Topeka Capital-Journal. September 23, 2022.
Editorial: Kansas deputy should have lost certification for excessive force on autistic child
On Feb. 23, Matthew Honas, then a Jackson County sheriff’s deputy, used his taser on a 12-year-old autistic boy. That boy was sitting handcuffed, shackled and hogtied in Honas’ vehicle. Honas tased him without warning.
Honas knew the boy was autistic. The boy was restrained and not a threat. Nevertheless, Honas used profanity. He threatened to tase the boy again. Honas failed to use de-escalation techniques or other means to persuade the boy to comply.
The Topeka Capital-Journal’s Tim Hrenchir reports the Kansas Commission on Peace Officers’ Standards and Training on Aug. 22 issued an order of reprimand to Honas. While Honas was discharged March 3 from his deputy’s job in Jackson County, the commission chose not to revoke his certification as a law enforcement officer. That means he one day could be employed by other law enforcement agencies. Hopefully, a Google search and common sense will keep that from happening.
Honas and Jackson County failed that child, and the commission failed Kansas by only reprimanding Honas. The commission has the authority by Kansas Statute to “suspend, condition or revoke the certification of a police officer or law enforcement officer.” His certification should have been revoked.
Honas’ actions are yet another black eye for public mistrust of law enforcement and evidence that further training for law enforcement to handle traumatized youths. When is enough enough?
The state’s law enforcement oversight body says Honas used excessive force multiple times on the boy, including tying him up in a manner that threatened “his ability to breathe properly.”
While Honas wasn’t wearing a body camera during the Feb 23 incident, Hrenchir reports, most of the interaction was captured by his in-car camera.
The public needs to see that video. The Capital-Journal attempted to obtain a copy via an open records request but was denied by Jackson County counselor Lee Hendricks, who cited a section of the Kansas Open Records Act that allows criminal investigation records to be kept secret.
“The disclosure and publicity of recorded encounters with law enforcement is not in the public interest,” Hendricks wrote. “Persons who know their statements and encounters with law enforcement may become public will tend against providing information for fear of that publicity — whether it being identified in the community as a ‘snitch’ or for fear of embarrassing information being disclosed.”
The public has a right to know about law enforcement misconduct. That outweighs any concerns about “snitching.”
END
