A comment received today from "Gilbert"

I can’t believe the number of Canadian cops and even some coroners and judges who are still accepting Excited Delirium as a ‘cause-of-death’. Neither the CMA or AMA recognize it. Then the Braidwood Inquiry looking into the death of Robert Dziekanski blew the ED idea out of the water, as a concocted concept to help police explain away ‘unintended consequences’ during and after Taser incidents. Have you ever heard of ED mentioned in anything other than Taser-related fatalities?

Mother Jones published an eye-opening piece in 2009, right around the time when Taser International quietly announced in a training bulletin that officers should avoid chest shots because of proximity to the heart. That flies in the face of the claims made by the company a decade earlier, when its executives crowed about Tasers being safe to use on any assailant. Mother Jones reported the manufacturer’s questionable methods of promoting ED to anyone who would listen—mainly police and lawyers- through a second-party organization based in Las Vegas, Nevada! The article is a bit dated now, in that Taser has lost at least one other major product liability case- that being the late 17-year old Daryl Turner, who was stunned twice in the chest by a cop in North Carolina. The Turner family won a $10-million dollar jury judgement, although it was halfed on appeal. Taser was rapped for 'failure to warn' about cardiac risks; these are risks TI executives were told about in 2006 by one of their own scientists after one of their own healthy volunteers suffered a heart attack during a controlled experiment. Luckily a defib was nearby and the volunteer survived. They company kept selling product, only issuing the chest-avoidance warning in late 2009. That case set the legal precedent that Tasers can kill. Commissioner Braidwood concluded that too. And now, if you read the fine print you'll see TI itself is admitting its products can cause cardiac and metabolic changes that can lead to death.

TASER: The Whole Story

October, 15, 2012
http://re-sergeance.net/2012/10/15/taser-the-whole-story/

Dear Zofia,

In memory of Robert and all those who have lost their lives proximal to a TASER.  A promise not forgotten.

Dr. Mike Webster’s Presentation to:
Special Committee to Inquire into the Use of Conducted Energy Weapons
and to Audit Selected Police Complaints
Monday, October 15, from 10:45 to 11:30 a.m.
Douglas Fir Committee Room, Room 226, Parliament Buildings.

Preamble

I would like to thank the committee for inviting me here today. I am a Registered Psychologist (in private practice) that has worked in the area of police psychology for over 30 years. I completed basic police training at the RCMP Training Academy (Depot Division) in 1988. I specialize in the area of crisis management and have experience in the application of force across a broad array of police tasks including: hostage/barricade incidents; kidnappings; incidents of public disorder; and crisis intervention. I have been instrumental in the creation and delivery of crisis intervention, crisis negotiation, and incident command courses from the Canadian Police College (Ottawa, Ontario) to the B.C. Police Academy (New Westminster, B.C.). I have been an adjunct lecturer at the FBI Training Academy. I have consulted internationally and with several law enforcement agencies including: Colombia, Mexico, Singapore, Brazil, the United Arab Emirates, Hungary, Iceland, Sweden, Australia, and Europol. I have consulted operationally at a variety of incidents including: the old BC Penitentiary (hostage takings); Waco, Texas; Gustafsen Lake, B.C.; Jordan, Montana; Ft. Davis, Texas; the G8; the G20; Apex Alpine; and numerous kidnappings from Iraq to Indonesia, and Kashmir to Colombia. I am familiar with both Use of Force Models; the RCMP’s Integrated Model of Incident Management and the National Use of Force Framework. I provided testimony at both phases of the Braidwood Commission of Inquiries.

I assume that your committee invited me here today to comment on my experience in the implementation of Justice Braidwood’s recommendations in the areas of crisis intervention and training; as I have noted, areas of specialty and experience for me. As I was not invited to be a part of that implementation process, I can only make general comment on what has been done by others. I am more than willing to answer any questions you may have in those areas of police work following my presentation. However, as it appears that electro-shock weapons (ESWs) are here to stay, and in order to assist in an informed discussion, and the formulation of future public policy, I would like to address in the meantime a couple of critical concerns. I believe your committee, and the public should be advised of not only recent TASER-related science but also some of the more pertinent contemporary and historical concerns associated with the TASER’s place in Canadian law enforcement. In providing this information I hope to prevent the next generation technology from being so easily accepted and under such compromised circumstances.

Presentation

The BC Government failed its citizens when TASER technology was introduced to the Province. As someone who is trained to construct, conduct, and be critical of research, I was taken aback last week to hear the Assistant Deputy Minister and Director of Police Services cavalierly gloss over the inadequate and flawed process used to approve the use of TASERs in this Province. Those who appreciate the scientific method prefer to regard that process as amateurish, at best, and replete with misrepresentations provided by what appears to have been a seriously compromised policeman/project manager. I would like to elaborate. There was not enough rigorous science applied by the manufacturer to guarantee the safety of the weapon. TASERs were anecdotally not scientifically developed. Universally, public officials failed to verify the safety claims being made by the company and its spokespersons. TASERs were rushed into service by decision makers and police in B.C. and throughout Canada in 1999. The weapon has caused problems for the public and the manufacturer. For example, TASER International is presently engaged in damage control by offering trade-ins to “recall” older, more powerful weapons. (Are you aware that the M-26 model is powered at 26-Watts, the next generation model the X-26 is lower powered, and the newest model the X2 will be even lower? This begs the question as to why the manufacturer would lower the power of the weapon without alerting law enforcement first and providing some explanation). It appears that with the lack of regular and rigorous peer reviewed independent measurement, no policeperson could be sure of the amount of current being emitted from the weapon at any given deployment; for unlike breathalysers, defibrillators, and radar guns, the police do not routinely measure the output of their TASERs.

