Who Is Responsible? Father Tased By Key West Police Suffered Catastrophic Brain Injury

Kaeden Murphy, 3 yrs old, May 2014

Matthew Shaun Murphy’s son Kaeden, now 3 yrs old, May 2014
Photo credit:  Richard Watherwax

Three years after being tased on Duval Street by a Key West Police officer, Matthew Shaun Murphy is still lying in a hospital bed.  It was around 3:30 am on April 16th, 2011, Murphy and his fiancé Marie Annulysse were on their way back home from a night on the town when they heard a raspy woman’s voice yelling, “Hey nigger lover!”  At this point you need to know that Matthew, 27 at the time, is a white man from West Virginia and Marie, then 23, is a black woman from Key West.

Sitting on the steps in front of the “Flirt” store in the 300 block were Beverly Anderson, Jason Moffet, and their pit bull.  According to Annulysse, while she was pushing Murphy away, across Eaton Street, the insults and threats kept pouring out of Anderson’s mouth, “I’m gonna kick your nigger girlfriend’s ass!” and “that’s how you make monkey babies!”

The Blue Paper has now obtained the 911 audio files. You can hear Anderson spewing an endless sewer of racial slurs at Murphy and his girlfriend.  According to Annulysse, Murphy went back and began arguing with Moffet and Anderson.  Police Officer Mark Siracuse arrived on scene at precisely the moment when Murphy punched Moffet in the jaw.  Siracuse, who had already pulled out his Taser, zapped Murphy on his right shoulder.

Mathew now

Mathew Shaun Murphy now

That quick decision was going to have enormous and irreparable consequences.  Murphy dropped like a log, hit his head on the sidewalk, and fell into a coma.  The trauma caused severe brain damage. To this day Murphy has not regained the use of his legs, he cannot eat on his own or speak; he is able to communicate only by blinking his eyes.   Annulysse is left alone to raise their son Kaeden, who was only three months old at the time.

The multi-million dollar question is who – if anyone – is responsible?

Chief Donie Lee, who had declined a request for a face to face interview, responded on US1 Radio last week.  The Chief claims that the “officers gave verbal commands to the people to separate and stop fighting and they refused to do so.” Actually, three years ago, the press release sent by KWPD to the Key West Citizen apparently made the same claim, “an officer repeatedly warned the man before shocking him with the Taser.” [Key West Citizen, April 24, 2011] Why is this essential?  Because under the strict guidelines of Florida Statutes 943.1717 Use of dart-firing stun guns, a police officer can only use a Taser if the person he is trying to arrest “escalates resistance to the officer from passive physical resistance to active physical resistance.”

Some useful definitions are “passive resistance”: the subject “refuses to comply or respond to officer’s requests or attempts to control the situation” and “active resistance”: requires the subject to “make physically evasive movements to defeat an officer’s attempts at control.” [from KWPD Response to Resistance General Order]

No ‘active resistance to the officer’, no Tasing.  That is why it is essential for the Chief to say that there was, at the very least, a clear warning given before Matthew’s life was destroyed.  The problem with the Chief’s claim is that it is contradicted by every witnesses The Blue Paper has interviewed so far, including the “victim”.  And worse yet, it is contradicted by the reports written by the very officers who responded that night, and it is contradicted by the Taser video.

It appears that Officer Siracuse simply didn’t issue any warnings.  No ‘stop or I’ll shoot’, no “verbal commands to separate and stop fighting,” as the Chief claims. Officer Siracuse’s defense is to claim, in his report, that Murphy should have seen him coming, “I responded on my patrol bicycle, wearing a full bicycle uniform, consisting of a blue uniform shirt with patches, badge, blue shorts and a gun belt.”

The problem with that account is that the Taser video shows that Siracuse was about 10-15 feet to the side and slightly behind Murphy when he shot the Taser, which is also what Moffet told The Blue Paper, “[Murphy] never got to see the officer, never knew that the officer was there, never knew what hit him.” Moffet says he could see Officer Siracuse, but Murphy could not.  So apparently, no matter what uniform Siracuse was wearing, Murphy would not have seen him.

