history of violence towards his wife, it is not a stretch to believe he has mental issues, and its not safe for him to be near the baby, particularly not in an agitated state. It goes to overall show that he isn't a rational civilized individual.

 

[jomi822]

how do you know it wasnt the wife who attacked the husband easejl

so it is not safe for anyone involved in domestic violence to be near a baby? including their own?

cmon man

 

[EasyEJL]

how do you know it wasnt the wife who attacked the husband easejl

so it is not safe for anyone involved in domestic violence to be near a baby? including their own?

cmon man

Umm yep, its not safe. The abuse patten is a pattern, thats why child and protective services has custody. If the guard had let the man walk out with the baby, or even just continued to follow him thru the hospital taking no action and the baby had gotten hurt, they'd be ripping into the guard even worse. They'd be saying how he refused to do his job and should have stopped the father before the incident happened. This is what jay said, you can't armchair quarterback the situation from afar, i'm pretty sure the guard felt it was more dangerous for the man to continue doing what he was doing than to stop him. Heck if he was acting and talking crazy enough, the guard might have been worried that he'd try to take another person hostage. You and I weren't there, and i'll take the hospital guard's word over a wife beater's.

 

[zbtboy]

i think the situation is pretty clear if you put yourself in the position of the father

I don't see how you can say the father responded in the correct manner. If the guy wasn't happy about the quality of care the child was receiving then you request a transfer and pursue other means to get your child out. Anybody who's had a child in the last decade knows that the hospital goes into shutdown mode when those bracelets activate.

From what i see in all of this; the father acted in an inappropriate manner which put a lot people in a bind, including the security guard. He payed for the rash decision and in the process put his child at risk. I have no sympathy for him at all.

 

[Chad]

I don't see how you can say the father responded in the correct manner. If the guy wasn't happy about the quality of care the child was receiving then you request a transfer and pursue other means to get your child out. Anybody who's had a child in the last decade knows that the hospital goes into shutdown mode when those bracelets activate.

From what i see in all of this; the father acted in an inappropriate manner which put a lot people in a bind, including the security guard. He payed for the rash decision and in the process put his child at risk. I have no sympathy for him at all.

you NEVER take the shot when there are innocent people that could get hurt. especially a fcuking baby!
they could have shut down the ways for him to leave and talked to him until he was calm or put the baby down.

 

[EasyEJL]

you NEVER take the shot when there are innocent people that could get hurt. especially a fcuking baby!
they could have shut down the ways for him to leave and talked to him until he was calm or put the baby down.

You certainly do when you think there is more of a chance of an innocent being hurt by doing nothing than by taking the shot.

 

[Chad]

You certainly do when you think there is more of a chance of an innocent being hurt by doing nothing than by taking the shot.

ummmmm........ no. not even then. a stun gun isn`t a sniper rifle. if that retard hit the baby with it im 99% sure the baby would have died.

and who said the man was trying to hurt his baby?!
no one! he just wanted to leave! they prob only wanted to keep them there to make sure he paid his bill.

if a gunman has a hostage right in front of him the cops 9 times out of 10 will NOT fire.

 

[EasyEJL]

ummmmm........ no. not even then. a stun gun isn`t a sniper rifle. if that retard hit the baby with it im 99% sure the baby would have died.

and who said the man was trying to hurt his baby?!
no one! he just wanted to leave! they prob only wanted to keep them there to make sure he paid his bill.

if a gunman has a hostage right in front of him the cops 9 times out of 10 will NOT fire.

Right, call the security guard a retard, but whatever the wifebeater does is perfectly fine. Do you know the condition of the baby? anything else detailed about this for that matter? no, you read some stuff on some other board written by more people who weren't there. Its all about the situation. If a gunman has a hostage and the cops are confident they will hit the gunman they will take the shot.

 

[Chad]

Right, call the security guard a retard, but whatever the wifebeater does is perfectly fine. Do you know the condition of the baby? anything else detailed about this for that matter? no, you read some stuff on some other board written by more people who weren't there. Its all about the situation. If a gunman has a hostage and the cops are confident they will hit the gunman they will take the shot.

do you know he beats his wife? no. you`re just saying that cause the words "domestic violence" came up.

and you really think that the gaurd made the right call? really?

 

[EasyEJL]

do you know he beats his wife? no. you`re just saying that cause the words "domestic violence" came up.

and you really think that the gaurd made the right call? really?

No I do not know that he beat his wife, but the state wouldn't have the right to take custody of the child and the paper wouldn't report it otherwise. Without physically hitting someone, you can't call it domestic violence it would only be "loud yelling"

And yes I do think the guard believed he did the right thing as far as he was concerned based on what knoweledge he had at the time. I don't have the same knowledge, I don't know what the guy was saying, I don't know if he was up for the last 48 hours or reeked of vodka. The guard had that sort of information though, as he was there.

As a sort of example in florida, in order to pick up your newborn from the hospital, you have to go outside with one of the nurses aides or other hospital staff and show them that you have an infant car seat in the car, and its properly installed. Without that, they will NOT release the child into your care. If when they said that to me I started ranting and raving and grabbed the infant and started running around trying to find a way out, i'd expect to get tasered. Of course, i'd never do that.