The CBC had fifty randomly chosen police TASERs tested independently in a lab in Chicago in 2008. They discovered that not all TASERs perform in the same way, as reflected in their “output variance”. Electro-shock weapons manufacturers readily admit that the output of these devices can vary due to factors beyond their control.

According to the Canadian blog “Truth-Not-Tasers”, that has been tracking the death toll, approximately 750 people have died proximal to TASER use in North America since the higher-powered M-26 was introduced. The lower powered 5-Watt system was what was field tested in Canada, by the Victoria Police Department in 1999, in the “field study” mentioned by Mr. Pecknold. The policeman in charge initially said he had concerns about the new, soon-to-be-available higher powered 26-Watt weapons and that more research was needed before he could recommend them. Yet a few months later this was exactly the model of TASER that his police department purchased. In his final report (“An Independent Evaluation of Conducted Energy Weapons”) there was no evidence that the 26-Watt system had ever been subjected to any controlled research. Yet, the higher powered 26-Watt system is what our police services decided to buy and deploy. The medical safety studies promised by this policeman/project manager were never produced. Contrary to Mr. Pecknold’s statement of last week, the people of BC received no medical evidence assuring them of the safety of TASERs prior to them being brought into service.

Despite the glaring omissions of the 26-Watt system, and safety concerns about it in his final report, this same Victoria policeman wrote in both of his reports that TASERs had been “over-studied”. In fact, this was not true. It is widely known that TASER spent only $14,000 in research and development when it shocked a single pig in 1996 to develop the waveform and then 5 dogs in 1999 to further test the weapon. The results of these tests were not published, or reviewed, by third party peers. These results are not even included in TASER International’s own Medical Compendium.

The higher powered technology was never subjected to independent, impartial, rigorous research prior to being deployed throughout Canada. The policeman who claimed that TASERs were “medically safe”, not being scientifically or medically trained, was not qualified to make such a judgement.

This same policeman claimed that TASERs met electrical safety standards as set by the Underwriters Laboratory (UL) and the International Electro-technical Commission (IEC). (The Canadian Standards Association (CSA) was not mentioned). This policeman’s claim of electrical safety was untrue because the devices have never been tested by these safety standards bodies. You will note that TASERs do not bear certification marks from any of these organizations, as other electrical products sold, and used, in Canada must. The fact is, the Canadian public still has an untested, unregulated electrical device in the hands of police; this, in violation of the Electrical Safety Standards Act, that says no electrical devices are to be sold or used without a proper certification mark. The TASER carries no such mark, even though it emits electrical current into the body. Remarkably this policeman/project manager’s report, replete with what appear to be false claims, was vetted by TASER International and the CPRC; and neither saw fit to make any amendments. Today these claims are no longer made.

Although somewhat technical, it is well to recognize that the dangers lie in the peaks of the current, even though TASER International prefers to use “averages” in its description of the weapon’s electrical characteristics. It is medically uncontroversial that electrical currents between 70 – 100 milliamps can kill. Following TASER International’s original specification sheets, the peak currents of the M-26 and X-26 models are obscured in average calculations. These weapons, at peak current, that is 162 and 151 milliamps respectively, are powerful enough to kill as suggested by Commissioner Braidwood at the conclusion of his Commission of Inquiries. Moreover, according to the IEC-479 standard, shocks of 151 to 162 milliamps over five seconds can stimulate the heart adversely in 50% of the population that receives the shock. Today the electrical output of these weapons does not appear in the manufacturer’s product specification sheets.

This same Victoria Police Department member was then seconded to manage the joint (RCMP and CPRC) “Conducted Energy Weapons Evaluation Project”. It was not a study into health and safety effects, as one may have hoped, but simply a cataloging of the effects of the harsh Canadian winter on the functioning of the weapons.

It was later discovered and reported by the Vancouver Sun, that this policeman had an undisclosed financial relationship with TASER International. This was revealed when he testified at a wrongful death lawsuit in 2005. The family of Robert Bagnell was suing the Vancouver Police Department after Mr. Bagnell was shocked multiple times and died in the downtown east side.

The policeman in question was asked to testify as he had been brought over from Victoria by the Vancouver Police Department as an “independent” investigator into Mr. Bagnell’s death. When pressed by lawyer Cameron Ward, the policeman admitted he had done undisclosed freelance work for TASER International.

