Fraction of VPD carries Tasers under new rules

"Tasers can still be used on seniors, children, pregnant women and the mentally ill, despite warnings from the manufacturer."

January 27, 2012

CTV BC

With a report from CTV British Columbia's Peter Grainger

The new standards for Taser use are set to come into effect next week, and they mean that just a fraction of Vancouver police officers are carrying the conducted-energy weapons.

The changes to B.C. policy were recommended by retired judge Thomas Braidwood, who led an inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski after being stunned multiple times at the Vancouver International Airport in October 2007.

The Vancouver Police Department is already complying with the province-wide standards, which require officers to undergo training before they can carry Tasers. But the department doesn't automatically send people to be qualified and officers have to volunteer.

Right now, only 107 officers carry a Taser, and a third of those are members of the emergency response team. As of December, there were 1,327 sworn officers in the VPD.

Some of the other new policies include:

• Tasers are only to be used on violent people
• Officers must give verbal warnings before shocking anyone
• They must use, or consider using, crisis intervention first
• They must avoid chest shots
• Shocks cannot last for more than five seconds

However, Tasers can still be used on seniors, children, pregnant women and the mentally ill, despite warnings from the manufacturer.

That is a concern for BC Civil Liberties Association director David Eby, who was the only civilian member of the implementation committee on Braidwood's recommendations.

"This device, still untested on those groups, is still being used by police officers and potentially on those groups. That is a potential major issue given the recent Tasering of an 11-year old in Prince George," he said.
"There may be some mistaken notion that now they're safe, now we know what the effects of them are, now we know when we can properly use them and when we can't. I don't think police officers have that information still."

Transit cop turned off by Tasers-Ex-VPD officer says he now doubts safety, usefulness of devices

"Dickhout, a former Vancouver Police Department officer who still works as a transit cop, said he will never carry a Taser again because he believes they are not appropriate for transit policing."

January 27, 2012
Sam Cooper, The Province

A SkyTrain transit cop who Tasered an intoxicated fare evader in Surrey testified Thursday that he believed the man was assaulting his partner, but in the aftermath he was sickened and decided to never use a Taser again.

In an Office of Police Complaints Commissioner discipline hearing, Const. Daniel Dickhout is alleged to have used excessive force on Christopher Lypchuk, who fell and smacked his face on a concrete stairwell after being Tasered at Scott Road SkyTrain station in September 2007.

"I don't think it was excessive," Dickhout testified of his use of the Taser.

"In my view at that time, he was attacking [partner] Const. Chartrand."

Lypchuk was cut over his eye in his fall but could have been concussed or even have died, according to public hearing counsel Joe Doyle.

Dickhout said he escorted Lypchuk off the train for fare evasion and was writing up a ticket on the platform when Lypchuk suddenly picked up two unopened beers and fled for the stairwell exit.

Security-camera footage shows Dickhout quickly drawing his Taser and catching Lypchuk in a steep and narrow stairwell, with his partner blocking Lypchuk from above.

Dickhout's partner "interjected" with a comment, according to Dickhout, and Lypchuk took a jerky step toward the second officer, before stopping.

Dickhout said from below, as Lypchuk took his step: "I see his right elbow back, in what I take to be cocking and throwing a punch."

At that point, Dickhout said, he pulled the trigger and Lypchuk stiffened and fell down several steps.

"I realized, days later when I watched the video from the top of the stairs, that he may not have been doing what I thought he was, and that made me sick," Dickhout said.

Dickhout, a former Vancouver Police Department officer who still works as a transit cop, said he will never carry a Taser again because he believes they are not appropriate for transit policing.

"Since that time, we had the [Robert] Dziekanski incident," Dickhout said.

"I don't think they are quite as safe and useful as I once believed."

Dziekanski died at the Vancouver airport in October 2007 after being Tasered and restrained by RCMP officers.

In cross-examination, Doyle established several inconsistencies between Dickhout's incident report and video evidence shown in court.

Doyle suggested Dickhout truly did not perceive an imminent assault, because Dickhout did not write in his report that he feared Lypchuk was about to punch his partner.

"When I reviewed the video, I was reminded of a punch," Dickhout said. "I don't know why it didn't get into my report."

The hearing has been adjourned until Feb. 22.

Deaths in Police Custody: Excited Delirium

Next On: Tuesday, 20:00 on BBC Radio 31 Jan 2012



SYNOPSIS

Inquests in England are increasingly hearing a new term to explain deaths in police custody: Excited Delirium. It's a diagnosis with origins in the United States, where it has been associated with consumption of massive doses of cocaine. People with ED are said to possess super-human strength and to be largely impervious to pain. They behave bizarrely, sometimes destructively. They often seem paranoid and frequently resist arrest. As police struggle to restrain them they overheat and die.

But critics -- including some British Pathologists -- point out that Excited Delirium is not recognised by the World Health Organisation and that there is a lack of valid research. Civil liberties organisations fear that the diagnosis might be employed to excuse improper use of restraint techniques by police.

For 'File on 4' Angus Stickler has travelled to the cocaine capital of the United States, Miami, where police and scientists are attempting to define and deal with the controversial condition.

And in England he speaks to families whose loved ones have died after being restrained by the police. Is Excited Delirium well-enough understood to be used by courts? And just how many people are dying while being restrained -- either in custody or while being arrested? Are the official figures reliable?


Producer: Andy Denwood.

BROADCAST
Tue 31 Jan 2012
20:00
BBC Radio 4

(There will be a transcript after the program)

New standards for Taser use go into effect in B.C. Monday Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/news/standards+Taser+into+effect+Monday/6060706/story.html#ixzz1khHd5Yj9

January 27, 2012
Mike Raptis, The Province

B.C. police agencies will soon be forced to comply with new provincial Taser standards following commissioner Thomas Braidwood's landmark 2009 recommendations.

The new standards — most of which will take effect Jan. 30 — will be binding on all police forces in the province, including the RCMP.

The Vancouver Police Department has already adopted the majority of Braidwood's recommendations, including new standards for use of force, equipment storage and electrical testing for the conducted-energy weapons (CEWs), police spokesman Const. Lindsey Houghton said Thursday.

Under the new provincial policing standards, all front-line police officers, recruits and cadets must now complete training in crisis intervention and de-escalation.

"Prior to the legislation, there was no provincial standard of training for CEWs," Houghton said.

There are 107 VPD members certified to carry the Taser on duty. Seventy-six are patrol officers and 31 are assigned to the emergency response team.

Seven transit police officers are certified to use the Taser. However, that number will grow, said Insp. David Hansen, as an unspecified number of transit police will soon undergo the provincial training regime.

In 2009, Solicitor-General Shirley Bond directed all police in B.C. to use de-escalation techniques with all persons, including the emotionally disturbed.

Provincial standards will require police officers who deploy a Taser to provide medical assistance and have an automated external defibrillator readily available.

Karbon Arms Prevails over Taser in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

January 26, 2012
Market Watch, Wall Street Journal

TAMPA, Fla., Jan 25, 2012 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Karbon Arms, a leader in electronic immobilization technology prevailed in the U.S. District Court. In the court filing, Taser International /quotes/zigman/85741/quotes/nls/tasr TASR -0.65% falsely accused Karbon Arms of violating a court ordered injunction. Karbon was vindicated of the baseless allegation by Rick Smith, Taser's CEO, that Karbon is "seeking to evade the Court's injunction through subversive means."

In the hearing to determine whether Karbon Arms is selling an infringing version of the Stinger Systems S-200 Judge James A. Teilborg ruled that the circuitry and operation of the devices are "unquestionably" different. As a result, the Court found that Taser has failed to prove that the Karbon MPID is not more than "colorably different" from the circuit in question. The injunction against Karbon is the result of the assets purchased from Stinger Systems by outbidding Taser in August 2010.

In addition to this victory, in December 2011, the U.S. Patent Office completed a re-examination of Karbon's patent number 7,778,005 and found in favor of Karbon Arms. Taser requested this re-examination in May 2011. Karbon Arms' CEO Robert Gruder stated, "These successful outcomes are proof that Karbon is prepared to defeat Taser's relentless attacks and attempts to corner the Electronic Immobilization Device market."

Matthew Pliskin, President of Karbon Arms, stated, "We are enjoying the momentum on both the legal and marketing fronts. This is an exciting time for Karbon Arms." In response to Taser's October 24, 2011 press release he added, "I am disappointed by Taser's unethical behavior and mischaracterization of Bob Gruder. He has worked tirelessly to produce a competitive product that exceeds the expectations of the marketplace."

Robert Gruder continued, "Taser has done everything in their power to prevent us from entering the marketplace. We will continue to bring our superior products to compete head to head with their offering. We hope the law enforcement community will now clearly see Taser's strategy. My message to Taser International and to Rick Smith is to focus on making a product that can be competitive with the Karbon MPID and you can save your shareholders lots of attorney's fees."

About Karbon Arms:

Karbon Arms is a leading provider of electronic immobilization products. Almost 100,000 individuals have been trained to use Karbon products. The Multi-Purpose Immobilization Device (MPID) is Karbon's flagship product. Innovative officer friendly features such as a cartridge eject system, 22 foot range cartridge, 345 nm laser, off-the-shelf batteries, and a rugged unibody frame construction accent the exterior of the MPID. Under the hood, the MPID utilizes patented technology that allows a safety designed constant current generator.

Effective, Durable, Affordable.

Departments nationwide have made the transition from traditional older immobilization technologies to the newer, cost effective Karbon MPID. Find out more at www.karbonarms.com or call 800-345-STUN

SOURCE: Karbon Arms

Tasers a ‘new urban terrorism’ against ‘downtrodden’: Canadian study

January 20, 2012
By Douglas Quan, Post Media News

"They should have just taken a gun and shot my son‟: Taser deployment and the downtrodden in Canada

The use of Tasers by Canada’s police forces represents a “teething new urban terrorism” that targets society’s “downtrodden,” says a study published this month that looked at more than two dozen deaths involving the stun guns.

