Front Page  »  

Ranger uses electric shock on man walking dogs off leash

February 1, 2012

A ranger shot a man on Sunday with a stun gun who was walking his lap-dogs off leash in a federal park after he tried to walk away, causing witnesses to claim the action was excessive. [SFChronicle]

Gary Hesterberg was walking his dogs off leash on Sunday at Rancho Corral de Tierra, an area that had long been an off leash dog park. In December, the park was incorporated into the Golden Gate National Recreation Area which requires leashes. Hesterberg, who was not carrying identification, allegedly gave a false name to the ranger who failed to tell him why he was being questioned.

The unidentified ranger asked Hesterberg to remain at the scene. After the ranger shot Hesterberg in the back, she called sheriff deputies who arrested Hesterberg for walking his dog without a  leash and giving false information.

A fellow dog walker, Michelle Babcock said the use of a stun gun and the arrest seemed excessive for someone walking small dogs without a leash.

“It was really scary,” said Michelle Babcock to the Chronicle. “He just tried to walk away. She never gave him a reason.”


Loading...
Subjects:         
Related:


106 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Let me ask this of the people who do not support this officers use of the taser, what should she have done? Just let the guy go? Wrested him to the ground and increased the danger for her and him? I am curious

as to what the complainers think.


Does the issue of self responsibility come into play? Does anybody see the arrogance of this man’s

behavior?


Does anybody think what happened to this guy is funny? Because I sure do.


0

I fail to see the humor in this and find it offensive that you not only find enjoyment in other people’s suffering, but brag about it too. Do you think that attitude makes our community a healthier, happier place? Or, rather, does it promote a more callous, less-respectful and mean-spiritied society?


But you have a legitimate question. One that is difficult to answer, especially not having been there to know all the specific details. For all we know, the best thing might have been for the officer to simply thank the man for leaving and taking his dogs with him.


But I’d say there is no easy, universal answer, and that is why there is such spirited discussion about this.


0

Ha, that is a great way to enforce the law! Say thank you and let the criminals go that do not feel like dealing with law enforcement. What world do you live in?


Fleeing the scene should be congratulated and the law breaker should be thanked for violating the law, providing false information and endangering the public? I do not know what is funnier, your ludicrous logic or this idiot getting zapped for bullying the cop. He thought he could get away with it, it took him

flopping around on the ground for him to learn otherwise. It was his own fault. And yes, I find

humor and cosmic karma in somebody getting what they asked for as result of their own

selfish and self centered behavior.


0

It’s all in the way you imagine the scene. We weren’t there so we probably will never know exactly what happened. But one way to look at it is that the guy had his dogs off the leash for whatever reason (he may have been unaware of the apparently newly enacted leash law), the ranger made him aware that behavior was unacceptable, so he was willing to leave the area and end the conflict.


The ranger was not content with having the problem solved, and wanted to punish him in some manner, perhaps issuing him an expensive ticket, when a warning may have been more appropriate, especially under this circumstance, the area having long been an official “off leash dog park.” The victim may have had a difficult time accepting that this ranger would be so unreasonable and over-zealous and in his frustration he made an unfortunate, rash, but understandable choice to simply take his dogs and leave the area—problem solved—not anticipating that the ranger would be so gung-ho and unreasonable to the point that she would shoot him in the back with a taser.


So, we might very well conclude that this was a case where both parties made unfortunate decisions that escalated a simple problem into a horrendous, expensive and painful situation.


I happen to think that the ranger likely over-reacted, and could have just as easily had the situation resolved in a peaceful way. Unfortunately we have a society where too many people are over-eager to want to punish and inflict pain and other indignities on people who don’t behave exactly as they wish they would.


Maybe if the ranger though of herself as a “peace officer” instead of an enforcer or punisher, the problem would have gone away painlessly for everyone. This is not an unreasonable assumption.


On the other hand, maybe she is like some of the people who post on this forum, who seem to get a perverse kick out of seeing people who they don’t like punished and hurt, even if that solves nothing. It’s sort of a control-freak thing that is often based on some long-ago punishment or pain that they were inflicted with that they have not processed in a healthy manner. Sad all the way around.