On the surface it appears that this policeman, at some point in 2000, tasked with evaluating the technology for BC (and ultimately the rest of Canada), was quietly being given stock in TASER International while he lead Master Taser Trainer Courses for the manufacturer with other police services. TASER International Chairman Tom Smith told a federal all-party subcommittee, looking into TASER stock options, and televised nation-wide on the Parliamentary channel, that stock options were given to this officer for designing a holster. (Ironically, the holster in question was for the M-26 model, the very weapon this officer claimed to be uncertain of). There are those, who understand the objectivity of the scientific method, who would describe the receipt of payment, in whole or in kind, from TASER International, while evaluating the safety of its products for the BC Government as a hopeless conflict of interest. Ujjal Dosanjh, who had given the Victoria Police Department permission to field test the 5-Watt system in 1999, told CTV News that he felt he had been deceived. He was concerned that the policeman, in question, had failed to disclose his relationship with TASER International and, worse still, that false claims were made in the various versions of his so-called “independent evaluation”. This policeman remains on the job today with the Victoria Police Department and has never been held accountable by decision makers for making these misrepresentations. Mr. Dosanjh has said that if he knew then what he knows now, he would never have given TASERs the go-ahead.

Also related to the absence of independent, scientific evidence, American authorities allowed TASERs to be deployed despite significant “data gaps”, and other concerns raised in three key US government reports. Canadian law enforcement was unaware of, or worse ignored, these over sights. One of these critical oversights involved not questioning, TASER International for placing a conformity mark on their M-26 brochure. This mark (i.e. CE) is used to indicate conformity with standards necessary for a product to enter the European Economic Area. The European Community did not have, nor even have today, any standard for electrical safety that would apply to the M26 ADVANCED TASER. In sum, there was a glaring lack of due diligence undertaken by authorities when these weapons were first introduced. As a result, approximately eight people have died in British Columbia proximal to their use.

Times Colonist reporter Rob Shaw has said that your Special Committee will be considering “the scientific research into the medical risks to persons against whom conducted energy weapons are deployed”. This is encouraging as there is much that even Commissioner Braidwood did not uncover. Not one Canadian government agency or department including Health Canada, Public Safety Canada or the RCMP bothered to verify TASER International’s medical and safety claims. The RCMP even used photo-copied TASER promotional information in its first TASER report in 2000.Remarkably, law enforcement in Canada is still able to use TASERs in “probe mode”, when there is no electrical safety standard for invasive shocks; that is, electrical current introduced below the skin.

One Vancouver journalist approached the IEC, the UL, and the CSA and learned that the standard they use to measure safety thresholds is for shocks on the skin, not subcutaneous shocks. All these laboratories assert that we know so little about the effects of electricity below the skin they could not, in good faith, certify these weapons with one of their safety marks; like you find on your electric shaver, toaster, or hair dryer.

Contrary to Dr. Lu’s assertion, last week before this committee, there has been important TASER related research since 2008. Regarding cardiac risks, a study published this year, in the Journal of Circulation, by Dr. Douglas P. Zipes, cardiologist and professor emeritus at Indiana University, clearly demonstrates that the electric shock delivered to the chest by a Taser can lead to cardiac arrest and sudden death. “This is no longer arguable”, said Dr. Byron Lee, a cardiologist and director of the electrophysiology laboratory at the University of California, San Francisco. “This is a scientific fact”. With respect, the question before your committee should now focus on whether the risk of sudden death from a TASER shock is low enough to warrant wide spread use of the weapon by police in British Columbia.

It seems at this point governments and/or police decision makers don’t really want to know, or admit, they made grave errors by not adequately verifying TASER International’s safety claims. Presently in the U.S., courts are being asked to consider for the first time, police use of TASERs. No longer are TASER cases based strictly upon product liability; the cases now before the courts are different. These cases challenge the police persons who deployed the weapon. The question, in light of current evidence, is now “when is electrical force excessive force?” Appellate Judge Mary Schroeder has noted, “One could argue that the use of painful, permanently scarring weaponry on non-threatening individuals, who were not trying to escape, should have been known to be excessive by an informed police officer”. This may give you some insight into the “major and consistent decrease” in TASER use mentioned by the Deputy Minister last week before this committee. It is only a matter of time before cases of this nature work their way into the Canadian legal experience.

In contrast to Dr. Lu’s statement that “. . . TASERs are generally shown to be relatively safe”, TASER International’s own Voluntary Exposure and Liability Release Form includes a long list of alarming known and possible side effects that contradict its original safety claims and confirms what critics have been saying for over a decade. Here are only a few of those known and possible side effects. The company cautions that the weapons ”. . . have not been scientifically tested on pregnant women, the infirm, the elderly, small children, and low body mass persons…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 confirms experts’ beliefs that the TASER can capture the heart and alter its rhythms in healthy adults. TASER International then goes on to shift the responsibility for their weapons onto the user by recommending that “…all TASER … users conduct their own research, analysis, and evaluation”. Wouldn’t you think a manufacturer would want to be able to assure its customers of its product’s safety before it went to, or even after it was on the market?

A final concern that should be of interest to this committee involves the TASER tester, “Verus One”, being put forward by the B.C. Police Services. Police Services has accepted a test protocol developed by Andy Adler of Carlton University, Ottawa’s MPB Electronics, and Datrends Systems of Richmond, B.C., despite the authors themselves admitting this protocol is far from comprehensive or independent.

The Verus One actually tests to determine whether an ESW is operating within TASER International’s specifications. The Verus One does not determine the electrical energy delivered into a subject. The 600 Ohms resistance value being used in the formula by the B.C. Police Services actually comes from TASER International’s chief engineer Max Nerheim via Adler et.al. According to a study by the American Heart Association (AHA) the resistance for a trans-thoracic shock could be as low as 25 Ohms. So the suggested 600 Ohms indicates a base resistance that would appear to be an artificially high value that does not necessarily reflect the reality of all subjects. When CBC did it’s testing in 2008 and found a 12 percent failure rate, it used a previous test protocol employing 250 Ohms of resistance, which it got from TASER International. The company has since recommended raising the resistance level to 600 Ohms but, I have found no literature from the manufacturer that has offered the scientific references or rationale for doing so.