Those most likely to get “tased” include the poor, mentally ill and chronic drug users, according to the study, led by Temitope Oriola, who received a Governor General’s Gold Medal for academic excellence upon the completion of his doctoral studies at the University of Alberta last year.

“It is beneath the integrity of the RCMP — a well-respected organization by international standards — and other police establishments in Canada to continue to use the Taser without conclusive independent scientific evidence succinctly demonstrating its effects or consequences on the human body,” the study, published in the journal Social Identities, concludes.

Steve Tuttle, a spokesman for Taser International in Arizona, said in a statement that the study reads more like a social commentary and falsely implies that Tasers caused all the deaths examined.

“The report is woefully out of touch regarding the realities facing Canadian law and enforcement,” he said.

Tuttle cited a U.S. Department of Justice report that found Tasers can significantly reduce injuries to suspects, protect police officers and may prevent injury to bystanders. The same report, however, raised concerns that police may be becoming too reliant on Tasers

In a statement, RCMP spokeswoman Sgt. Julie Gagnon said the force has revised its use-of-force training and policies since 2007 to focus on “de-escalation and communication.”

The latest revision to the RCMP’s Taser-use policy in April 2010 states that Tasers can only be used when someone is causing bodily harm or when an officer believes that a person will imminently cause bodily harm, she said.

The force continues to work with the RCMP Public Complaints Commission, other police agencies and medical experts to enhance policies and training, Gagnon added.

The study reviewed 26 fatalities across the country in which a Taser was involved, including the high-profile death of Robert Dziekanski, a distraught Polish immigrant, following an encounter with police at Vancouver International Airport.

Relying on news accounts of those incidents, the study’s authors conclude that Tasers tend to be used on the most “hapless” members of society.

Many were poor or had chronic drug problems, some were ethnic minorities, and a few were certified as mentally ill, they said.

“Taser use on the downtrodden has led to a very unhealthy mistrust, dread and fear of the police akin to the way members of the public are terrified by terrorist attacks,” the authors wrote.

They go on to say that the huge public outcry that followed Dziekanski’s death was exceptional, as those with histories of poverty, drug use and mental illness tend not to generate much public sympathy.

In an interview, Oriola said he understands the dangers and risks that police face, but he insisted that there should be a moratorium on Taser use in Canada.

The days when academics sit on the sidelines and do “objective analysis” are becoming a “thing of the past,” Oriola said. Scholars need to take a stance on issues, especially those that involve society’s most vulnerable, he said.

Nicole Neverson of Ryerson University in Toronto and Charles Adeyanju of the University of Prince Edward Island were co-authors.

Attorney calls Taser use ‘sadistic’

January 18, 2012
Katherine Heerbrandt, Gazette.net

A Frederick County sheriff’s deputy acted in a “sadistic” manner four years ago when he hit a 20-year-old man twice with a Taser, the attorney for the man’s family told a federal jury Tuesday.

That man, Jarrel Gray, died soon after, and his family is seeking $145 million in damages in a wrongful death lawsuit that began Tuesday in federal court in Baltimore.

In his opening statement, attorney Gregory Lattimer told the jury that Cpl. Rudy Torres of the Frederick County Sheriff’s Office used excessive force in the events surrounding the death of Gray on Nov. 18, 2007.

Gray’s family is claiming wrongful death, excessive use of force, and battery on the part of the now-retired Torres.

“You will determine if the initial tasing was appropriate and if the second tasking was appropriate under the circumstances, and render a decision based on your answers,” Lattimer told the jury. “We are convinced you will agree that shouldn’t have happened.”

Torres’ attorney, Daniel Karp, outlined a different scenario of how and why Torres used the Taser on Gray, and said the deputy was following procedure when he shot Gray with the stun gun to force him to get on the ground and show his hands.

“We will show that a reasonable and well-trained officer could not appreciate the fact that the use of the Taser might cause serious injury or death,” Karp said.

Torres responded to a dispatcher’s calls about fighting near Gresham Court, on the western side of Frederick, in the early morning hours of Nov. 18, 2007.

While Lattimer characterized the altercation between Gray and a friend as “acting the fool, like young people do,” Karp painted a more serious picture of the fight between two young men that prompted neighbors to call 911.

When Torres responded, he saw three young men on the sidewalk, and a woman in a car. When he demanded they show their hands and get down on the ground, two complied, while Gray turned his back, then turned around with his hands in his pants, both lawyers said in their opening statements.

Karp told the jury that all the men were “verbally resistant.” Torres shot Gray in the chest with the Taser, and he fell to the ground, with his hands pinned under him. When he did not show his hands, Torres delivered the second shot.

“That doesn’t mean he had something in his hands. It may mean he’s stupid or it may mean he’s drunk … but he continued to be a threat to the deputy,” Karp said.

Witnesses for the Gray family will testify that Gray’s hands were by his side, Lattimer said.

Lattimer told the jury that Torres delivered the second shot while Gray was on the ground unconscious, and did nothing to help him. Karp disputed the allegation, and said Torres did “nothing wrong.”

“And even if he did, he did not cause this young man’s death,” Karp said.

Torres allegedly used the Taser a second time on Gray because he would not show the deputy his hands while on the ground after the first shot. The state medical examiner, scheduled to testify later this week, named the cause of death “undetermined” and noted that a Taser had been used.

The medical examiner found nothing abnormal during the autopsy, Karp told the jury, but that Gray’s blood-alcohol level was .23, a level he said is “consistent with binge drinking.”

Maryland state law considers a person with a blood-alcohol level of .08 as too drunk to drive.

“That young man didn’t deserve to die because, at 20 years old, he had too much to drink,” Lattimer said.

The Gray family is seeking $145 million in damages against Frederick County, the Sheriff’s Office and Torres, and amount Lattimer said in an interview was set to “indicate the seriousness of the suit.” The jury can determine a specific award if it finds in favor of the Gray family.

The Sheriff’s Office and Frederick County were split from the original suit, which can be revisited later.

County attorney John Mathias said the reason for splitting the suit is that the liability of Frederick County and the Sheriff’s Office only comes into play if it can be determined Torres did not receive proper training in the use of Tasers. Mathias said the chances of that are “slim.”

Sheriff Chuck Jenkins (R) was in the courtroom, but had to leave when Lattimer told Karp he wanted to put Jenkins on the witness stand during the trial. Attorneys said the trial will likely last this week and perhaps into the next.

A Frederick County grand jury found no criminal wrongdoing in the death of Gray.

Bipolar Man's Death by Taser Needs Jury Trial

One to watch, maybe the U.S. test case on how tasers will be used in the future in the United States of America - no more indiscriminate use!!!!

January 17, 2012
Tim Hull, Courthouse News Service

(CN) - Police may be liable for the death of a man who was shot twice with a Taser by a police officer trying to make him stop directing traffic naked, a federal judge ruled.

Brian Cardall, 32, had a psychotic episode in the car while he and his wife, Anna, were driving near Hurricane, Utah, with their infant daughter in June 2009.

Unable to get Brian back in the car, Anna called the Hurricane City Police Department. Officer Kenneth Thompson and Police Chief Lynn Excell found Brian standing in the road, completely naked and trying to direct traffic, when they arrived at the scene.

Thompson told Brian to get down on the ground 13 times, according to deposition testimony. After Brian failed to comply, Thompson deployed his stun gun twice at Brian without warning. Excell put Brian in handcuffs as officers radioed the paramedics. While waiting for the arrival of paramedics, however, a third officer noticed that Brian had stopped breathing and lacked a pulse. Brian was pronounced dead at the hospital.

Brian's widow, children and parents raised a series of constitutional and state-law claims against Officer Thompson, Chief Excell and the city of Hurricane.

Though the defendants claimed qualified immunity, U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups ruled said the disputed facts make the case ripe for a jury.

Most significantly, there are "conflicting eyewitness accounts" as to whether the naked, unarmed man posed enough of a threat to the officers to justify the use of the Taser.

While the officers testified that Brian had "charged" Thompson, Anna Cardall and a passing motorist gave a different story, saying that he merely "turned toward the officer" or took "one small step" his way.

"If Brian suddenly charged at Officer Thompson in a violent manner, then he may have posed a threat to the police and there would be considerable justification for the Tasing," Waddoups wrote.

"If, on the other hand, Brian simply turned towards Thompson, or was taking a few steps in various directions as he had been since the officers arrived on the scene, then he was not a threat," the Jan. 11 decision states. "Brian was a considerable distance from the road, and did not verbally threaten the police, himself, or his family. He was naked and clearly unarmed, and outnumbered by the officers on the scene, who significantly outweighed him and were about to be joined by additional backup. If the facts are viewed in the light most favorable to Anna's claim, then Brian did not pose a threat."

"Brian was Tased although he was not guilty of any serious crime or attempting to flee," the judge added. "If all factual disputes are resolved in favor of Anna, Brian was not a threat to the officers who impatiently Tased him when, in his confusion, he was slow to comply with their demands. Tenth Circuit case law, as well as authority from other jurisdictions, explicitly holds that Tasings under similar circumstances violated clearly established Fourth Amendment law."

Immunity does protect the defendants from three claims alleging that officers violated Anna's constitutional rights by holding her illegally and failing to get her husband medical treatment.

Texas man dies after police taser him

709. January 15, 2012: Daniel Guerra, 24, Fort Worth, Texas

TAZED - the movie

Please forward and share
TAZED CROWDFUNDING 

CONTRIBUTE TO THE CAUSE via ChipIn!

