WELCOME to TRUTH ... not TASERS

You may have arrived here via a direct link to a specific post. To see the most recent posts, click HERE.

Showing posts with label dr. mark kroll. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dr. mark kroll. Show all posts

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Defense experts begin testimony in Taser death trial in Winnfield

Jerry Glas, one of the attorneys defending former Winnfield Police Officer Scott Nugent against manSLAUGHTER, represents Taser International.

"Expert witness" Mark Kroll, Taser shareholder, serves on the corporate board of Taser and has been paid more than $800,000 over the past three years as he has been used as a witness in cases involving Tasers

"Expert witness" Hugh Calkins is a paid consultant for TASER International and sits on one of their Boards.

Taser International is apparently paying for their appearance at the trial.

Renowned New York City medical examiner Michael Baden testified that Pikes, 21, died from cardiac arrest suffered from the repeated Taser shocks. "He was healthy. He was Tasered. He died," Baden testified. "There was no other reason for his death."


October 28, 2010
Bret H. McCormick, The Town Talk

WINNFIELD -- The defense team in the manslaughter trial of former Winnfield Police Officer Scott Nugent rolled out its first two expert witnesses Wednesday in an attempt to convince the jury that Nugent was not responsible for the death of Barron "Scooter" Pikes.

Nugent, 24, is accused by prosecutors of using a Taser on Pikes, also known as Barron Collins, "eight or nine times," which they say led to Pikes' death following his arrest on an outstanding felony drug warrant on Jan. 17, 2008.

The two expert witnesses -- one who took the stand in the Winn Parish Courthouse and the other who appeared via a videotaped deposition -- attempted to poke holes in the testimony of one of the prosecution's key witnesses.

That witness, renowned New York City medical examiner Michael Baden, testified earlier that Pikes, 21, died from cardiac arrest suffered from the repeated Taser shocks. "He was healthy. He was Tasered. He died," Baden testified. "There was no other reason for his death."

Mark Kroll, a biomedical engineering professor at the University of Minnesota whom the defense submitted as an expert in bioelectricity, and Dr. Hugh Calkins, a cardiology professor at Johns Hopkins University, both disputed Baden's theory.
Kroll and Calkins were the first two defense witnesses called by defense attorney Jerry Glas, a New Orleans attorney who also represents Taser International.

Dressed in a long-sleeve white shirt and black dress pants, Nugent sat stoically between his Pineville attorneys, George Higgins and Phillip Terrell, while Glas presented the defense's case.

Calkins particularly took Baden to task, saying his statement "was not consistent with anyone who has any knowledge of the Taser device." Calkins' deposition was recorded Monday night because he was unable to attend the trial.

The defense's two experts testified that research shows Tasers, particularly the TaserX26 model used by Nugent and the "drive stun" method of using the Taser directly against a suspect's body, cause pain but would not lead to the death of a 6-foot, 250-pound, 21-year-old like Pikes.

"It hurts, but there's zero negative effect on the body," Kroll said.

"That's what the drive stun does," Calkins said. "It doesn't cause arrhythmia. It causes discomfort."

Winn Parish chief prosecutor Steve Crews tried to punch holes in the experts' credibility by showing their close relationships with Taser International, which is paying for their appearance at the Nugent trial.

Both Kroll and Calkins have paid positions on Taser International boards, while Kroll has received nearly $800,000 in compensation over the past three years for his role on the board of directors and as a consultant for Taser.

Those relationships, Crews said, show "bias and prejudice" on the experts' part.
The experts said they haven't hidden their relationships with Taser International, but those relationships give them a unique perspective and knowledge on the effects of the devices.

Crews said Pikes' combination of sickle cell trait, an enlarged heart, high blood pressure from trying to escape arrest and being Tased eight or nine times over a 15-minute span formed a lethal combination that could have led to his death.

Calkins, however, said there is "no evidence" that Tasers can lead to someone's death because the electricity only causes blood pressure to rise "a trivial amount," and the electricity charge is "very superficial. "The Taser ECD (Electronic Control Device) played no role, did not cause or contribute to the death of Mr. Collins (Pikes)," Calkins said.

