This headline writer has no shame at all. “No indictment for officer in Taser dare” and the name of the page is even worse. “No indictment for officer who tased woman, 72, on a dare”. It makes it appear as though that was his sole reason for tasing her, when in fact, it wasn’t part of the equation. He felt he was unable to gain control of the situation with any other technique. He tried verbal commands and that didn’t work. He didn’t want to put his hands on her, I’m sure. So he tased her. Probably not the smartest move, but he didn’t “tase her on a dare.” That’s just bullshit (I tried not to use that phrase but nothing else fit) and the Houston Chronicle should be ashamed of itself for running that headline.
The good news is the part where Chris Bieze wasn’t indicted. I don’t know why he chose to go with the taser, but I have a feeling his agencies taser policy didn’t have any qualifiers or disqualifiers on people subject to the taser, based on old age. I could be wrong. I’m just saying I believe this was within his policy. If that offender had been 20 years old and male it would have been perfectly fine. Why should an old woman get a pass?