The “active resistance” requirement of the Florida Statutes has one legal consequence – the intent is to place the responsibility for any Taser accident on the person who resists. That person would have made a deliberate choice: obey the officer or accept whatever consequences could come from the Taser blast.  Murphy, apparently, never had a chance to make that choice.

Siracuse also claims in his report that he said, upon arriving on scene, “Key West Police,” words that no one else appears to have heard, not even his partner, Officer Jeffrey Dean.  Interviews with the many other witnesses who were present would help to clarify the matter, but interestingly enough, officers chased prime eyewitnesses away, immediately.  We do know that two black men, possibly tourists, and a friend of Murphy’s had been there, but they were not identified by police, and that, according to Annulysse, she was chased away by Officer Siracuse with a threat of being tased herself. Anderson, and all of the other witnesses were dispersed.

Under strict KWPD policy, all persons present were supposed to be identified and kept separate from each other until FDLE investigators arrived.  FDLE, as per the Memorandum of Understanding with KWPD, was to investigate this serious injury, which had occurred while a Key West police officer was conducting an arrest.

“They told us to kick the can down the road,” says Moffet.  Moffet and Anderson also both claim that days later another KWPD officer told them to keep quiet about the incident. Annulysse took it upon herself to walk into the police department office later that morning to give a written statement.

Murphy’s brother-in-law, Travis Pinson, who lives in Georgia, phoned FDLE in early May 2011, asking them to conduct an investigation, “they told me they could not initiate an investigation based on a complaint from a private individual; it had to come from a law enforcement agency.”  Pinson then wrote directly to Chief Lee, on May 5, 2011, asking for an impartial investigation.  Pinson doesn’t recall getting any response to that request, but FDLE confirmed last week that they did not conduct an investigation of officer Siracuse.  “Did the Chief or anyone at the KWPD let you know you could file a complaint with our Citizen Review Board,” we asked. “No,” said Pinson, “I don’t recall being told that that was an option.”

Since we broke the story last week thousands of people have read about what happened to Murphy, including attorneys that Annulysse and Murphy’s father Marty have since reached out to for help.

Marie and Mathew

Marie Annulysse and Matthew Murphy in happier days

“Since Matthew and I weren’t married yet (we were getting married the next month) I can’t be the one to get legal help for Matthew, but maybe the attorneys can find a way to help our son.”   Could three-year old Kaeden Murphy soon become a Plaintiff in a product liability suit against Taser International, the manufacturer of the stun gun device used by KWPD officers?

What would that case look like?

Taser International makes about $ 100 Million in profit a year.  Initial “minor cuts and bruises” advertisements led everyone to believe the product was painful but safe.  Then the bad news began rolling in.  In October of 2006 Steven Butler, 49, refused to get off a bus and a Watsonville, California police officer shot him with a Taser X-26.  Butler went into cardiac arrest.  It took the medical personnel 18 minutes to resuscitate him and Butler suffered a debilitating brain injury as a result.  Taser International settled the product liability claim for $ 2.85 Million in 2010.

In September of 2011, 20-year-old Florida woman, Danielle Maudsley, was tased by a state trooper while she was running away in hand-cuffs. She fell and hit her head and remained in a vegetative state until she died two years later.

In November of 2013, 17-year-old high school student, Noe Nino de Rivera, suffered a brain injury after a Texas Sheriff’s deputy tased him following a skirmish in a school hallway.  Like Murphy, he suffered a severe ‘brain bleed’, ended up in a coma, and now lives in a hospital re-habilitation center.

Even police officers are now claiming they were seriously injured by the supposedly safe device while being tased during training.