Judge John Joyce, who earlier in the day seated one of the two alternate jurors because one of the jurors was dismissed "due to unusual circumstances," recessed the trial early Wednesday afternoon as the defense's third witness was not in town yet.
The trial will continue at 9 a.m. today with more defense testimony, and the defense could rest its case as early as this afternoon.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Bioelectricity expert in Winnfield manslaughter trial says Taser did not cause suspect's death

October 27, 2010
thetowntalk.com

WINNFIELD – The Taser shocks administered to Barron "Scooter" Pikes by police were not the cause of Pikes’ death, a bioelectricity expert testified today, Oct. 27, in a trial in Winnfield.

Former Winnfield Police Officer Scott Nugent, 24, is on trial for manslaughter. He is accused of using a Taser to cause Pikes’ death as Pikes, 21, was being arrested in 2008.

The bioelectricity expert, Mark Kroll of the University of Minnesota, testified for two hours today as the defense began presenting witnesses.

Kroll said the Taser X26 used on Pikes generates 2,000 times less electricity than a defibrillator and that the electric shocks “never came close to the heart” as Pikes was Tasered.

Kroll serves on the corporate board of Taser and has been paid more than $800,000 over the past three years as he has been used as a witness in cases involving Tasers. The prosecution said Kroll is biased.

Concerning a shock by the Taser, Kroll said, “It hurts, but there’s zero negative effect on the body.”

If convicted of manslaughter, Nugent could face up to 40 years in prison.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

It’s tough to be a pit bull

Thanks to KV, who provided the following information:

Oct 18, 2010, Deuce the Neopolitan mastiff, Corvallis, Wa. Bit officer, tased, died of suffocation (in his regular muzzle) while being transported to Humane Society. A previous injury caused swelling in his throat. First report said he was a pit bull.

July 12, 2010, Apollo the pit bull, Altoona Pa. Also was pepper sprayed. “After attempts to find the dog's owner failed, Cpl Boyles said Sgt. William Gibbons struck one of the dogs with a Taser. Boyles said he assumed that is what killed the animal."

Jan 3, 2010, Hershey the pit bull, Salem, Or. Fighting another pit bull, still fighting after 4 shocks, collapsed after 5th one.

Aug 27, 2009, Peatross’s pit bull, Danville, Va. Fighting pitbulls were tased, one lived, one died immediately. Also pepper sprayed. Catch pole choking was blamed.

June 5, 2007, Muscub the boxer, Fredericton, New Brunswick. Tasered, died en route to SPCA Police thought he was a pit bull.

June 5, 2005, Palfoss's pit bull, Portland, Or. 3 or more shocks. The Oregon State University's veterinary lab performed a necropsy on the dog. A preliminarly report concludes the pit bull died from circulatory collapse but reaches no judgement on whether repeated taser shocks killed it. Police insist that tasers didn't kill the dog; rather, they say it died from "over-excitement" after multiple 50,000-volt zaps. Earlier that week (June 1) Portland had issued tasers to all street police.

Oct 3, 2003, unidentified pit bull, Albany, NY. 30 sec+ in 5 second bursts, dead when tasing ended. Could not be revived with heart compressions.

In a September 2008 letter, entitled "Taser safety", published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, Mark Kroll explains to Canadian doctors why dogs are better models for the human heart than pigs are: “The second erroneous implication is that small swine provide a reasonable model with which to measure the risk of electrical induction of ventricular fibrillation in humans. Swine, especially small ones, are extremely sensitive to the electrical induction of ventricular fibrillation. In pigs, the Purkinje fibers cross the entire ventricular wall whereas in dogs and humans they are confined to a very thin endocardial layer. Activation in swine proceeds from the epicardium to the endocardium, whereas it occurs in the reverse direction in dogs and humans. Thus, swine are much more sensitive to external electrical currents. In humans, even if the barbs of an electronic control device are placed directly on the cardiac axis, no effect is captured with echocardiographic monitoring.”

