Deaf man's ordeal a 'teachable moment'

Last Updated on Sunday, 13 December 2009 16:49 Written by The Press Register Sunday, 02 August 2009 00:00

Originally Posted Here

A disturbing incident involving a deaf and mentally disabled man should prompt Mobile police officials to re-evaluate the department's policies and training on dealing with people with disabilities.

On July 24, police officers forcibly removed Antonio Love from the bathroom of a Dollar General store on Azalea Road. The police responded to a report that a man had been locked in the bathroom for more than an hour. Officers used pepper spray in an effort to force the 37-year-old deaf man, who family members say has the mental capacity of a 10-year-old, out of the bathroom. When that failed, the officers broke into the bathroom and used a Taser on Mr. Love.

Antonio Love's unfortunate brush with the law ended when a city magistrate refused to sign off on charges against him. The police wanted to charge him with resisting arrest, disorderly conduct and failure to obey a police officer, but they ended up taking him home.

It certainly appears this was an appropriate — if belated — outcome. Mr. Love was caught in a snafu, not a criminal incident. His deafness and limited mental abilities likely account for behavior the police initially interpreted as menacing or defiant.

Given Mr. Love's disabilities, the officers' decision to use a Taser appears callous and unwarranted. However, the officers didn't discover that Mr. Love was deaf until after they removed him from the bathroom. The use of a Taser may have been justified, considering the situation the officers confronted when they arrived on the scene.

It's what happened — or didn't happen — after Mr. Love was taken into custody that raises questions about the po lice department's sensitivity to issues involving disabled people.

The Americans with Disabilities Act mandates that law enforcement agencies "provide the communication aids and services needed to communicate effectively with people who are deaf or hard of hearing." Based on comments from police officials and Mr. Love, the police did not provide a sign language interpreter for him, even though he was facing criminal charges.

According to information provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, trained interpreters may be required in situations "such as interviewing a victim, witness, suspect or arrestee." If an interpreter's services are needed, the police agency must provide them.

Since the ADA was passed by Congress in the 1990s, the Justice Department has taken civil action against a number of police departments that did not meet ADA standards in dealing with the deaf during traffic stops, arrests and criminal interrogations.

Mobile police officials need to thoroughly investigate the incident involving Mr. Love and determine whether he received the required assistance. If he was left in a communications vacuum because of his physical and mental limitations, the department must take steps to ensure that in the future officers do what's necessary to communicate effectively with the deaf or mentally disabled.

President Obama might call this "a teachable moment." Often, police officers must be forceful and aggressive in performing their difficult duties, but there are times when sensitivity is required. It's a reasonable assumption that a little sensitivity would have gone a long way in the Antonio Love incident.