Taser International has reacted by readjusting its advertising campaign and in 2009 it changed its description of the devices from “non-lethal weapons” to “less-lethal weapons”.  The advertisements no longer promise a limited risk of ‘minor cuts and bruises’ as a result of a fall, they simply say, “Taser, a Safer Alternative.”

The question is, has Taser International taken enough active steps to correct, in the minds of all the Officer Siracuses and all the Matthew Murphys, the false sense of safety associated with the Taser, that has brought the company to financial triumph and Murphy and others to a hospital bed?

Matthew and Kaeden Murphy in 2011

Matthew and Kaeden Murphy in 2011

It is uncertain at this point just who a Murphy family lawsuit would target.  Of course, the family expects a “bad-boy Murphy defense.”  After all, didn’t he allegedly punch someone in the face?  Simple battery is indeed a misdemeanor.  However, the record shows Murphy was not swinging at innocent victims. He was defending his beliefs and his family against fierce racial prejudice, and there are many who might find that perfectly honorable.  Actually some states, like Georgia, even allow a defense of ‘justifiable battery’ when the first punch was in reaction to especially abusive language.

This case could very well become a test case for Taser use. Would Matthew Shaun Murphy be happily married in Key West with son Kaeden at his side if Officer Siracuse had simply yelled, “stop fighting?”  Is Taser International selling a product that is in fact far more dangerous than they have led everyone to believe?

Those and many more questions could soon hit the courts of Key West.

Stay tuned.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To access all Blue Paper articles about Matthew Shaun Murphy click here.


Key West The Newspaper [The Blue Paper] encourages spirited, open debate in comments on our stories. We do ask that you refrain from profanity, personal attacks and remarks that are off point. Please join the conversation!

27 comments on “Who Is Responsible? Father Tased By Key West Police Suffered Catastrophic Brain Injury

  1. I am going to have to send you a check. Much more info than any other media outlet – even CBS didn’t get it. (Probably more coverage of Donald Sterling and his big mouth). What is the address to send a check, please?

    • Did you say check? We like checks. Key West The Newspaer, 1214 Newton Street, Key West, FL 33040. Thank you! Seriously, we do rely on support from readers.

  2. A truly disturbing follow up to last week’s article breaking this horrible story.

    Truly disturbing, because there still are white people who would say something like this to, or about, a black person.

    Truly disturbing, because of the allegations that Murphy was ambushed (shot in the back) by Officer Siracuse, without warning from Siracuse.

    Truly disturbing, because KWPD did not ask FDLE to investigate.

    Truly disturbing, because KWPD did not do its own IA investigation.

    Truly disturbing, because it is alleged KWPD was using a proven lethal brand of taser.

    Truly disturbing, because the city’s police review board (CRB) apparently did not launch its own investigation, which it is empowered to do.

    Truly disturbing, because this article supports citizens taking matters into their own hands and hitting people who say racist things to them or their friends or loved ones, instead of simply walking away or calling the police. Next step up from hitting someone for making racists remarks, is pulling out a gun and shooting.

    Would Dr. Martin Luther King have encouraged hitting someone who made racists remarks against a black person? Not the Dr. King I read and heard so much about.

    • Good points Sloan, but I would say the only ones that was”Truly disturbing” is the one about resorting to physical violence in response to words alone. The others are “Somewhat disturbing” because we don’t know what really happened. I’m sure you’ve seen the research on “witnesses” who INSIST things happened or did not happen despite IRON-CLAD video evidence to the contrary! And your remark about Dr. King is spot on!

      • Yes, on iron-clad video, Just Jim, and, I was taught at the University of Alabama School of Law not to predict the outcome of litigation, and I learned when I practiced law that my law professors had taught me well. The part of the allegations in this article, which really do trouble me, if they are true, is the bushwack from behind with the taser. I commented to last week’s article on this horrible case, if I had been the cop, I would have gotten between the two men with my taser drawn and told them to stand down. I doubt that would be viewed as proper police procedure, though. What if both men had attacked me? What if one of them drew a pistol and shot me? What if one of them grabbed my taser and tased me? What if one of them grabbed my pistol and shot me? If a lawsuit is filed, a jury, not the media, not me, you, or any bystanding viewer, will decide the case, as we have seen happen quite a few times on television.