0

you’re an IDIOT if you think this ranger is justified in SHOOTING a man in the BACK with a TASER for walking his dogs off leash…where is your COMMON SENSE?…and wtf was the ranger thinking?…


0

My common sense is intact just fine thank you. Do not break the law, do not supply false information to the police and do not flee from law enforcement. This guy made his bed and then he had to lie

in it ( in this case flopping around on the ground of the park). Had he just done one of things right this would have not happened to him. Everybody is responsible for their own actions and this man was no victim.


0

so you think it’s ok for a park ranger to shoot a defenseless person IN THE BACK with a taser as he’s WALKING AWAY?…for having dogs off leash???…it’s not like he had just mugged somebody…give me a break…


0

Give us all a break. People should be held accountable for their actions. Thats why he got zapped- because he was walking away and fleeing the scene, of course she shot his dumb ass in the back. Learn the rules GRC. Quit apologizing for this doofus. There are real victims out there who deserve your outrage, not dummies that get exactly what they asked for. You do not get to pick and choose which laws you obey and which type of cops you want to listen to. Grow up!


0

if you actually took the time to read the article, you’d see that the ranger failed to even tell the guy why he was being questioned…I’m not talking about choosing which laws to obey or not obey, I’m talking about a ranger using excessive force in a situation that did not call for it…you want me to grow up, well maybe you should take a good long look into the mirror…


0

I read that a person who happened across the scene at some point said that. if someone is breaking the law and detained for questioning, it is the officer who dictates the procedure and calls the shots not the suspect. The officer asks the questions and the suspect answers. That is just they way it is. I told you to grow up because you refuse to acknowledge that this man had anything to do with his situation, holding him responsible for nothing. People make their own luck and more often than not their own problems. Calling people idiots, making excuses, blaming others for self inflicted problems, and defending stupid behavior is why I told you to grow up. Much like your “victim” you have the logic, decorum, and the accountability of an entitled adolescent.


0

because you know me so well, and you so think you have me pegged…I’ll go right on back to my first instinct of you and your post…you’re an idiot


0

Such a clever retort! You make my point regarding your character much better than I did. I now see that I insulted entitled adolescents by throwing them in with the likes of you.


0

I’m not really sure why so many here are anti-police, I watch those “Police Brutality” vids online and have not seen one yet where if the victim had only done what he/she was told they would have been fine. You can’t say “all cops” anymore than you can say “all blacks”, or “all anything”. Remember what happened after the Rodney King incident in LA after the Police told to leave the area. People should obey the laws, and if they don’t like them, work to have them changed, not argue the law with the Officers.


0

It’s a complex issue you’ve brought up. To say that everything will be peachy keen is everyone simply always does everything a law enforcement officer asks or demands is overly simplistic, I think.


And yet I agree that people should not assume an automatic and universal “anti-police” attitude.


One problem is American’s natural tendency to despise hypocrisy. Many law enforcement officers frequently break the law themselves, which is bad in itself, but the problem is compounded by the fact that so many other police are often quick to join in in hiding or defending such breaches.


Lying is also common among police, and I’m talking about lying to the point that laws are being broken and innocents people are suffering for it. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere in this thread, it is common place for police officers to falsify police reports. Happens all the time. Again, a big part of the problem is that such hypocritical, illegal behavior is almost universally tolerated among law enforcement to the point that in many cases fellow officers expect and encourage their brethren to juice up their reports with false statements aimed at either protecting the officer or beefing up a weak criminal case.


Then there is the brutality issue, which again concerns hypocrisy and illegal behavior on the part of some, if not many, officers. It is NOT the job of police officers to punish suspects or criminals. A certain amount of force may be required to subdue and incapacitate suspects, but as so much evidence proves, officers frequently go way beyond what is required and use illegal means to inflect pain and injury and even death. Again, a big part of the problem is that such illegal behavior is frequently tolerated and defended by others in the law enforcement profession, sometimes to the point that the defense goes into the realm of illegal behavior.


These are just a few of the reasons that law enforcement suffers from a public relations problem to the point that many people truly are “anti-police” whether that be fair or not. It may be unfortunate, but I find it understandable. Maybe now you can find it understandable as well.


0

Just a friendly reminder that HUNDREDS OF MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN HAVE BEEN KILLED BY TASERS IN THE UNITED STATES. Undoubtedly many more have been killed in other nations.


To get a taste of the horrible reality of being “tased” or “zapped”, just trying Googling “killed by taser” and you will find a long, long list of horrible tragedies inflicted by the irresponsible, over-zealous, unnecessary and all too frequent use of tasers in the U.S.


