facts that the district court assumed or likely assumed to the extent that that version is not blatantly contradicted by the record that is no reasonable jury could believe it here the facts as the district or determine them to be nor has the aptly even argued that any of those facts are blatantly contradicted by the record and therefore this court is constrained by those facts in deciding qualified immunity on this appeal specifically the version of the event as the district court determined are as follows during the early morning hours of may th two thousand and sixteen study of police officer nathan griffith received a call for assistance from a franklin county jail or james requesting his assistance in moving in inmate and cody franklin from general population to the detox cell so that he could be isolated from the other inmate because he had been starting fights and altercations with the other inmates in general population making ready for the ride to the jail at approximately twelve fifty four am and he along with nick james made repeated verbal actually tried to get the officers to come into the general popular population cell with him and fight him at a point mr franklin grabbed ahold of deputy james james and pulled him into the general population  with them james was able to get free and at that point mr franklin through several items at nick james which struck him in the head at that point mr franklin exited the cell he slammed the door behind him and he said i'm not going anywhere so at that point there was a standoff between the two officers and mr franklin mr franklin made an aggressive move towards the officers and ended up on the ground with nathan time striking mr franklin mr franklin went to the ground officer griffith ordered him to roll over and put his hands behind his back mr franklin did not comply with that order and he began to stand back up officer griffiths deployed the taser a  vague allegation that mr franklin was choked out that again is very vague and that was alleged to occur after the taser deployment in the general population area once he was inside the detox cell with the officers the juster court determined that he continued to struggle is that where we have the video yes your honor we have video of what occurred immediately way up to the point where he becomes unconscious and the officers leave and then they come back you know right we do have video of what occurred there and somebody talked cell and nothing in that video blatantly contradicts what the district court determined in the detox tell the district court that mr franklin resisted the officer's attempts to remove the handcuffs and that he continuously struggled throughout their effort s there's nothing in that video that blatantly contradicts that and in fact the video supports that finding what was the what was or started the record with respect to the reasons and the officers articulated two reasons for that belief number one being they thought he was a threat to officers who would have entered the cell had to go into the cell later on with him they thought that it was a possibility he could get the handcuffs around to the front of his continue the struggle the evidence in the records and readable that he struggled with over the five years and that was what was determined by the district court and we are bound by those findings and was there something in the record which blatantly recess backs who are brothers who had made threats the officers they were placed in handcuffs and while they waited to be transported to jail one of the brothers refused to move over in the back seat of the patrol car which prompted the officer to deploy his taser and drive to an mo to ensure suspects compliant and here the court found that use of the taser in that circumstance was reasonable because it was a chance standoff situation where the suspect was refusing to comply with with the officers rapidly evolving circumstance which justifies multiple applications of the taser if necessary specifically ryan v armstrong is very on point with the fact referring to the scenario that is captured on the video first of all his hands were cuffed behind his back not in front of him he was laying flat face down on the concrete floor with three officers on top of him homicide there's a difference between being able to survive being chased one time and being able to beat to survive being chased eight times and other particular with other aggravating factors such as your ability to breathe being inhibited  having been engaged in in an altercation and having your heart rate up so part of testimony from from sergeant griffith the one who delivered the lethal cases is that when he enters the cell he doesn't ask officer griffith his cousin or deputy james you know have you all taste him before and that's particularly relevant because the the united states department of whether or not whether the author of been previous cases and how many and also those same problem limit the application of taser to three instances because if you take somebody three times and they're still not coming excessive force and the one end of it that i think we need to give attention to is on the will just how bad exactly was he behaving and the the absence of application of deadly force and that's exactly the question and i believe that we need to in considering that look at the full scope of whether or not ok because you've got to think what are those officers thinking in that moment you know what is a reasonable man thinking and so i'm making the point about the rd nobody suffered injury there's not even an allegation or any finding by the court that he ever threw a punch the ever pinched anyone and that's awful after the  i think the fact that when he was up and able to move around it was not laying underneath the officers that he didn't enjoy anyone when he was doing that in these officers knew that the threat is that that apply this balancing test of the reasonable their application of deadly force when you've got a subdued victim brushes and knowing that even when he was up and walking around and about the fact that i think it's a fact correct me if i'm wrong that he was  times is one factor normally when you're talking about normally that doesn't result in death that is not in a circumstance where they are good they don't know that right they didn't know because you didn't ask well i know but the other officers  officer nathan grew up with it was there he knew how many times you've been tasered there's even evidence that it may be greater than eight because the autopsy report found evidence that there was a separate set of problems that were applied to him which not in the officer's testimony they never account for  which if there was a nother another taser used that would necessarily mean a minimum of a a not application established well i mean he's he's clearly has a right not to have excessive force applied against him but the supreme court has repeatedly said we're not supposed to take a so what's your best case where a guy is resisting h you in his judge a holder of force is least justified against nonviolent misdemeanor it's who do not flee or actively resist arrest and pose little or no threat to the security of officers or the public have a force may be used if the individual was actively resisting the commands of law enforcement but asked the critical point is at the point that the three of them are on top of him in the video i asked the mean additions that we have a wonder i'll give you a full cite for it did they involve a prisoner in handcuffs resisting where officers are putting their body weight on the  prisoner in an effort to remove handcuffs and apply a tell yes or no and that's part of my point is that they involve inmates or suspects who were applying a greater the i think us i said i think the entire case comes down to the sense that i read the start because because mr franklin was restrained while sergeant group of taste and he was unlikely to place the officers in danger of fear however they continue tase him and it led to his death there's just no getting around that approaching later i mean i'm not sure that logically weekend get to the idea that leaving a suspect laying on the floor in handcuffs is going to make an officer that comes along later going to a greater degree of danger than the degree of danger he would be in if that same supposedly dangerous suspect was was free to move out what is the state of the record or goes back to the possibility that it might have got his hands on  all there's a video and know all three of these officers testified and agreed that the that is he was a fact of lee handcuffed with his hands behind him i understand that but i don't i mean i physically i mean you were talking about logic i think you were saying is it but i wonder is it physically possible for him to have done that none of these officers these officers were given opportunity and none of them testified that the reason they did this they were worried that he was going to somehow i was on the run jump through his arms i thought i was on the record as one of the reasons testified that they were concerned that he was that he was not effectively restrained with his hands behind his back ok that's that's not my question you know but i mean it's a your theory just nobody none of the i mean counsel may have but none of these witnesses in their hours of deposition testimony testified that the reason that they wanted to remove his handcuffs was because they were afraid he was going to be a greater danger laying face down think up on his back and he would be up free to move about what did they say the reason why they said that it was the policy of the department you know they had the choice to walk out let him calm down they had the choice for the three of them to lay stay there with their weight on top of him without repeatedly tasered him till he gave out good did the  notice that he was under the influence of methamphetamine and they were not what did i know about his condition about his violent condition or resisting a condition of resisting or non communicative whether they know they if they will i can tell you is what they testified to what they saw which was it's described by  one of the deputies as a scuffle in terms of the violence that he exerted in the general population unit and they there's a conflict in the testimony between officer griffith and deputy james one of whom says that he they says they drug him on the mat so therefore he was either unconscious or completely comply because you can't pull somebody on a mat while you're fighting with  but yeah they would have had they they would've knew would know anything about the non non lethal amount of methamphetamine that was in his system which the state medical examiner found was was not sufficient to cause death in fact the suspect was by a lot aggressive and non compliant overwhelmingly hold that multiple applications of the taser is objective way reasonable according to ryan even if the suspect is subdued face down in the proposition and according