Knox County Sheriff’s Office internal investigators cleared deputies of any wrongdoing after they repeatedly used stun guns against an unarmed man who is now suing the department, according to the investigative file.

“We were giving verbal commands, and he was not complying at all,” Deputy Christian L. Gomez said of Paul Edward Branch and why he and Deputy Paul Saah repeatedly fired their Taser stun guns into Branch’s body.

KCSO’s policy does not allow the use of a stun gun to force compliance with orders, and it does not list the act of passively resisting an order as just cause to shock someone. The policy treats a stun gun much like a bullet-firing one and limits its use to situations in which a deputy is fighting with a suspect, trying to protect another deputy fighting with a suspect, or protecting a citizen being attacked by a suspect.

► More: Unarmed man repeatedly shocked with stun gun sues KCSO

Branch, the Sheriff's Office's video shows, did not attempt to hit, kick or otherwise assault the deputies. KCSO’s Office of Professional Standards deemed Branch’s claim of excessive force in the January incident to be “unfounded” and made no recommendations for disciplinary action or additional training on KCSO’s stun gun policy.

Review after notice of lawsuit

Sheriff Jimmy “J.J.” Jones has declined to comment, citing the pending lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court by attorneys John Barnes and Stephen McGrath on behalf of Branch.

The agency did not launch an investigation until the attorneys notified the Knox County Law Director’s Office of the lawsuit in August.

Gomez, a trainee, and Saah are accused in the lawsuit of excessive force by repeatedly using their Taser stun guns against Branch even though he wasn’t fighting. Saah’s body camera footage showed Branch largely complied with commands, according to the suit. Three deputies had their hands on him, pressing his face against a firetruck, when Saah shot him with the Taser in the back of the neck.

The video showed Branch was seated on the ground with his hands behind his back when a second round of 50,000-volt shots was fired into his chest. He was shocked 10 times over 64 seconds.

Investigative file investigated

USA TODAY NETWORK - Tennessee conducted a review of KCSO’s investigative file. It showed the following:

Branch, 31, ran out of his West Knox County apartment at 3 a.m. in January and asked a neighbor to call for help after he had doused a fire on his stove and himself with water, records show. He was shirtless and shoeless. He had on athletic shorts, and he was dripping with water, the file showed.

He took a seat in an unlocked Rural/Metro Fire Department truck and was groping at the dash and equipment and speaking in “mumbling” fashion, interviews showed. Rural/Metro alerted KCSO, but Deputy Nathan Stachey told investigators Branch wasn’t posing a threat when he, Saah and Gomez, his trainee, arrived.

“There were 10 grown men standing around the truck when we got there,” Stachey said of firefighters. “And they, I mean, they weren’t talking to him anymore. They asked us to remove him.”

Branch got out of the truck when Saah ordered him to do so, the video showed. Saah, Gomez and Stachey each said in separate interviews Branch was “resisting” by refusing to follow commands. None alleged Branch threatened violence or struck them.

According to arrest warrants, Saah says Branch resisted arrest by “pulling away” and “not giving his hands.”

Leading questions?

The internal investigation was assigned to investigator Walt Schmidt, and he began each of the three interviews with the deputies with a silent Capt. Tom Cox in the room. But midway through Gomez’s interview, Cox took over. He did so again with Stachey and Saah.

“Could you tell if he was wet like he’d been emerged in water possibly? And in your experience, and I realize you haven’t been on patrol a great amount of time, in your experience … is it harder to take physical control of somebody that’s wet and partially clothed, where their upper body is nothing but skin and not wearing shoes, you don’t have a shirt to try to grab and control him with, he’s only clothed in some sort of short pants?” Cox asked Gomez.

“Correct,” Gomez replied.

Cox told Stachey that Stachey “made a comment earlier” that Branch was “one of the strongest individuals that you’ve seen.” Neither the recording nor the transcription of Stachey’s interview shows that statement by Stachey.

Stachey agreed, though, when Cox suggested Branch's strength was an issue.

Under control?

Stachey said he was able to use a “pain compliance” technique to lift Branch off his feet, and that each time Branch was stunned with electricity, he was “under control.”

Cox responded, “Would it be more accurate to describe the influence of the Taser of just periods that he wasn’t resisting because of the effect of being struck with Taser darts? And not to put words in your mouth, I was going to ask you so, would it be more accurate to say he wasn’t in control, the effect of the Taser was to limit or decrease his acts of resistance? And you can’t really touch him during those periods when he has electrical current?”

“Yes, sir,” Stachey responded.

Cox pressed, “Can you?”

“No, sir, it … ,” Stachey said before Cox interrupted.

“So you didn’t have the opportunity to like, you know, pounce on him and cuff while an electrical charge is in his body?” Cox asked.

“Yes, sir,” Stachey then replied.

“I just wanted to clarify that,” Cox said. “I’m not trying to get you to say anything one way or the other. But in listening to you, I didn’t get the impression that he was under control.”

'He was ripped'

Cox also pressed Saah on Branch’s threat level.

“Was it cold?” Cox asked.

Saah responded, “It was freezing that night.”

Noting Branch was wet and shirtless, Cox asked, “So that was, fair to say, unusual behavior?”

“Yes, sir, very unusual,” Saah said.

Cox asked, “Do you remember anything else unusual about him? Other than his behavior. Physically?”

“He was very, very ripped, had very little body fat,” Saah said.

Cox continued, “Were all the officers present in uniform? And (Branch) still continues what could be interpreted as criminal behavior in front of several police officers? So that’s fair to say that you interpreted this as very unusual and potentially dangerous behavior?”

“Yes, sir, that’s very reasonable because I,” Saah responded and then paused. “I’ve never in my entirety in law enforcement have ever seen something of that unusual behavior before out of a certain individual.”

Branch was charged with public intoxication. The warrant cites his behavior, not any evidence of alcohol or drug use, as probable cause. He also is charged with resisting arrest. The cases are pending as is the lawsuit.