 

[DefTek]

In the video it appears the agitated person holding an infant turned his back to the security personnel on the scene and was subsequently tased. I personally think a dry stun and blanket of the man/baby at the same time would have been a "better" choice but then again had the father acted rationally then "NO" choice would have had to been made.

When dealing with public safety it is the "suspect" who dictates the course of action. As the suspect escelates the situation, law enforcement must do so as well but not on a 1 to 1 ratio. If you put your hands up - I pepper spray and pull out a stick. You pull out pepper spray or a stick - I pull out a gun. Simple as that. (if you're a big guy and use your baby as a shield then it really escelates) At no time is there an expectation or requirement for law enforcement to retreat or submit (for once the supreme court got it right.) In this situation it was a total **** sandwitch and everyone had to take a bite. Had the father complied to the request of the law enforcement presence then NONE of this would have occured. (period)

just my $.02

 

[zbtboy]

If he would have acted like a mature adult none of this would have happened. End of story.

 

[jomi822]

In the video it appears the agitated person holding an infant turned his back to the security personnel on the scene and was subsequently tased. I personally think a dry stun and blanket of the man/baby at the same time would have been a "better" choice but then again had the father acted rationally then "NO" choice would have had to been made.

When dealing with public safety it is the "suspect" who dictates the course of action. As the suspect escelates the situation, law enforcement must do so as well but not on a 1 to 1 ratio. If you put your hands up - I pepper spray and pull out a stick. You pull out pepper spray or a stick - I pull out a gun. Simple as that. (if you're a big guy and use your baby as a shield then it really escelates) At no time is there an expectation or requirement for law enforcement to retreat or submit (for once the supreme court got it right.) In this situation it was a total **** sandwitch and everyone had to take a bite. Had the father complied to the request of the law enforcement presence then NONE of this would have occured. (period)

just my $.02

i kind of resent that approach, and its the reason why police feel like they have a target placed on their back every time they step out of the house.

do what i say, no matter what, or well shoot you and/or use overwhelming force no matter what the circumstances. its a tough-guy approach, and it will turn a lot of people off to cooperating with the police. Police arent the only type-A personality individuals walking around out there.

being a tough guy is fine, but sometimes the rules have to be broken so a a 4 day old baby doesnt end up flying through the air and landing on its head.

 

[EasyEJL]

i kind of resent that approach, and its the reason why police feel like they have a target placed on their back every time they step out of the house.

do what i say, no matter what, or well shoot you and/or use overwhelming force no matter what the circumstances. its a tough-guy approach, and it will turn a lot of people off to cooperating with the police. Police arent the only type-A personality individuals walking around out there.

being a tough guy is fine, but sometimes the rules have to be broken so a a 4 day old baby doesnt end up flying through the air and landing on its head.

So its better to let criminals do what they want, so nobody gets hurt other than their victims?

 

[jomi822]

So its better to let criminals do what they want, so nobody gets hurt other than their victims?

this man wasnt a criminal from what i can tell. you are assuming a lot about the individual involved. If you watch the video it appears he has the permission of the mother as well, so he was not kidnapping.

what i am saying is that escalating the situation was probably the worst thing to do. the man was trying to remove HIS baby from a hospital where he believed doctors were MISTREATING both his baby and his wife. That is a very legitimate reason to want to leave. perhaps the man had no other option. he wanted to have the baby and mother removed from the hospital...the doctors said "no". what do you do at that point.

perhaps aiding the man in leaving the hospital is EXACTLY what needed to be done.

 

[Jayhawkk]

Everyone is assuming from one standpoint or another. We can what if this to death but without being there and knowing what the guard/officer knew, then we can't really make an educated guess on what should have happened. Your experience will probably lead you to defend one or the other but it doesn't matter at this point.

 

[DefTek]

Law enforcement officers HAVE to assume the worst. You cannot expect to live a long life and retire if you dont. And yes cops wear a target on them EVERY time they step from their house, go to the store with their wife and kids, get McDonald's, cut the grass in their front yard. There are dedicated criminal and malignant groups/people who will kill and harm you JUST because of what you do for a living.

When was the last time you heard of a plumber getting shot just because he was a plumber and was called to a house to fix a leaky faucet. I can tell you a story of a friend of mine who was sniped as he stepped from his patrol car... just because he was a cop. It has nothing to do with what TYPE personality you have - I know plenty non-type A's who wear a badge. It has everything to do with the nature of the beast and it is a dangerouse and violent creature that has no pitty, no remorse, and no concience.

This guy was wrong. When has anyone ever been right telling the cops to screw off (verbaly or by action) and something good came of it? This is not Communist Russia - we in the community do value our rights and the rights of others but when the police arrive they are there to stop whatever is happening so that the situation can be resolved.

Should he have tased the guy holding the baby? Dont know, was'nt there. Sounds bad that he did but sometime things and events sound bad when you're not there. Like I said before "It's a big s**t sandwitch and they all had to take a bite..

PS: And if people think US cops are bad - try seeing how some of the other "western" nations do law enforcement - big sticks and heavy hands...


Officer Down Memorial Page The two incidents on August 15th, 2007 are just two recent examples of how deadly the beast really is.

And the list goes on...

Sorry to get off subject a bit and bring the mood down - but people who dont face evil everyday dont think it exists in the manner or capacity that it does.