A lawsuit was settled involving allegations that a deputy with the Union County Sheriff’s Office unlawfully used a taser on an individual experiencing a mental health crisis. The defendants agreed to a $58,000 settlement without admitting liability. Jeff and his law firm collaborated with Smallhorn Law to represent the victim. This case raised awareness regarding the excessive use of tasers in southern Illinois.
The Events That Sparked the Lawsuit
On June 18, 2021, a father called 911 seeking an ambulance for his adult homeless son, who was in the midst of a mental health crisis brought on by meth addiction. When the father called for medical assistance, he was unaware that his son was the subject of a felony arrest warrant. The arrest warrant was never served, meaning the son was also unaware he was the subject of a warrant.
In response to the 911 call, deputies with the Union County Sheriff’s Office arrived without an ambulance and without offering medical assistance. Instead of addressing the need for care, they quickly resorted to force to carry out the warrant.
Disturbing bodycam footage from the incident shows the deputy firing his taser without providing the victim with any warning or giving him a chance to comply. At the time, the victim was in a backyard, barefoot and dressed only in shorts, posing no threat to the officers or the public.
The deputy wrote in his report that he knew the victim was “having a mental health crisis, described as psychotic, and needing an ambulance.” The deputy also wrote “I also knew [the victim] had a felony warrant out of Union County as well as history of running away naked from help when we arrived.”
The deputy stated he withdrew his taser and knocked on the door. According to the deputy, when the victim saw the police, he turned and began to run away. The report stated “[a]t this point I raised and fired my taser at him as he ran away . . . I was unable to issue a warning to him because the situation evolved so quickly.” The deputy allowed the taser to run for the full five-second cycle.
The deputy resigned shortly after the incident was exposed on the popular website The Civil Rights Lawyer. The post generated hundreds of online comments, many expressing outrage over the deputy’s “tase first, ask questions later” approach. Nevertheless, the defendants denied any connection between the deputy’s resignation and the website post. According to the deputy, he was not disciplined for the incident.
Why the Alleged Use of the Taser Was Unjustified
Tasers are designed to subdue violent or dangerous suspects, not to manage distressed individuals who pose no threat, nor to apprehend people attempting to flee.
Tasers subdue individuals from a safe distance by deploying darts that attach to the target. When activated, the taser delivers a potent electrical charge that instantly causes full-body paralysis, temporarily immobilizing the individual. This electrical surge induces intense, radiating pain, leaving the individual completely incapacitated and unable to resist.
Nationally accepted standards generally prohibit the use of tasers on non-resisting or passively resisting individuals. The Union County Sheriff’s Office taser policy specifically states that “the fact that the person is fleeing should not be the sole justification for the use of the Taser.”
The lawsuit alleged that the deputy’s use of a taser constituted excessive and unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The Repercussions of Taser Abuse
The use of tasers has been on the rise for years, with law enforcement agencies justifying their use as a tool to subdue suspects while minimizing the chance for serious injury.
However, studies have shown that tasers can be deadly, especially when used excessively or in situations where they are not necessary.
If leadership ignores the misuse of tasers, it can foster an environment where excessive taser use becomes normalized. Vulnerable individuals, especially those experiencing mental health crises, are disproportionately affected by this culture. When force is used unnecessarily—especially against vulnerable individuals—it not only harms individuals but also erodes public trust in the institutions meant to protect the community.
This case highlights the need to reinforce taser policies and ensure proper training to protect the rights of all citizens.
The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, Case No. 23-cv-2056.
NOTICE: The information contained in this post comes from allegations made in a legal complaint which was filed in the public record with the court. Please note that this is a contested matter. As a result, it is expected that the allegations will be opposed or denied by other parties and the court has not ruled on the merits as of the date of this statement.