Become a Friend, Witness, Protector, Defender, Champion,Guardian Angel or Patron Saint of Robert Dziekanski. Contribute to the movieTAZED.

We need your help to make TAZED. We can't do it on our own. So far, TelefilmCanada, a private investor, our creative team and our own company UTOPIAPICTURES have financed the development and got us to this point. Now, we needYOUR support.

FUND A - Packaging/Financing/Preproduction.

FUND B - PRODUCTION: TBA. Stay tuned for more information. In the meantime contribute to FUND A.

GOAL FUND A: $10,000 + to covercosts necessary to get TAZED into production such as final script changes andscript breakdown, Polish translation, location scouting, final budget, legaland accounting.

CONTRIBUTE TO FUND A - PACKAGING - VIA CHIPIN ABOVE

ChipIn!

Packaging – Financing

REWARDS

REWARDS FUNDS A & B:All contributors will get a credit on the TAZED website and at the end titlesequence of the film, plus other rewards depending on the level ofcontribution.

CONTRIBUTE $25 or more: Become a"FRIEND OF ROBERT DZIEKANSKI", get this credit plus a "Get Tazed" button.

CONTIRIBUTE $50 or more: Becomea  "WITNESSES OF ROBERT DZKIEKANSKI", get this credit, a "Get Tazed" buttonplus a poster signed by the actor who plays Robert Dziekanski.

CONTRIBUTE $100 or more:Become a "SUPPORTER OF ROBERT DZIEKANSKI",
get this credit, all of the above plus a DVD when the film is released.

CONTRIBUTE $250 or more: Becomea "PROTECTOR OF ROBERT DZIEKANSKI",
get this credit, all of the above plus  a "Get Tazed" T-Shirt orhat signed by lead cast & crew.

CONTRIBUTE $500 or more: Becomea "DEFENDER OF ROBERT DZIEKANSKI",
get this credit, all of the above plus an invite to the cast & crewscreening in Vancouver (travel not included)

CONTRIBUTE $1000 or more: Becomea "CHAMPION OF ROBERT DZIEKANSKI",
get this credit, all of the above plus an invite to the Premiere of the film inthe city closet to you. (Travel not included)

CONTRIBUTE $2500 or more: Becomea "GUARDIAN ANGEL OF ROBERT DZIEKANSKI", get this credit, all of the above plus anopportunity to be an extra in the movie. (Travel not included)

CONTRIBUTE $5000 or more: Becomea "PATRON SAINT OF ROBERT DZIEKANSKI", get this credit, all of the above plus theopportunity to spend a day on the set while in production and to come to therough cut screening and contribute your suggestions.

INVEST: $5000 or more andshare in the profits of the film. Check out the page on this website INVEST for more information.You must be an AccreditedInvestor to qualify.

ChipIn!

Please forward and share.
Many thanks,
Elvira Lount Producer
http://www.tazedthemovie.com/
http://www.utopiapictures.com

Utopia Pictures
Ste 2 - 2629 West 1st Avenue
Vancouver, BC V6K 1H1
604-734-1274

California man dies after police taser him

708. January 15, 2012: Hutalio Serrano, 43, Colton, California

... it is not immediately known if the Tasering specifically led to Serrano's death. “While in custody, Serrano suffered some type of medical emergency," said one of the arresting officers in his written statement about the fatality.

Editorial: Delirious Fatality report

January 7, 2012
Calgary Herald

The fatality report into the death of Gordon Bowe adds ammunition to the argument that public inquiries too often become a waste of time and money.

Provincial Court Judge Heather Lamoureux’s recommendations are curious, in that they are almost entirely built around the theory that excited delirium is a legitimate medical condition, an assertion that’s controversial and widely disputed. She concluded Bowe, 40, died as a result of excited delirium syndrome, which she says was brought on by cocaine use, and not from the deployment of a Taser gun, used by Calgary police trying to subdue him.

Her nine recommendations in the seven-page report almost all deal with developing protocols around excited delirium, treating it as a legitimate condition without reference to the controversy or debate in the medical community. She calls for mandatory training of emergency response workers, police and dispatchers in identifying excited delirium, and wants a national database established, where police chiefs across Canada would “record and share information relating to death associated with Excited Delirium.”

There’s another school of thought that warns the controversial diagnosis of excited delirium is a distraction from the true cause of the medical condition that caused the death, and is used to justify use of force by police.

The exhaustive Braidwood inquiry into the Taser death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski heard overwhelming evidence that, while delirium is real, excited delirium is “NOT a valid medical or psychiatric diagnosis.” Moreover, it “provides a convenient post-mortem explanation for in-custody deaths where physical and mechanical restraints and conducted energy weapons were employed.”

Just a year ago, another provincial court judge in Halifax, who presided over an 11-month inquiry and wrote a far more comprehensive 460-page report, to Lamoureux’s seven pages, reached conclusions similar to Braidwood’s.

Provincial Court Judge Anne Derrick rejected excited delirium as the cause of death of a man Tasered repeatedly by police. She warned: “This case should sound a loud alarm that resorting to ‘excited delirium’ as an explanation for a person’s behaviour and/or their death may be entirely misguided.”

Excited delirium is not listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the medical community’s bible for diagnosing psychiatric illness. Even an independent report commissioned by the RCMP criticized the term and concluded it is sometimes used as an excuse to justify using a Taser.

All that aside, asking police officers to diagnose the mental state of an agitated suspect in the midst of a crime scene places too much responsibility on those who are not trained psychiatrists.

John Dooks, president of the Calgary Police Association union, offers another perspective. Dooks supports any tools that can help better educate and train officers, so that they are able to identify the symptoms described as excited delirium, regardless of whether or not excited delirium is a legitimate medical condition.

We agree there are physical attributes that are common in all of these cases that police would do well to understand and recognize. When these symptoms present themselves, police should refrain from using stun guns on the suspects, and call for medical help immediately. A public inquiry isn’t needed to reach that conclusion.

EDITORIAL: Delirious over delirium

The Globe & Mail NAILED IT in yesterday's editorial!!

January 4, 2012
Globe and Mail

Canada does not need a national delirium over “excited delirium.” This supposed cause of many deaths in police custody, including those involving the use of tasers, was laid to rest after the exhaustive Braidwood inquiry following the 2007 death of the Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski.

Why then has an Alberta judge ruled that Gordon Bowe, tasered and restrained by several officers, died from “excited delirium syndrome”? Why is Judge Heather Lamoureux of Alberta Provincial Court proposing everything from the training of police dispatchers in diagnosing “excited delirium” to the creation of a countrywide “excited delirium” database?

“Excited delirium” (overheating and wild behaviour) is a blind alley, not a recognized medical condition. It is a convenient way to avoid tough scrutiny of police practices that may contribute to death.

Mr. Braidwood, a retired appeal court judge, spent two years and oversaw two inquiries, one on the overall safety concerns around the taser, and one on Mr. Dziekanski’s brutal death after being tasered five times by the RCMP at the Vancouver International Airport. He spoke to experts in emergency medicine, cardiology, electrophysiology, pathology, epidemiology, psychology and psychiatry. Judge Lamoureux did not refer in her seven-page ruling to Mr. Braidwood’s 1,000-plus page reports.

Mr. Braidwood concluded that “excited delirium” is not a medical condition. By contrast, delirium is a recognized cognitive and brain dysfunction that is a symptom of an underlying medical condition. This is not just semantics; it points to the real problem – dealing with a sick individual without killing him. “It is not helpful to blame resulting deaths on ‘excited delirium,’ since this conveniently avoids having to examine the underlying medical condition or conditions that actually caused death, let alone examining whether use of the conducted energy weapon and/or subsequent measures to physically restrain the subject contributed to those causes of death.”

Mr. Bowe was on cocaine and acting wildly in a dark house. The tasering and heavy-handed restraint by Calgary police may or may not have been justified – though the judge should have questioned “kicks to the side of Mr. Bowe’s body.” Any policy built around “excited delirium” would be an irrational response to such a death. Judges and policy-makers should read Mr. Braidwood’s reports.

California man dies

January 2, 2011: Mario Marin, 53, Santa Ana, California

Four taser related deaths in December 2011

Four men died in the United States in December 2011:

703. December 20, 2011: Ernest Atencio, 44, Phoenix, Arizona

704. December 22, 2011: Wayne Michael Williams, 27, Houma, Louisiana

705. December 27, 2011: Michael Calvert, 25, Indianapolis, Indiana

706. December 28, 2011: Willie Banks, 52, Burnet, Texas

Alberta judge suggests database for excited delirium

WHO substaniates ED as being anything, beyond a wide list of symptoms? (Dr. Christine Hall?!) The Canadian Medical Association (CMA) doesn't recognize it. And Braidwood concluded ED is hokum. Who's right? Where is the definitive science on the subject?

WHY do you only hear of ED in the wake of CEW-related deaths?

WAS the output of the CEW 'measured'? If not, the ME acted without full information. In other words his conclusion is flawed.

Even if the CEW was measured, there would still be the little problem of protocol. The CPRC, RCMP, BC Solicitor General's Office and probably the Alberta government, have accepted the 600 Ohms test protocol from TI. This is exactly the same mistake made over a decade ago- no one in government verifying the scientific or medical claims. In this case it is a mode of measurement that is flawed: it is admitted by the developers from Carleton/MPB/Datrends that their test is 'uncomprehensive' and NOT independent. An inflated resistance value in the protocol IS, however, a good way to cover the tracks of past mistakes, as now virtually all CEWs will pass!

And if Gordon Bowe WAS suffering a truly psychotic episode (from cocaine or anything else) this is exactly the worst thing an officer could do. When in a state of fear, pain, high stress and agitation, your PH level in the blood is already plummetting; to add the pain and fibrillation of lactic-acid-producing muscles to the mix can be enough to take a vulnerable person over the edge.

