Comments on: Police Taser Naked Wizard at Coachella

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 09 May 2009 22:28:10 +0000

and as for Heather, indeed police DO have they authority to harm people. Guess what….they even kill people sometimes. “In self defense or in the defense of another, or pursuit of a fleeing felon, where their escape puts the welfare of the public into danger of great bodily injury or death.” Pick up a CA Penal Code. Go to the 830′s section.

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 09 May 2009 22:25:52 +0000

One last thing. Do I get to call everyone who agrees with you “well conditioned sheep” too?

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 09 May 2009 22:08:43 +0000

In defense of the “well-conditioned sheep,” so to speak, that was not a convenience-taser. Have you ever tried to handcuff someone? It is very difficult to handcuff someone who does not want to be handcuffed. And the aternative means to get someone into handcuffs are much more violent than a taser, I assure you. Furthermore, CA police officers are not required to “retreat or desist in their duties because of any resistance,” be that from the subject or the crowd. Don’t like anti-nudity laws? Talk to your local representative to have it changed. That use of ECD was textbook, and only used as a last resort. As far as a fighting stance/violent behavior? Didn’t you watch as Mr. Felch started turning and pulling away? He was actively resisting a peace officer..is the officer expected to predict the man’s next move? He doesn’t need to wait to be struck before deploying a taser, only have reasonble cause to believe that he may be in harm. So you have a chemically altered (possibly) subject who is actively resisting the officers, then attempts to pull away from them after repeated attempts to control using verbal and physical means? Good job to the officers involved.

By: Steven Augustine

Steven Augustine — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:47:17 +0000

I like the well-conditioned sheep who justify convenience-tasering.

By: RyGuy

RyGuy — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:08:51 +0000

The cops were well within their rights, and under most policy they could/would have used clubs on the back of his legs to get him to the ground.

You people are silly.

I feel for the guy, because he was just trying to have a good time and probably bit off more than he could chew…

But he had it coming… and they were very civil

By: heather

heather — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:09:51 +0000

No one (cops included) has the authority to harm another person, and especially not a completely harmless and non-violent person, and ESPECIALLY not someone who is obviously in a chemically induced sensitive state.

Cops were not even necessary in this instance; the man didn’t need to be “subdued”. He needed to be talked down. Since the cops didn’t have the patience to do so, they tased him instead and bullied him to the ground, and then they continued to tase him in a manner that was physically dangerous, possibly life threatening, and way beyond uncalled for.

Tasers are for self defense, not for convincing hippies on E to put their wizard suits back on.

By: Avrum Halevi

Avrum Halevi — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:42:17 +0000

The cops displayed excellent restraint. He should have been beaten senseless ala Rodney King.

By: OUTONBAILFROMINDIOJAIL

OUTONBAILFROMINDIOJAIL — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 22:06:19 +0000

I CAN CONFIRM THAT MR. FELCH WAS PLACED IN INDIO JAIL, AS I TOO WAS THROWN IN THERE @ COACHELLA, THE SAME OFFICER FROM BANNING WHICH I RECOGNIZED FROM THIS VIDEO USED EXCESSIVE FORCE SLAMMING MR. FELCHES HEAD REPEATEDLY ON THE VAN AND SLAMMING HIM BACK FIRST ON THE SEATS, I ALONG WITH OTHERS BEING TRANSPORTED TO INDIO JAIL WITNESSED THIS SECOND USE OF FORCE.

By: william

william — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 02:25:00 +0000

Good reporting on this. Keep it coming.

By: Steven Augustine

Steven Augustine — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:12:24 +0000

“It appears that Mr. Felch may have been taken to a jail and a command center nearby the festival, but not directly to police headquarters.”

Oh no… Ed… you didn’t. *Mr. Felch*?