      • “We don’t know what really happened.” Most disturbing is that KWPD and FDLE didn’t get contact information and statements from all of the citizen eyewitnesses. This violates KWPD policy and the FDLE MOU and makes it very difficult to come up with independent accounts of what happened because we don’t even know who the witnesses were. Also disturbing is that violating the policy calling for identification of eyewitnesses and immediate taking of statements of eyewitnesses appears to be a pattern – the same thing occurred in the case of Charles Eimers who died in police custody after being arrested on South Beach last Thanksgiving. The eyewitnesses were not identified, their statements were not taken. They were chased off the pier or simply allowed to leave the area and now we don’t even know who to look for.

    • Hi Sloan,
      First – a correction to your statements – in our first article we reported that KWPD DID CALL in FDLE. FDLE however did not conduct an investigation of Officer Siracuse’s actions. What is disturbing is that the civilian witnesses were not identified – they were dispersed – and that is against KWPD policy and the FDLE MOU. So, here we are once again [Eimers case] in a situation where we can’t ask all of the people who were there what really happened.
      We see your point about it being disturbing that our article is “supporting citizens taking matters into their own hands”. We agree that walking away is always the better way to handle the situation that Murphy found himself in that night. Our point is, that the entire state of Georgia is of the opinion that sometimes there is justification for a punch in the face – so Matthew Murphy – who apparently punched Moffet in the face, would not be alone in that way of thinking. Also, let’s not forget the state of Florida and the Stand Your Ground Law. And let’s not forget that Murphy was very young – 27 years old – and someone had just called his beautiful baby boy – his first born child – a “monkey”. Did he lose control and commit simple battery? Looks that way. But shouldn’t he have had a choice about being tased – since there is evidence that tasers can in fact be lethal?

      • My impression of FDLE even before they got the Eimers case was they are not up to the task entrusted to them. That also my impression of Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Ethics Commission. All based on my earlier observations of them. That’s why I keep saying federal agencies need to be gotten involved, – US Department of Justice, F.B.I., but who knows if even they are up to the task down here? Perhaps lawsuits in federal court for damages are the best way to try to bring about change down here, certainly I do not trust our local state courts to do that, nor our current State Attorney. Even federal court damage suits are a crap shoot, but there is a better chance there, than in state court lawsuits. I still say this will be a tough case for a plaintiff lawyer to win even in federal court, because tasers are widely used and accepted, and this kind of result, horrible as it is, is rare, and you can bet the defense would parade witnesses like Just Jim before the jury. For me, the heat in this horrible case, if it is true, is the cop did not give Murphy a warning and shot him in the back. If a jury buys that, they might figure out a way among themselves to whack the city. I feel a jury might have a much harder time whacking the taser manufacturer. I think you went out of bounds, off the grid, beyond the pale, suggesting the fighting words defense, and continuing to defend that suggestion after both Just Jim and I called you on it.