I’m not saying that tasers don’t have their place in law enforcement, but the horrible shame is that the taser industry and law enforcement have routinely misrepresented the danger of using tasers, and thus encouraging them to be used too causally and too often for situations that don’t call for them. Thus, the number of funerals of taser victims continues to escalate, as do the PTSD cases of officers who used the weapons without proper knowledge, training or care and have ended up killing people and having to live with that fact for the rest of their lives. Sad.


0

Please address fellow users by the name they provide,not what you want it to be. no honey no pal just the name provided please. questions Email


0

OK, Moderator, will do, from now on.


0

It’s pretty offensive when one scofflaw getting tased while trying to get away from detainment by a peace officer is compared to the slaughter of millions of innocent Jews. See Godwin’s Law.


0

You can walk away from a cop that is questioning you, but they might have something for your butt if you do! This guy deserved it! I support leash laws. They keep my 18 pound shih tzu french bulldog safe from

idiots like this ( they usually have jerk dogs too). Good on this female officer for leveling the playing field and getting this jerks attention. All you NOCAL do gooder types who have a problem with law and order should go suck an egg (or another doobie).


0

So, you’re trying to tell us that people who “walk away from a cop” usually have “jerk dogs”? And you base this outrageous, prejudiced stereotype on what?


It seems to me you have let your emotions and violent sentiments get the best of any rational thought process.


And what, exactly, is wrong with “doing good”?


In my opinion, inflicting intense pain and possibly killing people for ALLEGED crimes is the EXACT opposite of “law and order.” True, Nazis, don’t take that attitude, but this is America where most people don’t wish to torture or kill people unnecesarily, especially without the benefit of an impartial judge or jury.


0

No Wise Guy, I said that people who walk their dogs off the leash are idiots and idiots usually have jerk dogs. Try to pay attention.


I also said that if you walk away from a cop that is questioning you then you greatly

increase you chances of being forcibly detained. In this case a well deserved blast from

the zappy gun. It is no different than driving away while being issued a ticket or walking

around the metal detector at the airport.


If you want to do whatever the hell you want then stay at home. If you are breaking a law on the streets or in a public place be prepared to pay the price. Had this dummy stopped and dealt with the officer like a grown up he probably would have received a warning, been informed of the new leash law for the park and been sent on his way. But instead he went marching off like a self important doofus and paid the price.


There is a reason they have leash laws, so responsible citizens and dog owners do not have to deal with unruly and violent dogs messing with them or their pets while trying to enjoy public places. Leash laws may seem silly to you but as a dow owner I support them and their enforcement. It is not the right of individual citizens to pick and choose which

laws they feel like obeying. If you don’t like a law then fight to have it changed but good

luck finding the same passion and support as the dog attack victims who helped get it on the books in the first place.


0

Oh, get off it with all your crocodile tears, SloDude. The only thing that offends you is people calling you on all your B.S.


in fact, my comments pay tribute to those unfortunate victims of the Holocaust by making an effort to see that similar things don’t happen in the U.S. By contrast, you promote the idea of people being painfully electrocuted and prosecuted for not providing documentation regarding their identity. “Show us your papers, please!”


I think the comparison to the Holocaust is apt and that YOUR comments are offensive to those who don’t wish to see Gestapo like tactics escalate in the U.S.


It is my contention that government agents should not be shooting anything, should not be electrocuting anyone, unless the person they are doing that to poses a violent, physical threat to others. And in the case that is detailed in the above article, it does not appear that the victim posed any violent, physical threat to anyone. In fact, because he was shot with a taser, he then was not able to control his dogs in any manner, which means that safety to others was compromised by the action of the ranger.


Get real, please, SloDude.


0

Please address fellow users by the name they provide,not what you want it to be. no honey no pal just the name provided please.


0

Moderator, What about using “my friend”? Does that also offend your sensibilities? And I wonder what your problem with “pal” is? Is it more of a questions of esthetics, as I can see how overuse of pal and dude can be grating to one’s ear. Or is there some other rational reason you find such words personally objectionable to the point you wish to prevent people from expressing themselves so colorfully? Is this a personal thing on your part, or is it some over-riding, industry-wide journalistic protocol that you wish to enforce?