Several significant considerations should be pointed out concerning the Verus One:

1. It does not determine electrical safety of ESWs

2. It only tests to determine whether ESWs are “in tolerance” or “out of tolerance”.

3. A test result of “in tolerance” does not indicate or imply that injury or death will not result from use of the tested ESW, or that the tested ESW will incapacitate a person against whom the ESW may be deployed.

4. It does not measure the electrical energy delivered into a body (i.e. invasive shocks).

5. It also does not disclose scientific references or rationale as to why 600 Ohms is identified as the measurement base vs. a range of resistances.

In closing it is worth mentioning that the IEC and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the US are presently developing a standardized method of measurement for ESWs. This standard will result in the IEC 62792 ESW measurement method. Moreover, it is my understanding that no Canadian law enforcement agencies have even bothered to investigate, nor has Datrend disclosed the issue of Intellectual Property Rights regarding “Verus One”. This is significant as a lack of Intellectual Property Rights could cost Canadian law enforcement, and the Canadian taxpayer, a significant amount of money due to Intellectual Property and licensing issues. Based upon these concluding statements, I would strongly urge care and caution be exercised before purchasing any ESW analyzer.

Taser recommendations to be examined by British Columbia

June 13, 2012
Rob Shaw, timescolonist.com

 

The use of Tasers by police officers will be put under the microscope by a special committee of provincial politicians.

 

Eight government and Opposition MLAs were quietly appointed to study the issue, amid a flurry of other business on the last day of the spring session of the legislature.

The MLAs will focus on recommendations made by Justice Thomas Braidwood on Tasers, as well as how those recommendations have been implemented throughout the province, said Murray Coell, the Liberal MLA for Saanich North and the Islands and the committee convener.

“The direction we were given [by the legislature] was basically to look at the recommendations of Justice Braidwood, that’s the starting point,” Coell said.

MLAs will also consider “the scientific research into the medical risks to persons against whom conducted-energy weapons are deployed,” according to the committee’s terms of reference.

The politicians have the power to call witnesses, gather evidence and travel throughout the province, though it’s not known to what extent they will exercise those abilities.

Coell said it is reasonable to assume that police officials would be called to give evidence.

The first meeting is scheduled for July 18, and the committee must produce a report within a year.
Braidwood released recommendations on the use of and training surrounding Tasers in 2009.

The provincial government accepted them all and, in late 2011, approved new mandatory policing standards for Taser use, as well as crisis intervention and de-escalation techniques.

The Braidwood commission then went on to examine the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski, who died after police repeatedly Tasered him while restraining him face down on the floor at Vancouver International Airport on Oct. 14, 2007.

The video of the incident sparked international criticism, and Braidwood ultimately said the actions of the four RCMP officers involved were shameful and not justified.

The officers have since been charged with perjury, and B.C. has launched a civilian Independent Investigations Office to handle police-involved serious injury and death cases.

“Clearly, given the death of Robert Dziekanski, given the serious concerns raised about the Taser … the committee has the chance to bring forward some good recommendations,” said NDP justice critic Leonard Krog, who is also a committee member.

The MLAs will also conduct a random audit of the police misconduct cases handled by B.C.’s Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner.

Coell said the government is doing “due diligence” in examining the office’s performance.

Same video analyst (former Vancouver cop) worked on Robert Dziekanski and Spokane Otto Zehm police perjury deaths

Former Vancouver police officer Grant Fredericks has become an “expert” in analysing police videos.

His website description says:

“Grant is a former police officer and coordinator of the Vancouver Police Forensic Video Unit in Canada. He is an adjunct instructor of Forensic Video Analysis at the National Digital Multimedia Evidence Processing Lab at the University of Indianapolis and is a contract instructor at the FBI National Academy in Quantico, VA..”  http://www.forensicvideoexpert.com/

In the Robert Dziekanski case, he was brought in by counsel for  Constable Bentley and testified in the Braidwood case that Dziekanski moved toward the officers. His qualification to make this conclusion was shown to be very weak and although he descibed it as “photogrammetry” he was merely counting pixels. He didn’t come out of the Braidwood testimony well:

http://www.braidwoodinquiry.ca/hearings_transcripts/BraidwoodHearingsMay25-09.pdf

Braidwood’s conclusions are listed in this Georgia Strait article:

http://www.straight.com/article-489316/vancouver/did-police-chief-jim-chu-roll-dice-choosing-former-vancouver-cop-analyze-riot-evidence

Otto Zehm:   Now he is shown under questionable circumstances in Spokane’s Otto Zehm killing in 2006:

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/apr/08/transcripts-reveal-officers-were-given-three-days/

Video expert paid by city, working for feds

More arguments are expected April 16 as attorneys for Thompson continue to press U.S. District Court Judge Fred Van Sickle to grant the decorated former police officer a new trial.