January 3, 2012
CBC News

A fatality inquiry into the death of a man during an encounter with Calgary police recommends a national database on excited delirium.

It’s just one of nine recommendations released Tuesday into the man’s death after Calgary police used a stun gun to arrest him three years ago.

Officers found Gordon Bowe from Castlegar, B.C., behaving erratically in the basement of a vacant house in the southeast community of Fonda Park in 2008.

Police described Bowe as jumping and diving off walls, saying he fought against officers for several minutes during the arrest then was "very still and did not look like he was doing well."

Bowe was being restrained by four city police officers who had been called to investigate a possible break and enter. The 30-year-old had also been shocked with a Taser, although the stun gun did not appear to work according to officers.

The medical examiner's report said Bowe's death was caused by excited delirium due to high levels of cocaine, not the use of a Taser.

At the time, Bowe's family said the arresting officers should have recognized the state he was in and treated him accordingly.

Provincial court Judge Heather Lamoureux had nine recommendations, including the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police create a database to record and share details about deaths due to excited delirium.

"For the same rationale as a provincial system is required, similar reporting on a national scale would provide an enormous amount of data upon which the Canadian police chiefs could conduct research," wrote Lamoureux.

Officials with the organization were unavailable for comment.

More training needed

Another key recommendation is that all police agencies in Alberta train their officers annually in the identification and management of excited delirium incidents, and that training should involve real case studies and scenario-based training.

Lamoureux noted Calgary police are already training officers about the condition, but it's not being done throughout the province.

The report also suggests that all 911 call takers and dispatchers providing services to police agencies receive updated training on excited delirium.

Excited delirium, also known as autonomic hyper-arousal, is characterized by increased strength, paranoia and suddenly violent behaviour. It is further marked by profuse sweating and an elevated heart rate.

Dr. Christine Hall, an expert on excited delirium from Victoria, is attempting to document all excited delirium cases across the country which involved police restraint.

Hall testified last year at the inquiry there is insufficient data to determine whether all cases of excited delirium lead to death. But she said the risk of death increases with physiologic stress, such as a physical encounter with officers.

She suggested police need to better recognize the symptoms of the condition and try to reduce the stress of people they are placing under arrest.

"It was Dr. Hall's observation that more time must be taken to teach police that individuals who 'give up' suddenly during a physical interaction with police may in fact be in need of urgent emergency care," said the judge's report.

Controversial diagnosis

Two years ago, a judge examining the death of a man Tasered by Halifax-area jail guards ruled out the cause of death as excited delirium. The judge in that case, Anne Derrick, ruled Howard Hyde died because jail guards applied restraint techniques that interfered with his breathing. Hyde was a longtime paranoid schizophrenic.

Derrick noted there is considerable controversy within the medical community as to whether excited delirium is a legitimate condition.

The issue came under scrutiny during the public inquiry into the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski, who died in 2007 after he was Tasered by a Mountie at Vancouver International Airport.

A subsequent independent report commissioned by the RCMP also criticized the use of the term excited delirium. It said the condition is sometimes used as an excuse to justify firing stun guns.

In 2009, the RCMP restricted the use of stun guns to cases involving threats to officers or public safety, because officers had been instructed to use the weapons to subdue suspects thought to be in a state of excited delirium.

That term no longer appears in RCMP operational manuals, because the force believes officers can't be expected to diagnose it.

New Taser rules for BC police

December 15, 2011
The Canadian Press

The B.C. government says it's now implemented all of the recommendations for the police use of Tasers that came out of the inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver airport four years ago.

Solicitor General Shirley Bond says she's approved new policing standards for the weapons and the rules will apply to all officers working in B.C., including the RCMP.

The standards flow from the Braidwood Commission, which examined the incident in which Dziekanski died after being struck several times with a Taser during a confrontation with four Mounties at Vancouver airport in 2007.

Braidwood recommended police get better training on Tasers, that the weapons only be used if there's a danger a suspect will cause bodily harm, and that officers be trained in crisis management.

Bond says in addition to implementing all of Braidwood's recommendations, the government is bringing in new standards for video surveillance in police buildings.

These rules follow the death of Ian Bush, who was shot to death during a struggle in the RCMP detachment in Houston, in northwest B.C., in 2005.

Purchase of Tasers for DPS questioned

December 10, 2011
JJ Hensley, The Arizona Republic

The Department of Public Safety set out to purchase 800 Tasers and accessories in 2009 for about $800,000.

But by the time the equipment was delivered, more than 13 months later, the purchase had grown to 1,000 newer-model Tasers and accessories at a cost of more than $1.9 million.

The DPS officer who requested the more expensive, newer model stun gun is a Taser senior master instructor, according to DPS. The instructor, Sgt. Bud Clark, did not have any paperwork on file noting his relationship with the Scottsdale manufacturer, as state law requires for procurement officers, said DPS spokesman Bart Graves.

"We are looking into why he didn't file that paperwork," Graves said.

Records show the department began taking steps to replace its officers' aging Tasers in the spring of 2009, initially getting approval for 500 units at an approximate cost of $400,000.

By the end of that summer, records show that DPS had received an estimate for 800 Tasers and accessories from a Prescott vendor for $880,000.

But the Taser model that DPS priced in the summer of 2009 was becoming increasingly obsolete, and in 2010, Clark requested that the agency amend the contract to cover a new model, the Taser X3.

The newer model was appealing because it included three cartridges that allow officers to simultaneously fire the electrodes at up to three people or fire three shots in more rapid succession.

"We had an 83 percent reduction in officer-injury rates when deploying the Taser. Sixty percent of our deployments do not capture the suspect on the first shot. Three shots will give the officer a better chance of striking on first deploy and further reducing officer injuries," according to a DPS statement on the purchase.

In December 2010, the agency took delivery of 1,000 Taser X3s at a price of about $1,600 each. DPS administrators also turned in more than 400 of the older model Tasers for a rebate of $75 each. The agency said those Tasers were broken.

The money to purchase the Tasers came to DPS through photo-enforcement citations thanks to a legislative measure that earmarked the funds for the purchase of ballistic vests, stun guns and other safety equipment, said Phil Case, DPS' chief financial officer.

"Normally, we wouldn't think of turning over our stock of anything that quickly," Case said. "In this case, we did because of that infusion of photo-enforcement money."

DPS is not the only Valley agency to upgrade its Tasers stock in the past year.

Chandler police will soon start turning over their stock of Tasers after the City Council last month approved the purchase of about 350 Tasers and accessories at a cost of about $470,000. Chandler police chose a different new-model Taser, which the department received for about $300 less each than the DPS models.

DPS Sgt. John Ortolano, president of the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police, said there were concerns about the X3 among officers who have used the device.

"The technology difference is day and night compared to the X26 but the biggest thing is (the X3) is a big bulky item. If you carry it on a drop-leg holster, it's like you strap a cinder block to your leg. Putting it on your duty belt is a better option, but then you start running into problems, because of the girth of the weapon, you have problems getting seat belts off and on," Ortolano said. "The thing is just so big that it's a problem."

Ortolano said the X2 model that Chandler ordered was smaller and more manageable and that it was well known that the smaller model would be available soon when DPS ordered the larger version.

DPS officers would have likely raised concerns about the bulk of the new Tasers had the product gone through the field testing that is common when the agency rolls out new products, Ortolano said.

Rifles were purchased out of the same fund that paid for the Tasers, and Ortolano said officers tested four brands before settling on the Colt tactical rifles they now use.

"Why didn't we buy 20 or 30 (Tasers) and get feedback instead of doing a huge purchase like this," Ortolano asked. "In this particular instance, a lot of people have a lot of questions as to why things appeared to be done differently."

EDITORIAL: Zapped by taser backers

December 7, 2011
RICK MARTINEZ, News Observer

I figured the call I made last week for North Carolina's law enforcement agencies to ban their officers from using stun guns and Tasers would be a lonely one. I just didn't realize how lonely. Opposition to my proposal has been nearly universal.

Eric Pagone sent an e-mail that sums up the blowback I've received electronically and in person. Pagone wrote: "Tasers are part of a force continuum. When you remove a tool such as the Taser, which is at the higher end of the continuum, an officer may be forced to resort to deadly force (gun). ... an overwhelmingly large percentage of the population (100%), are susceptible to negative health effects when struck by gunfire.

"Statistics you are referring to sound like people who say some car accident victims died as a result of wearing their seatbelts. The positive impact clearly outweighs the negative for seatbelts and Tasers. For those who don't want to be Tased ... don't live a high risk life style in which run-ins with the law are the norm."

Not surprisingly, I also received a nasty, but professional, response from Steve Tuttle of Taser International, who may have felt blindsided by my conclusions after I called the company inquiring about the status of a $9.2 million federal court judgment against it in the 2008 death of 17-year-old Darryl Turner in Charlotte. For the record, here is Tuttle's original response to me.

"TASER believes the court erred in not allowing evidence of contributory negligence or a jury instruction on contributory negligence by Mr. Turner which would be a complete bar to recovery under North Carolina law. As a result we are seeking judgment to overturn the verdict."

Tuttle also objected to my conclusion that a Taser jolt from a Scotland Neck police officer rendered 61-year-old Roger Anthony brain dead. Tuttle has me on that point. Only a medical official can make that determination. Still, both Tuttle and I agree a Taser was "involved" (Tuttle's word) in events that resulted in Anthony's brain death and expiration after he was taken off life support a few days after his arrest.

Tuttle, and others, accused me of not doing my homework. Not true. I studied the research I could find, including an often-cited study from Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center which concluded that Tasers were overwhelmingly safe. But I took Tuttle's advice and read two National Institute of Justice (NIJ) reports issued earlier this year: "Study of Deaths Following Electro Muscular Disruption" and "Police Use Of Force, Tasers And Other Less-Lethal Weapons."