0

They don’t want name calling on here, period. The name called, be it honey, pal, buddy, bro, is completely irrelevant. Name calling adds nothing to the discussion, hence why it is banned. You are attempting to split hairs which is exactly why they don’t allow some and not others. Calling people by their given names saves the argument over what is ok and what is not.


0

Makes sense. Thank you.


0

Call me old-fashioned, but I long for the day when law enforcement agents in the U.S. were not allowed to shoot anyone with a gun or a taser, or beat someone with a baton unless that person was posing a physical threat to others.


That approach worked for decades. Then what happened?And now some members of the public, recalling the days of Nazi Germany, actually approve of law enforcement using violent , even deadly means against non-violent suspects. Sad.


0

This “ranger” is BEYOND inept…I like to remind everyone that there is what as known as the “letter of the law & the spirit of the law”….she truly lacks training. Wonder what her reaction would be for something of a SERIOUS nature? hmmm….Funny she couldn’t see herself clear to give the guy a break…Do we really need public employees like this one?


0

What happened? The “militarization” of the police, that’s what happened! We see evidence of this all around us, and in incidents like this all the time. Do we see a pattern here? You bet? Is it dangerous? Absolutely! Does everyone perceive the danger? No!


0

Are they sure this didn’t happen in Morro Bay? Sounds like their M.O.

Leash law tickets are not misdemeanors or felonies, they are infractions. That means you don’t get arrested for them, nor do you go to jail for them, unless of course you don’t show up for court or pay the fine.

In any event a person shouldn’t be tazered for having a dog off-leash, especially since it was legal less than 2 months before. And the notion that this guy may not have even spoke English is interesting too. S.F. is a multi-cultural city after all.

Anyway, no matter what, this ranger should be reprimanded, and if she’s new and still on probation, she should be fired. Next time she might just shoot someone with a pistol.


0

He was not tased for walking a dog.


“Hesterberg, who said he didn’t have identification with him, allegedly gave the ranger a false name”


So much for your non-English speaking conspiracy too.


0

If he didn’t have ID on him, how the hell did she know he gave her a false name? Charged after the fact I say, so why did she taze him? For not obeying her way too heavy badge and ego.


0

It’s called a radio and a 10-27. That’s how they know. Anyone running from the cops gets taken down, tackled, or tased.


0

SLOdude, when you write “taken down” you mean shot with the intent to kill, correct? And when you write “anyone”, you mean anyone, even people who pose no threat to the public, correct? And thus you approve of law enforcement shooting people who pose no threat, correct?


So, why should your average citizen approve of such tactics? Who will benefit?


0

SLORider, since when is giving a false name a shootable offense in the United States? Answer: NEVER!


Do actually prefer Gestapo tactics be used in the U.S.? Well, maybe you do, but most people do not, thank goodness. And thank goodness you are not an elected official or anyone who works with the public.


0

No one was shot. You really contort. And now the Hitler card, also?


0

The whole point of this article is about the victim being SHOT with a taser. Get real, please. By the way, I said your attitude is like that of the GESTAPO. I never mentioned Hitler. Get real, please. Plus, having a “radio” wouldn’t necessarily allow the ranger to know if the name given was “false” or not. Get real, please.


0

The “Ranger” definitely shows an extreme abuse of power in this instance. I strongly suspect she is a rookie & needs to be removed from her job immediately. MOST people out for a walk with their dogs DO NOT neccessarily carry ID…I know I don’t. The only ID I have on me while I’m on a walk with my dogs is a “retired police officer badge replica” that I wear on a chain. That contains last name & badge number, would THAT suffice for an ID? Maybe the poor man wasn’t carrying small litter bags to clean up after his dogs! I find NOT picking up after your dogs to be more egregious than NOT having your ID!


0

Goodness, if you get tazed for no leash and giving false info, imagine what you’d get if you got caught fishing without a license or not paying to enter a park…


0

When you are lawfully detained you are not free to go. Running from the cops will ALWAYS end badly. I cannot fathom what is so difficult about this story that blinds readers from taking notice he was fleeing a lawful detention.


0

When did you become judge and jury, SLOdude? And when did it become acceptable for rangers to electrocute people who “walk away”?


0

It became acceptable when these rangers were given LEO responsibilities and enforcement equipment. Some of them ARE police.


0

By your crazy, Gestapo standards SLOdude, the ranger should have been allowed to shoot the leash law violator with a Glock semi-automatic. What the hell are you thinking? Is that your idea of a great nation?