Van Sickle indefinitely postponed Thompson’s Jan. 27 sentencing after the judge was contacted in December by forensic video expert Grant Fredericks, who claimed that federal prosecutors misrepresented the conclusions he would have expressed had he been called to testify at Thompson’s trial.

In response, Assistant U.S. Attorney Aine Ahmed has filed reams of documents and grand jury transcripts that refute Fredericks’ claims. The documents also show Fredericks wasn’t truthful about how he was brought into the investigation.

Fredericks, as late as last month, said under oath that he was first contacted by a county prosecutor to analyze the convenience store’s surveillance video. But emails from 2006 show Fredericks first contacted a Spokane police officer and offered his services in “helping” show that Zehm was using a 2-liter Diet Pepsi bottle as a weapon.

The allegations against Fredericks, who did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment, include providing “patent inaccuracies or inconsistencies” in two previous cases where Fredericks – a former Vancouver, B.C., police officer – provided testimony in defense of other officers’ actions. In one of those cases, four Canadian officers now face perjury charges based on assertions put forth by Fredericks.

The documents also, for the first time, show Fredericks was billing Treppiedi, the assistant city attorney, even after Fredericks completed his work for the city and started meeting with federal officials.

Because of a backlog of cases at the FBI lab in Quantico, Va., federal prosecutors hired Fredericks to do a second video analysis, where he changed many of the assertions he provided the city. Federal prosecutors later found out that much of the work Fredericks did for the FBI was being funneled back to Treppiedi.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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

B.C. won't hold inquest into death of Robert Dziekanski

October 6, 2011
CTV News

VICTORIA — There will be no inquest into the death of Robert Dziekanski, who died after being stunned multiple times by a Taser during a confrontation with Mounties at Vancouver International Airport in October of 2007.

Chief B.C. Coroner Lisa Lapointe says her office had planned to hold an inquest after the police investigation was complete, but now she says it's not in the public interest because a full public inquiry has been held into the case.

However, a coroner's report on the death will still be released to the public.

Retired B.C. Appeal Court Justice Thomas Braidwood conducted a two-part inquiry into the case, reviewing the death of Dziekanski and the use of stun guns in general.

In his final report, Braidwood rejected the testimony of the four Mounties involved, who said they felt threatened by Dziekanski, ruling they could not have believed he posed a danger to anybody.

The Mounties have since been charged with perjury.

BC Cops Opt for Spin Rather than Transparency - RCMP author of Taser e-mail now advising BC on police accountability

September 2, 2011
BCCLA

British Columbia Civil Liberties Association has confirmed that the police officer whose e-mail brought the Robert Dziekanski inquiry to a halt for months is now advising the provincial government on the formation of B.C.’s new police accountability body.

Dick Bent, along with another senior RCMP officer Russ Nash, has been hired on a contract that will pay him as much as $70,000 over six months (including expenses) to “make recommendations on a strategic and operational framework” for the new Independent Investigation Office.

“We could understand why the province might bring in the RCMP to provide this advice if better and more independent advice were not available elsewhere,” said Robert Holmes, Q.C., President of the BCCLA.

“But there are civilian bodies across the world that do this kind of work every day, and have for years. Does it really make sense to have the RCMP setting this body up when that force’s failures are the reason the IIO exists in the first place?”

One of the key issues in the Dziekanski Taser inquiry was whether or not the officers had appropriately evaluated the situation at the airport in advance of using the Taser. In June of 2009, an e-mail from then RCMP Chief Supt. Dick Bent to assistant Commissioner Al McIntyre titled “Media strategy – release of the YVR video” read, in part, as follows:

Finally, spoke to Wayne and he indicated that the members did not articulate that they saw the symptoms of excited delirium, but instead had discussed the response en route and decided that if he did not comply they would go to CEW [Conducted Energy Weapon/Taser].

Commissioner Braidwood said he was “obviously appalled” at the late disclosure of such a critical e-mail message, three weeks after the last witness had testified, and almost four months after the four officers involved had testified. No explanation was ever offered about why the e-mail did not surface except that federal lawyers had “overlooked” the key document accidentally. The e-mail shut the inquiry down for three months when it surfaced.

“We suggest that the Provincial government stop asking the police how to investigate the police, because B.C.’s police have demonstrated time and again that they cannot do it effectively and in a manner that maintains public confidence,” said Holmes.

“Instead, the Province should be reaching out to Ontario’s Special Investigation Unit, the Independent Police Complaints Commission in England, the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, and the South Australia Police Complaints Authority, among others.”

Mounties in Dziekanski case to appear in court

August 31, 2011
CBC News

Four Mounties charged with perjury during the inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver airport in 2007 are set to appear in court in Vancouver on Wednesday.


Constables Bill Bentley, Kwesi Millington, Gerry Rundell and Cpl. Benjamin Robinson are accused of lying about their actions when they confronted Dziekanski and stunned him multiple times with a Taser.

Dziekanski, 41, died in the secure arrivals area of Vancouver International Airport on Oct. 14, 2007, moments after he was shot with RCMP stun guns. His death ignited an international debate about the police use of stun guns.

The Mounties told commissioner Thomas Braidwood they feared for their safety when Dziekanski picked up a stapler, but Braidwood rejected their testimony in his final report.

No charges were ever laid against the four Mounties in Dziekanski's death, but a special prosecutor approved the charges of perjury.

