ABSTRACT
Chapter 8 examines the myth that officers are accountable for their use of force, especially their use of electric-shock weapons. Examining internal complaints mechanisms, the Independent Office for Police Conduct, the Independent Police Complaints Commission, and the operation of the courts, I suggest, instead, that it is exceptionally difficult to achieve accountability. Certain TASER models do offer advantages here, but barriers in criminal and civil court, the test in criminal law for use of force in England and Wales—the ‘honestly held belief standard’—and a police decision-making model called the National Decision Model, which is increasingly influential worldwide, mean that holding officers to account is a challenging endeavour. Moreover, the academic literature on police officer accountability is ill-equipped to tackle this challenge, as it has traditionally been human centric in nature. Yet, as previous chapters have demonstrated, decisions about whether, and how much force to use, are impacted by the materiality of projectile electric-shock weapons and the socio-technical network around them. The problem of excessive use of force is not something that can be addressed at the level of the individual officer alone. Rather, we need to ensure that the responsibility and accountability for the use of force is shared more broadly by humans and technological actors.