I can see why stun gun supporters like these studies. Both say the chances of a person being killed by a Taser shock are remote, and the report on police use emphatically declares that Tasers lessen the threat of injury to officers and suspects.

However, both also conclude that for some people, a stun gun jolt can be lethal. The question for the officer on the beat is, which people?

Thankfully, some police have implemented restrictions based on research that stun guns can be harmful. Of the 500 police departments surveyed by NIJ, 31 percent forbid stun gun use on pregnant women, 26 percent against drivers of moving vehicles, 23 percent against handcuffed suspects, 23 percent against people in elevated areas (to prevent fall injuries) and 10 percent against the elderly.

Another concern I expressed was that law enforcement officers may reach for their stun guns because it's easy and not because the situation warrants it. NIJ has the same worry. During interviews with officers and trainers, researchers heard comments that hinted at "lazy cop" syndrome, meaning some law enforcement officials found it easier to zap a citizen than to use conflict resolution skills or physically intervene. In its police use study, NIJ found stun guns can be used "too much and too often."

Both reports recommend more study, training and guidelines. Factoring in increased exposure to lawsuits, I call on police chiefs to consider this simple question - are stun guns more trouble than they're worth?

Manufacturer study: Taser worked fine

December 2, 2011
Pat Bywater, Mead Tribune

MEADVILLE — The Taser a Meadville police officer was using when it struck a resident in the eye does not appear to have been malfunctioning, but investigators may never be able to independently determine where the officer had aimed the Taser.

Those details are the highlights of a report completed by the device’s manufacturer at the request of the City of Meadville. The report was released to The Meadville Tribune as part of a request made by the newspaper under the state’s Open Records Law.

The forensic report from Taser International Inc. dated Nov. 1 is the latest significant development in a case that has had several odd turns.

It all started at 6:15 p.m. Aug. 23 in a church parking lot at 1080 Market St. when Meadville police responded to a call indicating that Market Street resident Michael Mondo was creating a disturbance. The Tribune’s investigation revealed that during the days before the incident the police had been warned by local mental health authorities that Mondo was struggling with paranoid schizophrenia. The officers who responded to the call were aware of this and the Crawford County Mental Health Crisis Team was summoned to the scene by police when the call came in.

Before the crisis team arrived, however, one of the two officers at the scene, Sgt. Glen Peterson, a 32-year veteran of the force, elected to deploy his Taser to subdue Mondo. Meadville Police Chief David Stefanucci recently revealed to the Tribune that Peterson claims Mondo was told to stop moving at least twice but did not comply and kept moving. At that point, according to Stefanucci, Peterson said he aimed the Taser at Mondo’s “low center mass,” not his head.

The Taser shoots out barbs that hook on to a person’s skin or clothes. They are attached to the Taser with wires that carry an electric discharge that disables the person temporarily.

In the Aug. 23 incident, one of the Taser’s barbs impaled Mondo’s right eye, which he later lost after unsuccessful surgeries. Mondo, who disputes the claim that he was suffering from mental health issues the day of the incident, says he has suffered some memory loss after the incident and that his recollection of that day is sketchy. He said he recalls the officers appearing and one of them asking him if he had been drinking. His next memory is of after the Tasering.

The public would not learn of the incident for some time.

It appears that the report of the incident may have been excluded from the police paperwork typically made available to the media. A tipster contacted the Tribune and The Associated Press with information about the incident the week of Sept. 12 and Mondo was not charged with any wrongdoing in the incident until Sept. 14.

In the first media reports about the incident, which were published Sept. 17, The Associated Press indicated Meadville Police Chief David Stefanucci said he had no reports about the Tasering. However, when a subsequent Meadville Tribune open records request revealed evidence that as many as five reports had been filed within a week of the incident, Stefanucci told the Tribune in a story published Nov. 4 that he had been misquoted by The Associated Press, although he said he does not remember exactly what he said. Stefanucci said that he never sought a correction of the story because he did not want to try a potential court case in the media or make any comments that might influence such a case.

The Associated Press is declining comment until an investigation into the claim is complete.

Meanwhile, the city launched an effort to learn more about how the Taser ended up hitting Mondo in the eye. Police policy calls on officers to avoid aiming at the head, and in statements after the incident, Peterson claimed he did not aim at Mondo’s head. As a result, city officials wanted to determine if the Taser perhaps malfunctioned. Stefanucci revealed in a recent interview that he arranged to have the Taser tested by its Scottsdale, Ariz.-based maker.

Under an open records request, the Tribune obtained the Nov. 1 report of the tests, which were conducted Sept. 9. The testers concluded that the Taser appears to be working properly and that “there is no reason not to return the Taser ... to service.” In a subsequent interview with the Tribune, Stefanucci confirmed that the Taser is currently being used by Meadville police.

The Taser testers also reviewed the video automatically taken by the Taser whenever the weapon’s safety is put in the off position. From that video the testers could not determine where the weapon’s laser sight was aimed when it was deployed, or even if the laser was turned on. However, the testers suggested that they might not have been able to detect the laser point due to sunlight at the time of the incident and the quality of the Taser’s video camera.

In part, the report reads: “because the laser aiming device is a low power eye safe red laser, it may not have been visible during the incident. Inside a building or at night it appears bright, however, because it is a low power eye safe laser, it is difficult for the human eye to see the laser, even at very close distances, in sunlight. The ability of the Taser cam to pick up visible details of the laser is less than the human eye.”

In a subsequent interview, Stefanucci said all Meadville police Tasers are configured so that the laser pointer is engaged automatically whenever the device’s safety goes into the off position. He also pointed out that all Tasers are equipped with fixed aiming sights so that officers can aim correctly even when they cannot see the laser point.

Stefanucci said he and Meadville City Manager Joe Chriest discussed sending the Taser to be checked by a company other than its manufacturer, but neither of them were familiar with companies that do that kind of work. “We are looking into it,” said Chriest. “We will have to look at their reputations,” he said.

Mondo’s attorney, Terry Toomey of Meadville, did not criticize the city’s effort to have the Taser tested. “It would seem to me to be reasonable and appropriate to send the Taser to see that it was operational and working as appropriate,” Toomey said. As for sending it to be tested by a company other than Taser, “I’m not sure where else they would take it,” he responded.

Taser cops won't be tried before next fall

December 4, 2011
Marcella Bernardo, CKNW

Four RCMP officers accused of lying when they testified at an inquiry into the death of a man at Vancouver's airport will not go to trial before next fall.

Jury selection for the perjury case against Corporal Monty Robinson and Constables Kwesi Millington, Gerry Rundell and Bill Bentley has been set for October 4th, 2012.

They were all charged in May of this year.

Special Prosecutor Richard Peck determined there was not enough evidence to lay manslaughter or assault charges, but he believes all four men lied under oath when they testified at the Braidwood Inquiry.

In October of 2007, they were involved in the death of Robert Dziekanski... a Polish immigrant who was repeatedly stunned with a Taser.

The maximum penalty for perjury in Canada is 14 years in prison.

Charlotte police find serious problem with new Tasers

December 2, 2011
WBTV

CHARLOTTE, NC (WBTV) - Charlotte police are trying to solve an issue with the department's new tasers.

Officials say the main trigger works fine, but they're concerned about something called the "arc switch," and officers use it to test tasers and to threaten suspects before actually firing.

CMPD bought new tasers after a man died after being tased this past summer.

The new tasers were chosen for the specific reason that they are considered safer -- they stop shocking someone after five seconds.

But CMPD learned the arc switch didn't stop after five seconds, which would completely defeat a key feature of the new tasers.

So they say company Taser International is upgrading software to fix the issue.

The Strange Career of Dr. Richard Carmona - Dr. Taser / Mr. Clorox

November 28, 2011
by DARWIN BOND-GRAHAM, counterpunch

On November 16 about two-hundred and fifty Oaklanders convened a general assembly in the city’s central square, Frank Ogawa/Oscar Grant Plaza. It was yet another experiment in direct democracy, one of many public meetings held since the city’s encampment was established a month earlier. Buoyed by a massive march to UC Berkeley’s campus the day before, Oakland’s occupiers floated proposals to guide the movement’s next steps.

A national day of action against the coordinated police crackdown on various occupy encampments around the nation received 90% of votes. An occupation of a park on 19th and Telegraph got another 90% of votes cast. Before adjourning, the assembly opened the floor to general announcements. Protesters from San Francisco spoke last. They were worried the police were coming for them again, armed with batons and pepper spray. “Please come help us defend ourselves,” they asked. Taking this into consideration, the Occupiers adjourned.

Just a block away on the same day another kind of “assembly” was taking place, the Clorox Company’s annual shareholders meeting held in the corporation’s office tower at 1221 Broadway. While a contractor tallied proxy votes, Clorox’s executives, directors, and representatives of its major shareholders huddled to chart their future.

Clorox’s board of directors was re-elected. It’s directors in turn recommended a package of executive compensation for the year ahead. Chair and CEO Don Knauss was paid $9.1 million. VP Lawrence Peiros was approved for $2.9 million in pay and stock. Most of the other executives received similar seven figure packages.

It’s likely that Clorox’s leadership also talked about the Occupy encampment, rallies, and assemblies occurring just steps outside their building. It’s quite likely they had been worrying if the protests would disrupt their annual meeting. Clorox, like other major corporations with offices in Oakland, is a member of the Oakland Chamber of Commerce, one of several business organizations that had pressured the Mayor to send in the cops on a mission to violently evict the movement.

On the Clorox committee making recommendations regarding compensation is one “Dr.” Richard H. Carmona. Carmona has been a board member of the Oakland-based Clorox since 2007. In that time he has been paid several hundred thousand in fees, and has obtained an option on upwards of 7,000 shares in the company. Carmona is a wealthy man.