Mounties - taser charges 2 month delay

CFJC TV
Kamloops

Both the Crown and the Defence asked for the case against 4 RCMP officers to be adjounred until the end of August. The officers, Constables Bill Bentley, Kwesi Millington and Gerry Rundell as well as Corporal Benjamin Robinson, are all facing perjury charges in connection with the multiple tasering and death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver airport.

The four testified they feared for their safety when they confornted the agitated Dziekansi at Vancouver airport. But Commissioner Thomas Braidwood dismissed their stories.

Independent, civilian office to investigate B.C. police officers accused of wrongdoing

May 17, 2011
The Canadian Press

VICTORIA — RCMP officers in British Columbia accused of serious wrongdoing will have their cases examined by an independent investigations office under legislation tabled Tuesday by the B.C. government.

The new office will be led by a civilian who has never worked as a police officer and will be responsible for investigating serious criminal allegations against officers in municipal forces as well as the RCMP.

"B.C.'s office will investigate a broader range of police-involved incidents than Ontario's model and be more independent than Alberta's, reporting to the attorney general rather than the minister responsible for policing," Solicitor General Shirley Bond told the legislature in introducing the bill.

Bond said the legislation is the fulfillment of the key recommendation from retired judge Thomas Braidwood's report into the October 2007 death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver's airport.

Braidwood and RCMP officials were in the legislature's public gallery to witness the tabling of the bill.

Investigators with the Independent Investigation Office will have the same status and powers as police to conduct criminal investigations into death or serious harm or other incidents involving officers.

The office's director will have the ability to appoint a civilian monitor with access to all the information on an investigation and with the ability to raise concerns to the director about the integrity of an investigation, the government said in background information.

Those who work as investigators for the office will be appointed by the office's director. In the early going, ex-police officers can be hired, but they can't have actively worked as a B.C. police officer in the previous five years.

Long-term, the goal is to progress to a fully civilian investigative staff and the Independent Investigation Office will face a review before Jan. 1, 2015, to determine whether it is on the road to meeting that goal.

"It is critical that British Columbians have confidence in our police and that the police are accountable to them," said Premier Christy Clark.

"This legislation is an historic step for policing in B.C. and will strengthen public faith in the dedicated officers who work so hard to keep our families safe."

Introduction of the legislation, which has been anticipated for months, was welcomed by critics who have long complained about police investigating themselves in such incidents.

Robert Holmes, president of the B.C. Civil Liberties, said he was "very pleased" to hear the government was acting on Braidwood's "critically important recommendations."

Officer who fired Taser at Dziekanski to plead not guilty

May 7, 2011
Petti Fong, Toronto Star

VANCOUVER—The RCMP officer who fired the Taser at Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski at the Vancouver airport will plead not guilty to perjury charges, his lawyer said Saturday.

Nearly four years after the fatal encounter between Dziekanski and four Mounties, perjury charges are recommended against the officers.

An earlier RCMP investigation into the officers’ actions led crown counsel to determine potential criminal charges for manslaughter or assault with a deadly weapon would unlikely lead to a conviction.

But an independent investigation by a special prosecutor appointed by the provincial government late Friday recommended charges of perjury against the four officers.

Ravi Hira, the lawyer for Const. Kwesi Millington, the Mountie who fired the Taser, said the recommended charges were unexpected.

“Naturally my client is disappointed that the special prosecutor is proceeding with the charge,” Hira said Saturday. “He will be pleading not guilty and he will be answering the evidence as it unfolds.”

Special prosecutor Richard Peck concluded following his investigation that pursuing charges related to the physical interaction between Dziekanski and the four officers on Oct. 14, 2007 which led to the Taser being fired would not be successful.

But Peck did recommend charges of perjury against Consts. Millington, Gerry Rundel, Bill Bentley and Cpl. Monty Robinson. The maximum penalty, which is extremely rare, is 14 years for a conviction.

Each of the four officers at the public inquiry testified under oath that they felt physically threatened by Dziekanski, 40, who was unarmed.

In his report of the inquiry’s findings released last year, Commissioner Thomas Braidwood found that the officer who fired the Taser was not justified in using the weapon and all of the officers offered “unbelievable after-the-fact rationalizations.” The officers made “deliberate misrepresentations for the purpose of justifying their action.”

The retired judge also said he disbelieved the officers’ claims that there was no discussion among them about the incident before being questioned by internal homicide investigators within the RCMP.

Braidwood said Dziekanski, who did not speak English, was compliant and did not move toward any of the officers. He concluded the officers did not honestly believe they were being attacked when the decision was made to fire the Taser.

Millington, who now works for an Ontario detachment, testified that the officers had to wrestle Dziekanski to the ground when video showed that he fell after the first shot was fired from the Taser.

The incident was captured on video taken by bystander Paul Pritchard. It showed the RCMP officers had fired the Taser within 30 seconds of first arriving at the scene of a 911 call about a disturbance in the international arrivals area at the airport.

Dziekanski was on his first-ever flight arriving in Vancouver from Poland. His mother Zofia Cisowski was to meet him at the airport. But because of miscommunications, Dziekanski and his mother never found each other and he was left stranded for nearly 10 hours without any assistance.

The RCMP has apologized to Cisowski and given her an undisclosed financial settlement.