  3. Great background information, but heavily skewed in the wrong direction. I’m a retired federal law enforcement officer. One of my duties during my 26 year career was managing my agency’s “Less than Lethal” weapons arsenal. These weapons are a wonderful tool designed to provide officers with a “safer” option between verbal commands and striking a suspect with a metal collapsible baton. There are TONS of cases where these tools SAVED LIVES because an officer was able to use them instead of his/her gun. I have been tased as part of my training. I did not find it at all painful. It was certainly surreal and uncomfortable, but I do not recall any pain, and the instant the shock stops (typically 5 seconds after the probes make contact) all taser sensation stops and the “victim” returns to normal. The VAST majority of taser cases do NOT result in tragedy. But that’s not the important point here. The important point is that the “victim” here was engaged in illegal behavior and the officer selected a safer, less than lethal option to stop him from striking the loud-mouthed racist. What Moffet and Anderson said that night is awful and unacceptable. But it wasn’t against the law…it was just ignorant, obnoxious, inflammatory and UNNECESSARY. There are a LOT of ignorant people out there. Striking someone, regardless of what they say, IS against the law. It’s like I tell my kids…it doesn’t matter what someone says, you still can’t lay your hands on them. It is just as likely that, had Officer Siracuse not arrived and tased Mr. Murphy, he would have succeeded in striking Moffet, causing him to fall to the ground, strike his head and end up in the vegetative state that Mr Murphy is now in. The important point and lesson of this whole tragic story (and yes…it’s awful that Mr Murphy suffered the injuries he suffered and that his family is now left without him) is that people should NOT DO ILLEGAL THINGS THAT WILL RESULT IN GETTING TASED. Had Murphy and Annulysse just kept walking, this tragedy would likely never have happened. Sticks and stones…

    • Hello Jim,
      Thank you so much for being a part of this conversation. Hearing from someone with your experience in law enforcement is so valuable. We have been struggling for the past two weeks trying to understand the intricacies of the Florida law governing taser use and how liability for serious injury might fit into the picture. We do see your point, and it makes perfect sense, that an officer would be given the power to physically stop someone from hurting another human being. However, the Florida Statutes are pretty clear in requiring a warning to the subject about to be tased. [There must be "active resistance to the officer"] The law could have been written differently – to allow an officer to tase someone without any type of interaction between the subject and the officer – but it wasn’t. We thought that perhaps the Florida legislature wrote it that way in recognition of the serious injury or death that tasers can sometimes (albeit rarely) inflict and so they decided to require that the subject be given the CHOICE to cease their illegal behavior or be tased. This way the subject could be said to have taken on the liability for whatever injury he/she then suffers from the use of the taser. Would you mind looking over the statute [linked in the article] and letting us know what you think? Thank you.

      • I would GUESS that the policy requirement to warn the subject is REALLY in place in anticipation of litigation. If I’ve told you your behavior is going to result in you being tased and you continue to exhibit the behavior, there’s no way you can sue me for tasing you. Once again, policy driven by litigation mentality. Understandable, the right thing for the policy-makers to do…but sad that they have to!!

  4. I believe tasers were given to officers to use if they needed them to protect themselves primarily from a citizen assaulting them. Secondly to subdue someone trying to flee. It does not seem that they were given tasers to use in a situation they were not yet involved in. The officer was not yet involved in this incident. He did not verbally command the men to stop fighting, etc.
    He just decided who was out of control and tased him. If this is a precedent, then any officer could just “think” someone was going to be violent or just think that two people goofing around with each other needed tasing, and tase whenever they felt like it. Surely tasers were not given out for officers to use UNLESS it was necessary. Clearly, the officer will never know if the man he tased would have backed off instantly if he were commanded to do so. I believe he would have. He did not even have the opportunity to comply, and everyone should be given that opportunity before any type of force is used.

  5. I have to speak out as Matt is my baby brother. I understand and respect everyone’s comments and opinions it is very hard to swallow the sticks and stones comments. As part of a bi racial couple Matthew heard racially ignaorant comments all the time and usually walked away but this night this one outburst was threatening towards MY nephew and my soon to be sister in law. I know it would have been right to walk away and wish the racist couple a good day but it’s now what happened. How many of us have always acted in the proper way in the heat of an argument or when we felt threatened? Honestly. We can’t change that trust me I wish I could. This is not the first case of the KWPD bullies with badges and their taser guns and most likely (sadly) it will not be the last case. The issue of was Matt right or wrong is a dead point what the issue is the brutality of the incident. Matt was demanding an apology and it never came. FROM ANYONE.