Guiding aspects of Clorox’s corporate decision making is only one of Carmona’s jobs, however. He’s much more involved in a different company headquartered in his home state of Arizona.

Dr. Carmona joined the board of Taser International in the same year he joined Clorox. Not coincidentally, that was just after he left office as the 17th Surgeon General of the United States under the administration of George W. Bush. Taser International is what you think it is; the company that makes and sells the electronic guns popularly known by their most famous brand name. Taser’s biggest customers are police departments.

According to various accounts, Carmona joined the Army in 1967, just as the Vietnam War was getting hot. He quickly became a member of the Army Special Forces known as the Green Berets, and learned medicine by treating fellow soldiers in the battlefield. After the war—in which he became a highly decorated combat veteran—he attended medical school, earning a bachelors degree from UCSF in 1979. Carmona’s early medical career was spent mostly as a nurse and paramedic.

In 1986 Carmona joined the Pima County Sheriff’s Office where he would become a leader of the SWAT team, and also worked as a police medic. Carmona killed in the line of duty in 1999, shooting a mentally ill man who fired at him. The deceased had reportedly killed his father earlier that day with a knife.

In Pima County, Carmona served in different management roles in the healthcare system while working as a cop. Lacking the advanced research and education that such jobs require, he obtained a Masters in Public Health from the University of Arizona in 1998.

It was out of this context, somewhat out of the blue, that George W. Bush nominated Carmona for the post of Surgeon General in 2002. Physicians from the University of Arizona Medical School, where Carmona lectured, even criticized the nomination. Against Carmona’s confirmation, Dr. Charles Putnam wrote to Senator Ted Kennedy saying the nominee’s work as a sheriff’s deputy was in direct conflict with his oath as a doctor to do no harm. Putnam concluded that Carmona’s “panache in the face of objective danger has on occasion overwhelmed his identity as a physician.” Even so, Carmona was eventually confirmed, and by some reports was competent in office, even emerging as a critic of the Bush administration after his departure.

As a board member of Taser International Carmona sits at that table with other retired military officers and representatives of major investors, some who specialize in investing in weapons manufacturing companies. In 2010 Carmona was paid $30,000 in fees and given another $58,000 in stock options as compensation by the company. All told he owns about 25,000 shares of Taser International stock.

In the world of corporate governance Carmona is considered an “independent” director of Taser because he is not an official employee, and because his equity stake is less than 1% of outstanding shares. Nevertheless, Carmona has a stake in the company’s fortunes. His compensation there is ultimately linked to how many Tasers the company sells.

It should come as no surprise to readers that the Oakland Police Department is a major customer of Taser International. According to the OPD’s 2010 Training Section Report, the department currently owns and fields 530 model X-26 Tasers. The City Council authorized purchasing most of these weapons in 2008 with $645,000, and tacked on an appropriation of another $55,000 every subsequent year for training and other costs associated with fielding them. The Oakland City Council even chose to waive the normal competitive bid process, apparently because Carmona’s company, Taser International is the only authorized distributor of the weapons in California.

In Taser International’s 2010 annual report the company notes that one of its primary problems is the possibility that local governments will not buy their X-26 weapons, which account for the bulk of sales revenues. The company states:

“Most of our end-user customers are government agencies. These agencies often do not set their own budgets and therefore, have limited control over the amount of money they can spend. In addition, these agencies experience political pressure that may dictate the manner in which they spend money. As a result, even if an agency wants to acquire our products, it may be unable to purchase them due to budgetary or political constraints.”

In the case of Oakland, neither the city’s dire fiscal situation, nor widespread opposition within the community scuttled the 2008 Taser deal. Officers wielded Tasers during the several evictions of Occupy Oakland.

In March of 2010 San Francisco’s Police Commission again rejected spending upwards of $1 million to outfit officers with Taser weapons.

The Pima County Sheriff’s Department, Carmona’s old stomping grounds, is a Taser International customer.

Darwin Bond-Graham is a sociologist who splits his time between New Orleans, Albuquerque, and Navarro, CA. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, forthcoming from AK Press. He can be reached at:darwin@riseup.net

Letter from a Concerned Canuck

In response to this November 18th report: "Cop sues taser after riding the lightning" I received the following letter from "Concerned Canuck":

Questions- so many questions. Judging from the news of this lawsuit against Taser International, it would seem some police are finally waking up to the real risks, after dozens have suffered life-altering injuries after 'riding the lightning'? Or worse, the Tucson PD officer last week, who suffered a fatal massive heart attack a day after a Taser training exercise?

More questions- Will it take the Taser-related death of a child, a celebrity or another cop, before someone, anyone in government somewhere, agrees that a federal investigation is warranted to clear the air on how such a now legally defined 'deadly weapon' (defined as such by a recent ninth circuit court decision in North Carolina) could be introduced as a 'non-lethal police tool'. Why was the lethality not recognized by anyone a decade ago when Tasers were foisted on us by eager and in some cases compensated cops?

C'mon now - 700 people are dead after being 'tased'. Taser International's numbers game of comparing the percentage of fatalities to the number of uses, doesn't mean a thing to the families who have lost loved ones. All they know is their loved one, who was alive one minute, was dead the next. Taser's lawyers and the company's allies in the Justice, Science and Medical communities have almost always thrown it back on the victims, blaming them for bringing such unfortunate outcomes upon themselves. They cite quite rightly that many had previous health problems, were drunk, high on drugs, had mental illnesses or ran away too vigorously from their Taser-toting pursuers. Some probably were violent. But did all 700 fall into this category of the truly violent? Robert Dziekanski didn't. He was a confused but compliant traveller, newly arrived in Vancouver, who was felled by an RCMP Taser and then multi-stunned while being held down by four burly officers. Nor did Darryl Turner-- a healthy teenager in Charlotte, NC-- who was shocked twice for having a temper tantrum at his workplace. His family was awarded $10-million dollars last summer. This award came after a jury of average citizens agreed Taser International made fatal mistakes by not warning law enforcement of the real risks, after numerous opportunities to do the right thing and own up to their errors.

The company motto about 'saving life' didn't ring true for the 700.

At the heart of the Turner case is the jaw-dropping revelation that in 2006, company execs were informed by their own research scientist that a fit young volunteer suffered cardiac arrest during a training exercise. Luckily a defribrillator was on-hand and the volunteer was saved. But it proved cardiac capture was indeed possible. But instead of warning its police customers or the public of this shocking occurrence, Taser International kept silent and continued selling its products. A warning to avoid chest shots didn't come until late 2009, buried in a training bulletin. That is nearly FOUR YEARS that Taser knew of the cardiac risks, but they FAILED TO WARN. Canadian media were the first to discover and report this news about the risks of chest shots- although Taser reacted by saying they were just trying to "avoid the controversy" whenever there was an unexplained death during a Taser incident. The company had inside information- that cardiac capture was possible- but they didn't admit this. Not yet.

It was May 2010, when Taser finally released a much longer list of risks and warnings - in the fine print of another training bulletin. However there was no mention to law enforcement that the company had known since 2006 of the potential cardiac dangers. No doubt Taser International issued this list in anticipation of the Turner case coming to trial. Now when citizens are injured or die after being tased by police, the product liability belongs to law enforcement and its employers, and not where it should lie- with the manufacturer.

The Turner family was awarded the $10-million, because of Taser International's FAILURE TO WARN. Police would be well advised to read the publically-avaliable judgement in detail. As a matter of course, Taser is appealing. It is one of dozens of company-crippling wrongful death lawsuits lined up against the company. What other choice does Taser International actually have when facing such steep multi-million dollar losses? They either settle for undisclosed amounts or they appeal. It is the same thing the company is doing by counter-suing this now crippled cop, whose doctors say his back was broken from the force of a Taser shock during training. One can hear Taser's lawyers now -- perhaps the officer had a pre-existing condition of osteoporosis, which is responsible for the injuries - but not the Taser? And for God's sake, why didn't the officer read the latest waiver before he signed it, where the risks of injury and death are plainly but finely printed for all to see?

In Montpelier, Vermont, officials there appear to be aware of the rising liability risks. A prescient City Manager and a sensible Police Chief have decided that arming their officers was NOT worth losing the trust of their citizens. Was it wisened worry of the possiblity of paying out huge damages if there was any proven police misuse? And misuse is bound to happen when many officers are still convinced Tasers are "safe to use on any attacker", as the company's early promotional material stated. Much of this same propaganda made its way into the first police evaluations of the higher 26-watt technology a decade ago- and was treated as truth.

Perhaps some police were knowing collaborators, but I'd like to think most were hapless victims. So many took it: Taser hook-Taser line-and-suspect sinker. The first clue should have been the skimpy science of testing of one pig in 1996, five dogs in 1999 and several hundred young police recruits who were given half-second zaps with taped leads rather than darts with the full five second stun. Sadly law enforcement brass never bothered to verify the manufacturer's safety claims or questioned the electrical theory of operation, when Taser made the drastic leap from 5-watt weapons to 26-watt ones. Now after 700 deaths, Taser International states in the fine print of its manuals and waivers, that police are responsible for their own research! What kind of upside-down Bizarro-World are we living in, where a device that allows dangerously high current to enter the human body and is associated with hundreds of deaths, expects its customers do its own research? The pharmaceutical companies wouldn't dare do that, so why is Taser getting a free pass?