0

Who is making an arrest out to be genocidal Nazi Germany and calling others crazy? Why are you always so violently angry, sir? Breathe.


0

I’m not “angry” at all, SLOdude. And from what do you draw your “violently” conclusion, SLO? Get real, please. And electrocuting someone in this manner is absolutely reminiscent of Nazi tactics. Get real, SLOdude.


0

Electrocuting is defined as “killing with electricity.” Less hyperbole, please.


0

I think the problem is that there is not a good word for the reality. Because “shocked” has other meanings that word is diluted and doesn’t seem descriptive enough to encompass having thousands of volts of electricity surge through ones body to the point where a person is incapacitated, falls the ground with seizure like spasms and loses control of bodily functions and comes within a sliver of dying.


So, please forgive the hyperbole. What word do you suggest?


By the way, in hundreds of taser cases in the U.S., victims have truly been “electrocuted”.


0

And when did the word go out to everybody that a ranger is God ? Did she say “You are under arrest for breaking a leash law?” I doubt that. Big Badge, Big ego.


0

Please explain what was “lawful detention” about it? As far as I can tell, there is NO evidence in the story that even remotely proves it was.


And what makes you so eager to support Gestapo tactics and shooting people who pose no danger to anyone?


0

Lawful detention occurs when there is probable cause that a crime occurred. You are not free to go. Try it sometime. I’ll bring the video camera.


0

SLOdude, your “definition” of “lawful detention” is woefully lacking. “Lawful detention” does NOT automatically happen whenever there is “probable cause.” Get real, please. Thank goodness you don’t work with the public and are not an elected official!


0

Actually, probable cause is the standard for an officer or agent to have the grounds for making an arrest.


0

Pilgrim got what he gave. Be respectful and let her do her job and he walks on with a smile. He chose to flip her a phony name and be an rsole and he his goodself tazed. Stupid is supposed to hurt.


0

Sewer dude, NO, you are absolutely wrong, “stupid” is not “supposed to hurt” and the fact that you wish harm upon people in that way shows your violent, sick, mean-spirited nature that is doing nobody any good.


Have you ever done anything “stupid’ Sewer dude? And if so, how would you like it if someone purposely shocked the hell out of you to the point that you might die?


Sewer Dude, you sound like you would have fit in perfectly well with the Nazis and the Third Reich. That’s the attitude they had. Sorry, but its true.


The mean and violent and bullying attitude of so many people who post here is a sad commentary on our community.


0

Oh Fer Gawds sake Lou, YOU are even more out of touch than even I imagined! What’s the big deal, so the guy was walking his two small dogs off leash, were they vicious & attacking the Ranger?Probably NOT. The Ranger needs to be fired for using excessive force, she’s probably a “rookie” with no prior experience. As my law enforcement family members tell me: “There’s the LETTER OF THE LAW & then there’s the SPIRIT OF THE LAW…It wouldn’t have killed her to give the guy a break. I’ll remember to pepper spray you & your dog when I see you walking your mutt off leash again….


0

What a load of crap! If the ranger was doing her job all she had to do was call for law enforcement and then follow suspect from a distance. If she was actually good at her job she would have told the suspect to pick up the damned dogs and carry them home.


Allegedly giving a false name is bad form. Tasering someone in the back in that situation is far worse. I wonder if it made the ranger feel “empowered?” Sounds like a true d-bag that souldn’t even be in that line of work.


Welcome to the POLICE STATE indeed! What a load of crap!


0

“all she had to do was call for law enforcement”


SHE IS LAW ENFORCEMENT. Giving false information is a serious crime. Resisting lawful detention is a serious crime. Try not pulling over for your next speeding ticket if you think it’s not. Crap, indeed!


0

SLOrider, what do you define as a “serious crime”? Can you give us an example of a “non-serious” crime so that we can get an idea of what you are talking about?


If a ranger asks me for my name and I say “Joe Blow”, is that serious? How serious? More serious than walking a dog without a leash? As serious as robbing someone? Serious enough to be shot at?


What exactly are your talking about?


And what makes you so darn certain that this man gave “false information”? Because the ranger said so?


SLOdude, it’s obvious your responses are based on some emotional reaction more than rational thinking, because what you write doesn’t add up.


0
1 2 3 4