    Thank you for taking the time to read the stories on Matt and I pray that noone else goes thru anything like this. EVER

  6. I pray the same thing, but knowing Key West as I do, I’m not hopeful this horrible case at this juncture, even coupled with the horrible Charles Eimers case, has gotten City Hall and the KWPD’s attention. I found myself thinking a little while ago that a judgment of $100,000,000 against the city in a federal lawsuit might get City Hall and the KWPD’s attention. Might. I can’t imagine any sane mixed-race couple wanting to be on Duval Street. What if CBS now picks up this horrible story, too? While, as with the Eimers case, city officials lay low, going “by the book”.

  7. So, if I was in Georgia and someone called me a bitch, I could legally punch them in the face?

    How ridiculous. Regardless of the law in Georgia, it is NEVER justifiable to initiate physical violence on another being. Not by a cop. Not by anyone.

    I feel sorry if either the Eimers family or the Murphy family have to put their trust in the Key West jury system. With all the twisted thought, I wouldn’t give more than a 10% chance of justice being served.

    • It’s actually a DEFENSE that is codified into the Georgia law. We haven’t found a similar statute in Florida. In Georgia, it would still come down to discretion of the trier of fact and how agregious the words were determined to be. Attorneys in Georgia state that racial slurs in particular are an example of what might justify a simple battery [such as a punch in the face]. The point is that it would be relevant and a judge or jury could take it into account when determining guilt as well as sentencing.

    • Let’s just say Georgia is an “interesting” state. Having such a statutory defense written into the code is not common – haven’t actually found it anywhere else [yet]. But what does that have to do with the Key West jury system and twisted thought, etc?

      • Ok, perhaps I should not have said the Key West jury system and should have generalized more to say the US jury system, since I don’t live among you specifically. With that said, I find the majority of US citizens to be statists in one form or other, arguing over their right/left garbage, pegging themselves into some tight little paradigm and basically buying into EVERY divide and conquer strategy the state can dream up for “we the people” to fight about. A sense of right and wrong has been abandoned as in the case of the Georgia law you have alluded to. If people do not have a sense of true right and wrong they can be swayed by any silver tongued attorney who comes their way and any lie broadcast over the radio waves. And I am mostly disappointed that the citizens of Key West have not ousted their corrupt police force.

  8. I’m sure all the domestic abuse perpetrators in Georgia love that one.

    Come on now, do you really think this law is righteous? It clearly states it’s up to the discretion of the trier, which is so arbitrary. There is no way that a finding can be evaluated fairly across the board. And even if it could be handed out evenly, it still goes against Natural Law ie Universal Law or God’s Law and in no way to be confused with Darwinism.

    • I thought today, Sister, that the fighting words philosophy kind of reminded me of the stand your ground philosophy.

      I thought today t hat what happened to Matthew Murphy after he punched the racist in the face had a spirit component.

      I thought of Jesus in the Gospels telling his disciples to resist not one who does evil, turn the other cheek, do good to and pray for those who persecuted them.

      I thought the racist’s karma, the cop’s karma, the city’s and the KWPD’s karma, will not be pleasant.

      I thought no amount of money recovered in a damage suit, not even $100,000,000, will fix Matthew Murphy, or restore what he and his fiance and their child have lost.

      • I thought today, what a cute little guy. I hope he knows how much his dad loves him.

        I thought today, without the true investigative reporting done by the blue paper, none of the horrors of the kwpd would be coming to light.

        I thought today, I hope the true perpetrators of these crimes are found guilty and lose their current place in society.

        I thought today, gosh if I could go around punching everyone who has called me a bitch, there would be a lot of bloody noses!

  9. After a peaceful walk in Key West with his fiancé, Mr. Murphy was on his way home with his future wife. An unprovoked verbally assault was directed at him and Ms. Annulysse.

    This verbal aggression increased in intensity, accompanied with threats of physical violence against Mr. Murphy’s fiancé. Mr. Murphy was advise by one of his assailants, Ms. Anderson, that she was: “gonna kick his nigger girlfriend’s ass”. This announcement was coupled with another declaration by Ms. Anderson: “that’s how you make monkey babies”.