Perhaps Taser International will be brought to its senses, or at least brought back into court when its shareholders launch another class action suit for failure to disclose all known safety risks? A dozen complainants shared a $21-million dollar out-of-court settlement in 2005, to buy the silence of this small group of compassionate shareholders . In the court documents of this case, seven former employees signed affadavits and testified there were so many 'returns' - defective units being sent back - because thousands of Tasers weren't operating properly or not at all, triggers were sticking with some staying on, etc. There were SO many returns they had to rent extra warehouse space to store them all. The witnesses claimed the bodies of these returns were cut open, the defective high-voltage boards were taken out and placed into new bodies with new serial numbers - and sold out the front door as new product.

No one has ever attempted to investigate Taser for any of this, because no one in law enforcement or the Justice department is paying attention or cares to. Taser called the accusations absurd but settled with the shareholders anyway; what is absurd is paying out $21-million dollars to a dozen complainants in what has to be one of the highest nuisance suit payouts in legal history.

Given the number of deaths and injuries, one wonders if any of these defective units being re-sold as 'new' were recycled into other police departments, where some of these 700 "unintended consequences" or dozens of "training injuries" occurred? There is no way of knowing for sure, because police do not measure the output of each Taser upon receipt from the company. SO there is no benchmark for product quality or reliability set from the start. There is no way of charting degradation over time. Which means there is no way of knowing the shelf life of Tasers. How will that be determined without proper measurement?

Since Taser International has shouldered the liability risks onto police- and those who employ them- municipalities, provinces, states, and federal bodies should consider the sense of seeing these untested, unregulated weapons measured regularly. That was one of the recommendations of the Braidwood Inquiry. So far no police agencies anywhere in North America have heeded this sage advice. The RCMP has supposedly tested its fleet of 36-hundred or so BUT many of them performed outside of the safety allowables set by Taser International. But what is the peak output/body current of the Tasers involved in the 700 deaths? Who knows? Again- there are just too many unanswered questions.

A proper Justice Department investigation of how all this occurred without proper checks & balances, is needed. The many questions demand answers. There needs to be accountability for the 700 and their families. Congressional hearings might be the only way to illuminate more of the truth about how Tasers were introduced without proper oversight and substantiated by rigorous, independent research. If we're stuck with the lethal Taser, it really should only be used in the rarest of circumstances, just below the firearm, NOT as a mere compliance tool. Regular measurement using a recognized electrical safety standard would go a long way too, in insuring this Russian Roulette-style of law enforcement is kept to a duller roar.

Concerned Canuck.

A Response to Cassandra

Letter to the Editor of Blue Line magazine, May 2011
Dr. Mike Webster, Police Psychologist

I read Sgt. Fawcett’s article in the May 2011 issue of Blue Line with great interest. I thought his use of the “reverse-Cassandra effect” (i.e. speaking falsehoods and being believed) was clever but somewhat indiscriminately applied in this case. In his article Sgt. Fawcett implies that all (police related) research is good research simply because it exists. With respect, I think Sgt. Fawcett may be guilty of another form of cognitive distortion – overgeneralization.

While it is certainly true that the majority of the work he cited is reputable research, it is not the case for some topics mentioned in his piece. For example, it is universally accepted by those trained to distinguish between reputable and questionable research that the TASER’s health and safety effects have never been subjected to rigorous, independent, and impartial research. It is true that a plethora of research on the weapon exists, and has been completed by an army of M.D.s and Ph.D.s, but it lacks scientific rigour and has been termed “junk science”.

It is never a good sign (or good for business) when a manufacturer contradicts its earlier “scientifically proven” claims. Taser International recently (2010.05.01) issued a new training manual for the X26 TASER. It includes a long list of alarming risks and warnings which constitute an “about face” on original claims based upon their research. Here are only a few of these warnings. The company now cautions that the weapon “has not been scientifically tested on pregnant women, the infirm, the elderly, small children, and low body mass persons” . . . and . . . “the use on these individuals could increase the risk of death or serious injury”. The company goes on to admit “that the TASER can produce physiologic or metabolic effects, which include changes in: acidosis, adrenergic states, blood pressure . . . heart rate and rhythm . . .”. With this statement Taser International directly disputes its own previous research findings and confirms what critics of that research have said for over a decade. Finally, Taser International appears to “throw in the towel” as they abdicate responsibility for their own weapon in the statement recommending that “all TASER . . . users conduct their own research, analysis, and evaluation”. So are we to think anyone who is critical of Taser International’s sloppy research is speaking a falsehood?

With regard to the controversial topic of excited delirium, Sgt. Fawcett implies that it has been the subject of “scientifically sound” research. In fact, it is not something that scientists can study in a controlled (scientifically sound) environment. Moreover, his assertion that there exists “documented descriptions of excited delirium in research dating back to the 1800’s,” is similar to saying that there are documented descriptions of the Yeti (abominable snowman) in research dating back to the same time period; and we are all aware of how those descriptions have failed to increase the credibility of the creature in the minds of the scientific community.

The term excited delirium was contemporarily applied by medical researchers to describe (not diagnose) the extreme end of a continuum of drug abuse behaviours such as “cocaine-induced excited delirium”. Neurologist Deborah Mash’s research on brain biomarkers for the identification of excited delirium seems to support the use of the term as a descriptor of cocaine induced behaviour and its association with cocaine toxicity; not as a diagnosis or its general application to all erratic behaviour.

The agitated and deranged behaviours termed excited delirium and observed by a police person in the community are essentially indistinguishable from those present in agitated schizophrenia, agitated hyper-mania, agitated dementia, true delirium, or a cocaine induced rant; there is nothing to differentiate these conditions, one from the other, save a full medical/psychiatric workup.

Most concerning was Sgt. Fawcett’s implication that because of equivalent early research results the concerns with prone restraint had been discredited. He and I were witnesses at the same Commission of Inquiries where a long line of distinguished medical experts, citing recent research, cautioned against the impairment of respiration as it is associated with prone restraint. Even the Canadian Police Research Centre in 2005 emphasized that respiratory impairment becomes particularly crucial when restraint is applied during or after a prolonged physical struggle. It is uncontroversial that acidosis is cleared primarily by the lungs; therefore during or after a prolonged struggle the body’s natural response is to hyperventilate. However, hyperventilation can be impeded if a subject is lying face down (prone). In this position, prone restraint becomes an obstacle to the subject’s attempts to clear acidosis, thus increasing the risk for cardiac arrhythmias.

So to conclude, are we to understand that when anyone wishes to question or criticize police actions, or methods, they will be viewed as part of the “reverse-Cassandra cry”? Does Sgt. Fawcett really believe that all those who criticize the police are anti-police? Is it not possible that those who are critical of police actions, or methods, also love their communities (and police services) and want the best for them both? And when Sgt. Fawcett muses, “one wonders when there will ever be enough research done to satisfy the critics”, does this reflect an understanding of the scientific method and its place in society? Or when he asserts that, “Credible police trainers stay current with research in a variety of fields . . .” how much faith can we have in his assertion after reading his article? Most importantly, does the tone of his article bring law enforcement any closer to the community it serves, or does it do more to feed the “us versus them” mentality?

Black Friday

This just tweeted by yours truly: Connecticut @southingtonpd police #taser man after he cuts in front of the line @walmart #blackfriday indeed!!

You can read it and weep here: Police: Taser used on man who cut line at Southington Wal-Mart

Letter from a Concerned Canuck

In response to this November 21st report: Caught on tape: Officers using tasers I received the following letter to FOX 8 Cleveland from "Concerned Canuck":

FORCED to use Tasers? The police choose to use the weapons when and how they do. In your edited examples, you showed unarmed, non-combative citizens being repeatedly shocked with a weapon the U-S Courts have decided is "deadly". One man was even hand-cuffed.

I write to you as a concerned Canadian citizen who has examined this issue extensively for many years. Please check the recent ninth circuit court decision in North Carolina, where the judges unanimously agreed Tasers are, by legal definition, "Deadly Weapons". Should police be using such a weapon on a handcuffed or unarmed suspect?

And now the manufacturer of this 'non-lethal police tool' has itself admitted its devices can cause dangerous metabolic and cardiac changes, which can lead to death, especially among vulnerable populations. It warns police not to use multiple or prolonged stuns. It warns police to avoid chest shots.

If you check the fine print of the latest training manual for the X26 model you'll discover, like I did, that there is a very long list of risks and warnings that was not there a decade ago, when police first purchased Tasers. The company said then that their devices were "safe to use on any assailant". That is not what they are saying now.

Has human physiology changed in ten years? Has the technology changed? NO-the only change seems to be the manufacturer's opinion of its own products. This admittance in the waiver should be all you need to see --to tell you the truth -- that Tasers were deployed prematurely without enough scientific scrutiny by any government on either side of our shared border —and now the legal responsibility is being thrown over to law enforcement. Police failed us too, with a lack of due diligence, because they never verified the initial safety claims made by Taser International.

Also of great concern is the fact that these electrical devices are not measured regularly in any police detachments across North America. This is -- ahem-- shocking, when you consider that according to Truth-Not-Tasers.Com, which has kept a death toll based on media accounts, 700 citizens have died after being 'tased', including a Tuscon police officer last week. Officer Fung was a healthy man who suffered a massive heart attack, a day after being 'tased' in a training exercise. I wonder if he bothered to read the fine print of the waiver? Did he sign it? And will his cop buddies agree so readily to being 'tased'?

A few other things your reporter might like to dig into -- shocks between 30 to 100 milliamps can kill. Yet Tasers have peak outputs of 151 to 162 milliamps. Don't be fooled by Taser's use of 'averages', as the danger is in the peaks. And despite taser's assurances that the there is consistent current being emitted, our national public broadcaster, the CBC, proved there is 'output variance'. They found in a random test, using Taser's own test protocol, that 12-percent of the weapons performed above the safety allowables set by the company.

Neither the UL, IEC or CSA have ever measured the Taser, nor would they, they say, because one of the modes of use of the weapon utilizes invasive probes which emit current INTO the body, where resistance is next to nil. Check with the UL -- they will tell you there is no electrical safety standard yet developed for internal shocks, just external shocks, where skin resistance provides a barrier.

