, 2000

Latest news from America's Progressive Community

Search | Sign Up | Privacy
  NewsCenter > NewsWire > For Immediate Release     


JUNE 28, 1999  4:07 PM
Amnesty International
Gwen Fitzgerald, 202-544-0200, ext. 289 or Karen Schneider, 202-544-0200, ext. 273
Amnesty International Files Legal Brief to Halt Use of Stun Belt
WASHINGTON - June 28 - As part of its nationwide "Ban the Belt" campaign, Amnesty International announced today that it has filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief asking the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold a lower court's injunction against use of stun belts in Los Angeles County courts. Amnesty filed the amicus brief in the case of Hawkins vs. Comparet-Cassani, a class action lawsuit brought by Ronnie Hawkins, a nonviolent criminal defendant on trial in Municipal Court in Long Beach, Calif. The human rights organization contends that the use of stun belts constitutes cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and can amount to torture when activated.

The stun belt is one of a growing array of electro-shock weapons, including the stun gun, stun shield and taser, increasingly being used by police and prison agencies in the U.S. More than 130 jurisdictions, including 20 state correctional systems, use the belt, a device that subjects its wearer to an eight-second, 50,000-volt electric shock by remote control. Federal, state and local correctional agencies use the belt on inmates during court appearances and transportation to hospitals; the U.S. and South Africa are the only nations known to use the stun belt.

"Stun belts can inflict enormous pain with no more effort than pushing a remote control button," said Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) General Counsel Paul L. Hoffman, who is also an attorney at Bostwick & Hoffman LLP in Santa Monica, Calif. "Individuals in custody may need to be restrained, but they do not need to be brutalized."

The stun belt causes immediate muscle immobilization, excruciating pain and can result in loss of control of bodily functions. By the manufacturers' own admission, the weapon can have dangerous effects on individuals with heart disease, multiple sclerosis and epilepsy and on those who use tranquilizers. No independent medical testing has been conducted on human beings. Inmates are rarely, if ever, tested for existing heart or other health conditions before being fitted with the belt.

The incident at the center of this court case occurred in June 1998 in a Long Beach, Calif., municipal courtroom. Hawkins, who was representing himself on charges of stealing several bottles of aspirin, refused several admonishments by Municipal Court Judge Joan Comparet -- Cassani to stop talking. The judge responded by ordering Hawkins, who was fitted with the stun belt, to be shocked with 50,000 volts. Hawkins filed a civil suit that resulted in the preliminary injunction banning use of the belt.

Amnesty's brief argues that use of the stun belt violates international law prohibiting torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. Amnesty's brief also argues that " 1/8t 3/8he psychological effects of being forced to wear a device with the capacity of conducting 50,000 volts of electricity through one's body unquestionably causes severe mental suffering."

Earlier this month, Amnesty International released a report titled "Cruelty In Control? The Stun Belt and Other Electro-shock Equipment in Law Enforcement," which calls for a ban on the stun belt and suspension of the use of other stun technology pending a "rigorous, independent and impartial inquiry including thorough medical evaluation (to) prove that they are safe and will not contribute to deaths in custody, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

Muhammad Ali has joined Amnesty's "Ban the Belt" campaign and is featured in print and television ads appearing across the country. At a news conference to release the report, AIUSA Executive Director Dr. William F. Schulz was joined by retired New York City Police Detective Frank Serpico and Laila Ali, a budding boxer and daughter of "The Greatest."

"It is wrong to use high-tech torture in place of less cruel and degrading restraints," Schulz said. "And it is wrong for judges to maintain order in the courtroom by zapping defendants.


Common Dreams NewsCenter is a non-profit news service
providing breaking news and views for the Progressive Community.

The press release posted here has been provided to Common Dreams NewsWire by one of the many progressive organizations who make up America's Progressive Community. If you wish to comment on this press release or would like more information, please contact the organization directly.
*all times Eastern US (GMT-5:00)

Making News?
E-mail us your news release!

Tell Us What You Think:

Copyrighted 1997-2000 All Rights Reserved. Common Dreams.