    Aggression and threats of violence were initiated by Ms. Anderson, as she sat on some steps with Mr. Moffet and his pit bull. Pit bulls can be dangerous and have been used as deadly weapons to inflict injury and death. Accordingly, since the 1950′s, the use of a dog as a weapon has prompted prosecutors to charge defendants with crimes usually associated with guns and knives.

    Threats to commit bodily harm, while possessing a deadly weapon is a serious crime. Under normal circumstances, you cannot out -run a pit bull. Walking or running away from this threat, can increase the risk of being attacked. Their backs turned to these armed assailants, would place Mr. Murphy and Ms. Annulysse in a vulnerable and compromising position.

    The instigators of this incident appeared blood thirsty, wanting a fight. Ms. Anderson did everything she could to create a violent confrontation. Apparently, Mr. Moffet did little, or nothing, to tone her down.

    Not too long ago, I found myself facing off with a pit bull owner, whose dog was off its leash. My instincts, intuition and adrenalin surged within me, as I rushed my threat in a deliberative manner. I was guided moment to moment during this engagement. It was brief and successful.

    As with Mr. Murphy, I was driven to confront my threat as a means of self-defense. I believed that the best chance of protecting myself, required that I rapidly proceed towards the individual who wanted to harm me, before he commanded his dog to attack. It worked. Perhaps it was exactly that response, which saved my life.

    I believe Mr. Murphy was in fear of his life and the life of his fiancé. That is why he went to address the threat. He felt that his best opportunity to protect Ms. Annulysse from bodily harm, and arrive at home safely, called upon him to take the action that he did.

    The Mayor, Key West Commissioners, City Manager, Police Chief and the FDLE; are making a strong case for outside involvement in cleaning up their city. American citizens live down there. They cannot be beaten, abused and defiled by government officials.

    The liability and potential criminality of all those culpable in the nefarious conduct outlined in ‘The Blue Paper’, are going to be expensive propositions.

    The Pulitzer Prize Investigative Coverage by ‘The Blue’, will be well received by the Justice Department and our United States’ Attorney.

  10. Oh, John, this was a stand your ground situation? I believe that’s a bit of a stretch: Murphy attacked because of the pit bull? If I saw they had a pit bull, I’d get me and my fiance away from them pronto, into the nearest bar, if I really felt threatened, and dialed 911. I have to wonder now if the cop felt threatened by the pit bull, and that is why he used the taser, instead of trying to break it up by getting between them.

  11. This case really has nothing to do with whether Mr. Murphy was justified in his actions toward Mr. Moffet. Even if there was a law in Key West like in Georgia permitting simple assault, the cop was not there to witness the initial interaction. The cop gave himself permission to be judge, jury and near executioner in this case. From what I’ve read there has been over 500 deaths from the use of these Tasers in the last decade. Less-lethal, really? Do these police departments do any evaluation on their equipment and procedures whatsoever? Is it all just to maintain the safety of the police force? What the hell do we need them for then?

    good article here: http://www.popularresistance.org/five-texas-police-departments-ban-tasers/

  12. From the book End of All Evil….

    Principle versus law

    To understand how evil controls people, it is necessary to
    understand the difference between principle and law.
    A principle is a truth that creates freedom. A law is a lie that
    creates slavery.
    Principles describe reality. They are knowledge that help you
    to make use of your world. Because of your intelligence, you
    recognize principles in everything you do. Every true thing you
    learn is a principle. The movements of your hands, which foods
    taste good, mathematics and empathy for a friend are all based
    on principles.
    Laws are artificial ideas created by evil men to restrict the
    thinking and understanding of people. Laws mask themselves in authority so that they can impersonate principles. When people
    mistake law for principle their freedom is restricted. When
    people mistake truth for the ideas of authority, their abilities and
    their wisdom are diminished. This is the purpose of law.

Leave a Reply