The lack of safety standards for non-lethal technologies is why NIST - the National Institute of Standards & Technology - is working with other scientists to develop a proper measurement protocol. But there will have to be TWO TEST PROTOCOLS for the TWO MODES OF USE: drive stun and the more dangerous dart/probe mode.

It took a major Public Inquiry in British Columbia to do it, but Canadian police have raised the Taser in the use-of-force continuum, to just below the firearm, only to be used as a last resort, in truly violent, life-threatening situations. Americans have to decide too — is it okay for police to continue to use the taser so cavalierly? Lakewood’s police chief told you this is exactly what the taser is for, “allowing us to have somebody compliant … without actually having to put hands on, wrestle or fight with them.” Should a deadly weapon be used to gain compliance? There have been too many "unintended consequences", but deaths will continue if police use the Taser the way they have.

Concerned Canuck

An embarrassing anniversary arrives for a broken RCMP complaint system

November 21, 2011
British Columbia Civil Liberties Association

An embarrassing anniversary arrives for a broken RCMP complaint system

November 23 is the second anniversary of B.C.’s Solicitor General filing a complaint with the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP (“CPC”) in relation to the 2003 death of Clayton Alvin Willey. At the time of the complaint, the Solicitor General called the investigation into the details of Willey’s death a matter of “confidence in the RCMP.” Two years later, the investigation by the CPC has not been completed.

The CPC is the same organization recently asked to conduct a multi-year investigation of sexual harassment complaints by female RCMP police and civilian staff.

“Ensuring standards of performance are met on complaints is a concern for all British Columbians. It should be a concern of the RCMP as well,” said Robert Holmes, Q.C., President of the BCCLA. “It is imperative that the Solicitor General ensure that the RCMP and CPC agree to appropriate performance measures if BC is to enter into a new contract. It shouldn’t take two years to respond to complaints. If the CPC and RCMP are going to allow multi-year delays in complaint investigations, they’re effectively thumbing their noses at those they’re supposed to serve.”

Clayton Alvin Willey died shortly after being removed from the Prince George RCMP detachment by ambulance. He had been Tasered multiple times while hog tied, and had been dragged while hog tied from the back of an RCMP SUV and allowed to drop, full weight, on his head and chest, fracturing his skull and ribs. RCMP video showed Mr. Willey being dragged through the RCMP detachment and receiving multiple Taser applications. The 2003 case rose to prominence again in 2009 when the BCCLA and Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs publicly released details contained on an RCMP surveillance video of the death and called for the release of the video.

“Clayton Alvin Willey’s death is a black mark on the record of service of the RCMP in BC,” noted Holmes. “We want timely investigations and prompt accountability for any who failed to live up to the standards the RCMP is supposed to live by. Instead, we are left knowing that another season’s ice is forming on the Ottawa River and that eight years after Mr. Willey died in 2003, we still have no answers from the force or the Complaints Commissioner whose job it is to uphold the public’s trust.”

Man dies in North Carolina after police taser him for failing to stop riding his bicycle

November 23, 2011
WITN, North Carolina

The State Bureau of Investigation is now looking into the death of a Halifax County man after he was hit with a stun gun. Police say Roger Anthony, 61, was riding his bike along a road in Scotland Neck Monday night when he was ordered by an officer to stop.

Officers had received a call about a man on a bike who fell and may have been drunk.

When Anthony failed to respond to the officer, the policeman shocked Anthony with a stun gun and he fell off his bike. Anthony's family says the disabled man, who suffered from seizures and had trouble hearing, was declared brain dead at Pitt County Memorial Hospital. He died after being taken off life support.

The mayor of Scotland Neck called for North Carolina's State Bureau of Investigation to look into what happened. He says Anthony did not pose a threat.

Wednesday morning an SBI spokeswoman told WITN News they were asked by Scotland Neck police and the district attorney to investigate the death.

The officer involved, who has only been on the force for a month, has been placed on desk duty.

Canadian condolences to the family of Tucson PD officer Henry Fung who died of an apparent heart attack on Tuesday this week, one day after he reportedly "volunteered" to take a taser jolt on Monday for "training" purposes.

The medical examiner must STRONGLY recommend that the taser(s) used on Henry Fung be measured for 'output variance'. As we have learned in Canada, not all tasers perform the same way. Many have tested way outside the safety allowables set by Taser International. The medical examiner (and all the doctors in the world) CANNOT rule out the taser until the shock from the weapon itself has been definitively ruled out. Proper measurement is required.

On CBS News last week, Taser International said that proving the taser did NOT play a role in a person's death is an UNPROVABLE supposition. There's your starting point. Click here: http://bit.ly/tT8iYq

It's notable that no one has reported the duration and number of stuns Officer Fung recieved. Usually when a citizen dies after being shocked by a Taser, he or she is blamed, because they had so-called "excited delirium", were on drugs or had a previous medical history (doesn't everyone have a previous medical history??).

Taser International has been warning about multiple and prolonged stuns only in recent years even though, at the beginning, they told police, policy-makers and the public that the taser was "safe to use on any assailant".

That is NOT what they're saying now. One must wonder if Officer Fung was given an opportunity to read the fine print of the latest Volunteer Waiver Taser International put out.

Read closely and it is ALL there: Tasers CAN CAUSE dangerous and deadly metabolic and cardiac changes. Several "suspects" have died MANY HOURS after taser shocks because of changes brought on by acidosis, which causes the muscles surrounding the heart to fail.

The city of Tucson cannot accept the "averages" Taser International spouts -- according to the original spec sheets, the true PEAK OUTPUT of Tasers varies between 151 and 162 milliamps, when "working properly". Any first year med student can tell you that shocks between 30 to 100 milliamps can KILL. Add to that, the invasive nature of a taser used in 'probe mode' - resistance under the skin is next to NIL.

And another shocking revelation: there are NO electrical safety standards for shocks UNDER the skin. Check with the Underwriters Laboratory, the IEC or Canadian Standards Association and you will quickly confirm this fact.

Taser International has some SERIOUS explaining to do. And you can be sure that their damage control machine is in full swing. I follow the company on TWITTER and they are a company which normally posts several TWEETS per day. They've been ominously silent since the day police officer Henry Fung died.

The Department of Justice ought to investigate how this technology was approved without enough rigorous science being applied.

One pig in 1996 and five dogs in 1999 and no true human trials until years after initial sales, should be alarming to all citizens.

Montpelier Police Chief withdraws request for tasers

November 18, 2011
Times Argus

Montpelier Police Chief Anthony Facos has withdrawn his request that officers be allowed to carry Tasers, and asked that the issue be dropped from further consideration, according to City Manager William Fraser.

"Chief Facos and I continue to believe that tasers could be an important and appropriate tool for the safety of our police officers and citizens. The City Council has been working very hard to find a balance between concerns about the devices and concerns about officer safety. Their sincere dilemma is indicative of the division within the community about this issue. Despite our opinions about tasers, the Chief and I both feel that a positive and productive relationship between the Police Department and our citizens is far more important," Fraser said in a press release.

Mayor Mary Hooper has agreed with the request, the press release says, and the issue will be discontinued

Cop sues Taser after riding the lighting

See also Taser shreds injury reports

November 18, 2011

Andy Butler, a Dallas police officer, filed a lawsuit against Taser International after being willingly zapped with over 50,000 volts of electricity during a Dallas Police Department training session.

The “ride,” which being tasered is often referred to, is what Butler blames for fracturing his back and leaving two metal plates in his neck.
For Butler it has been a “ride” he will never forget.

"I don't think any responsible person would have made that decision, knowing what I know now," Butler tells KDAF.

The 2009 incident required Butler to have surgery to repair three herniated discs in his neck, where one was forcing pressure on his spinal cord. Apparently Butler’s back muscles constricted so tight with the jolt that it crushed his vertebrae.

Butler, now under constant pain, has become a part of a rising number of law enforcement officers across America who are suing Taser International. According to the lawsuits, Taser has fallen short of effectively warning officers and their departments about the dangers of being tasered.

"Taser has known since 2004 that every time an officer is tasered, he is at risk of serious injury or even death," Butler's attorney, Mark Haney, tells KDAF.

Although Dallas PD does not require cops to be tasered, some in law enforcement say its all but a necessity.

"It seemed like a rite of passage, that everybody had to do it," Butler said. Butler admitted that peer pressure also played a significant role in experiencing “five seconds of pure pain.”

Butler adds the waiver he signed from Taser alluded to possible "physical exertion or athletic-type injuries” but failed to mention anything of this magnitude.

“They hint around about it, but they don't just come out and say that 20-40 officers have been injured and these are the kinds of risks you pose, if the department allows officers to be tasered," Butler’s attorney tells reporters.

Now the stun gun maker is counter-suing Butler, claiming he should have known the risks.

In a recent deposition for Butler's lawsuit, the CEO of Taser, Rick Smith, testified that instruction manuals disclose that ten officers have been injured while in Taser training. Smith admitted in his testimony that Taser never made an attempt to have the department put an end to Tasering its officers in training.

According to Taser's website, over 559,000 devices have been sold to more than 16,000 law enforcement and military agencies.

"That is a weapon we use on the public. If we think it is unsafe and harms officers, then I couldn't reasonably deploy those weapons against the public," says Deputy Chief Floyd Simpson, who is the head of the department's policy on Taser training.

Taser still stands by their products and credit the device for saving countless lives by providing police with a nonlethal option when dealing with uncontrollable criminals.

“I’m not saying there’s not a place in the law enforcement for a less-than-lethal option. I think a Taser is better than a 9 mm every time. But police officers need to understand these consequences and limit the risks in training,” Haney adds.