In a statement, Cisowski said the RCMP should not have investigated itself.

“It has been a long and painful ordeal over the last three-and-a-half years of delay and misinformation by the RCMP,” Cisowski said. “I hope that justice will finally be achieved in the death of my son.”

Mounties in Dziekanski death face perjury charges

CTV BRITISH COLUMBIA
With files from CTV British Columbia's Peter Grainger

The four Mounties involved in the Taser death of Robert Dziekanski in October 2007 will face criminal charges.

B.C. special prosecutor Richard Peck is recommending laying perjury charges against all of the officers related to misinformation given during the independent inquiry into Dziekanski's death, the provincial Criminal Justice Branch confirmed Friday.

Peck's recommendations will now be forwarded to the provincial attorney general's office for review.

The veteran lawyer ruled out proceeding with any criminal charges linked to the officer's conduct at the airport the night Dziekanski died.

"Mr. Peck has concluded that there is no substantial likelihood of conviction in relation to any potential charges arising from the circumstances of the physical altercation with Mr. Dziekanski or the subsequent investigation into his death," the CJB wrote in a statement issued late Friday in response to inquiries by CTV News.

Dziekanski's mother, Zofia Cisowski, said the special prosecutor's report will be released within two weeks.

She said charges are something she's been waiting for since the death of her son.

"It is very important to me, Robert's case. It is my life now," she said.

The province appointed Peck last year in response to the blunt assessment of inquiry commissioner Thomas Braidwood that the four Mounties deliberately misled investigators about what happened during their confrontation with Dziekanski at the Vancouver International Airport.

The public inquiry also stated that the officers were not justified in their use of force against the Polish immigrant, who did not speak any English.

Braidwood said Dziekanski's death, which was captured on a now-infamous amateur video, "shocked and repulsed people around the world" and the four officers acted improperly at nearly every step of the brief and tragic encounter.

Cisowski filed a wrongful death lawsuit in 2009 against the RCMP and others, but settled the case after receiving a public apology from the force and an undisclosed financial settlement.

Her lawyer said the officers could face charges in Dziekanski's home country of Poland if they are not charged in Canada.

"Justice Braidwood said that this was shameful conduct on the part of the police and that people were shocked and repulsed around the world. We're hoping that our institutions work," Bill Sundhu said.

The Braidwood Inquiry cost B.C. taxpayers almost $4.5 million.

One of the officers involved, Cpl. Benjamin (Monty) Robinson, is currently suspended from the RCMP and will soon stand trial for obstruction of justice following an unrelated fatal car crash in October 2008.

Robinson failed two separate police breathalyzer tests after hitting motorcyclist Orion Hutchinson with his Jeep.

Const. Gerry Rundel, the first officer to take the stand at the official inquiry into Dziekanski's death, is currently on desk duty in Nanaimo.

Const. Bill Bentley, who had been working at the Vancouver airport for just one month when Dziekanski died, is working for an RCMP security detail in Toronto.

The constable who fired the Taser, Zwesi Millington, is working for a commercial crime section in Milton, Ontario.

Millington's lawyer, Ravi Hira, said that his client will fight the charges.

"Naturally my client is disappointed that the special prosecutor is proceeding with charges," Hira told CTV News on Friday. "He will be pleading not guilty and plans a vigorous defence."

RCMP refused to comment on the case Friday.

MEDIA ADVISORY May 6, 2011 – Re: CRIMINAL CHARGES LAID AGAINST RCMP OFFICERS - YVR (ROBERT DZIEKANSKI)

CANADIAN CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT (CCRM)
www.civilrightsmovement.ca

MEDIA ADVISORY May 6, 2011 – Re: CRIMINAL CHARGES LAID AGAINST RCMP OFFICERS - YVR (ROBERT DZIEKANSKI)

Issued by Zofia Cisowski, Mother of Robert Dziekanski:

I am pleased that the Special Prosecutor has announced criminal charges against RCMP officers involved in the death of my son, Robert Dziekanski, at Vancouver Airport in October 2007.

It has been a long and painful ordeal over the last 3 ½ years of delay and misinformation by the RCMP. The RCMP should not be investigating itself. I and thousands of others, especially through CCRM Petition had urged the appointment of a Special Independent Prosecutor to review the evidence and recommend charges. The Special Prosecutor has acted against the testimony of the RCMP Officers. Police officers are not above the law and I will await the verdict of the Courts. I hope that justice will finally be achieved in the death of my son Robert Dziekanski.

I am very grateful to Sima Ashrafinia and especially Paul Pritchard and his determination in seeking release of the video that showed what really happened to my son. I would also like to express my appreciation to Justice Braidwood and his Inquiry. His Report resulted in the government finally appointing a Special Prosecutor. I met with the Honourable Barry Penner, Attorney General of British Columbia, on April 21, 2011 and urged him to implement ALL of Justice Braidwood’s recommendations. This is vitally necessary so that no other mother should have to needlessly lose and mourn a child in the manner I have and so that the public can trust and have confidence in the police and operation of justice in British Columbia. I will continue to watch whether our lawmakers fully implement meaningful and proper changes as recommended by Justice Braidwood.

For further contact with me, please call Zygmunt Riddle (604) 868-7070 and for further information please call B. William Sundhu (lawyer) at 250-574-2124.

Zygmunt Riddle
zriddle@shaw.ca

EDITORIAL: Foot-dragging on Braidwood

April 16, 2011
Times Colonist

It's wrong to jump to conclusions about the RCMP tasering of an 11-year-old boy in Prince George. But it is not too soon to raise concerns -again -about the way the incident is being investigated.

The RCMP has provided almost no information about the incident. It's known the boy was in the care of the Ministry of Children and Families, in a group home. He allegedly stabbed a 37-year-old man and went to a nearby residence. RCMP officers responded. When the boy emerged, an officer tasered him.

All this happened late in the afternoon on Thursday, April 7. But it took three days for officers from the West Vancouver police department to arrive in Prince George and begin investigating.

That's unacceptable. The sooner witnesses are interviewed, the more accurate the information -and the sooner public questions are answered.

The case also highlights the provincial government's failure to act on a key recommendation of the Braidwood inquiry into Robert Dziekanski's Taser death.

Last June, Braidwood called for the creation of an independent unit, staffed by civilians, to investigate policerelated incidents involving death or serious harm.

The government rejected the recommendation, but then attorney general Mike de Jong did commit to having a "civilian-led unit" in place with 12 months.

That's less than Braidwood considered necessary to ensure independent oversight and restore public confidence. But it is better than the approach that served the public so poorly in the deaths of Dziekanski and Majencio Camaso, killed by Saanich police.

Solicitor General Shirley Bond says the commitment will not be met. The unit is now to be in place by the end of the year.

The government professed to have learned from the Braidwood inquiry. Its failure to meet its own deadline on such a critical recommendation raises doubts.

Taser incident shows pitfalls of police investigating police, inquiry chief says

April 10, 2011
JAMES KELLER, Globe and Mail

The case of an 11-year-old boy who was stunned with an RCMP taser in British Columbia is yet another reminder that police shouldn't be investigating themselves, says the head of a wide-ranging public inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski.

The Mounties have asked West Vancouver police to investigate what happened when the boy was jolted with a taser in Prince George last Thursday.

The RCMP said the boy was considered a suspect in the stabbing of 37-year-old man, although neither the Mounties nor the West Vancouver police have explained what prompted an officer to fire the taser, what other options were used first, or whether the boy was holding a weapon when he was stunned.

Former appeal court judge Thomas Braidwood, who oversaw two sets of public hearings following Dziekanski's 2007 death at Vancouver's airport, said the case underscores his call for a civilian-led body to investigate the conduct of police.

“The most significant and important weapon the arsenal of any police force is public support, and the way to get public support is to have an independent body investigate situations like that,” Mr. Braidwood said in an interview Sunday.

“If the other tribunal is not in place, then I can see that [calling in the West Vancouver police] is the way it would have to be, but I don't agree that is the correct solution, because there is a camaraderie and other matters that exist between police forces – and indeed, so there should be, they have to support each other – so it doesn't quite go far enough.”

Mr. Braidwood was appointed to examine what happened when four RCMP officers confronted Mr. Dziekanski – a Polish immigrant who was agitated, confused and didn't speak English – at Vancouver's airport in October, 2007. Within seconds of their arrival, the officers stunned Mr. Dziekanski multiple times with a taser, and he died shortly after.

Mr. Braidwood first conducted hearings into the broad issues surrounding taser use, and later examined Mr. Dziekanski's death in detail.

In his report into Mr. Dziekanski's death, he called on the B.C. government to create an independent body to investigate cases involving police conduct, similar to agencies in place in Ontario and Alberta.

The provincial government has since pledged to create such a body and the RCMP has promised to use it in cases involving its own officers, but it has so far not materialized.

Mr. Braidwood said he's still confident the province will follow through.

“They accepted all of the recommendations, so I'm very pleased with them about that,” said Mr. Braidwood. “I just wish they'd hurry up.”

Mr. Braidwood declined to comment about the specifics of the Prince George case.

While his reports didn't make any recommendations about the use of tasers on youth, one of them said children, because of their small size, could be at an elevated risk from a taser jolt.

Mr. Braidwood's 2009 report on taser use in B.C. also concluded a taser jolt can be deadly in certain rare cases, and called for tighter restrictions on their use. That finding prompted Taser International to challenge Mr. Braidwood's findings in court, but a judge ruled against the company.

The document noted only two police forces in the province – Victoria and Saanich – had policies advising offers to avoid using tasers on “very young” suspects, though that term wasn't defined. The RCMP did not have such a policy when Mr. Braidwood issued his report, and no one from the force was available to comment Sunday about whether that's changed.

A separate report released last year by the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP identified 194 cases between 2002 and 2009 in which the force deployed tasers on subjects aged 13 to 17, including two 13-year-olds. None were as young as 11.

As for the incident in Prince George, Simon Fraser University criminologist David MacAlister said the “extremely young age” of the boy adds to the questions the investigation must answer – especially to address the public controversy it has already generated.

“To hear that somebody as young as 11 was on the receiving end of a big jolt came as a bit of a surprise,” said Mr. MacAlister, who stressed it was impossible to make any conclusions about the officers' conduct without knowing exactly what happened.

“What were the police thinking? What alternative responses were they contemplating? You have to wonder what happened in the situation to merit the use of a taser.”

B.C.’s representative for children and youth is considering launching her own investigation.