Friday, November 20, 2009

Autopsy links Taser to Cardall's death - Coroner cites being stunned near the heart as a key factor

November 19, 2009
Melinda Rogers, The Salt Lake Tribune

A Taser that twice shocked Brian Cardall contributed to or caused heart irregularities in the 32-year-old man that led to his death on the side of a southern Utah highway in June, the Utah Medical Examiner's Office has ruled.

Deputy Chief Medical Examiner Erik Christensen cited "ventricular fibrillation following conducted energy weapon deployment during a manic episode with psychotic features" as Cardall's cause of death.

The Salt Lake Tribune obtained a copy of the autopsy report Thursday from the Cardalls' attorney. The family chose to release it after Washington County Attorney Brock Belnap said he will not prosecute the officer who deployed a Taser on Cardall.

Belnap said Hurricane police Officer Ken Thompson legally used a Taser on Cardall as the man suffered a bipolar manic episode June 9.

The Cardall family disagrees with Belnap's decision, said Karra Porter, who is advising the Cardalls on their legal options.

Christensen's report states that prongs from a Taser a Hurricane police officer deployed struck Cardall over his heart. While Christensen acknowledged other factors could have contributed to Cardall's death, he pointed out factors that indicate a Taser electrocuted a naked, unarmed Cardall.

"While it is generally acknowledged that [Taser] use is safe and represents an extremely low risk due to the electrical activity of the weapon, the circumstances in this case represent a combination of the factors that are believed to increase the risk of a potential electrical death," Christensen's report reads.

"These include the placement of the barbs over the cardiac axis, the penetration of the barbs deeply into a thin chest wall directly over the heart, absence of intervening clothing and more than one cycle of electrical stimulation.

"Additionally, the initial cardiac rhythm of ventricular fibrillation is consistent with findings seen in cases of electrocution."

Christensen's conclusion that the X-26 Taser, made by Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Taser International, played a significant role in Cardall's death is bold.

While Taser International has claimed its products are not risk free, it has publicly stated its products do not cause cardiac arrest. It has filed numerous lawsuits against medical examiners who have cited Tasers as a cause of death.

Christensen noted that because Cardall, a graduate student at Northern Arizona University, was in a manic state, he was at risk for a heart attack before the Taser struck him.

Christensen said Cardall did not die from excited delirium, a syndrome often cited as a cause of death when someone is agitated or delirious and then dies after forcefully being taken into custody.

Thompson twice deployed a Taser on Cardall on the side of State Road 59 near Hurricane after Anna Cardall called 911 to report her husband was behaving erratically.

Thompson, one of multiple officers on the scene, waited 42 seconds after arriving before he deployed a Taser on a manic and confused Cardall, according to 911 recordings.

The 156-pound Cardall is heard screaming for about five seconds after Thompson first deploys a Taser on him. After a two-second pause, Thompson deploys the Taser on Cardall again. He says in the recordings Cardall had tried to get up.

Mental health history

Christensen's report details Cardall's struggle with bipolar disorder, which surfaced with depression in high school. Doctors diagnosed him as bipolar in 2005 after a manic episode that required brief hospitalization.

Cardall suffered manic episodes in 2006 and 2007, which he believed was due to a lack of sleep and stress, the report states. Cardall had been on and off medication for his disorder; he had scaled back medication in January.

Christensen wrote that Seroquel, the medication Cardall took for bipolar disorder, likely didn't contribute to his reaction after being shocked. He detected trace amounts of marijuana in Cardall's system, but Cardall tested negative for other illicit drugs.

Cardall's family told Christensen that Cardall occasionally used marijuana, according to the report.

Taser International had not yet seen Christensen's report, company spokesman Steve Tuttle said.

"We have not been provided a copy of the autopsy for our medical advisory board to review the details of this tragic incident. Our hearts continue to go out to the Cardall family during this difficult time," Tuttle told The Tribune .

Peter Stirba, a Salt Lake City attorney representing the Hurricane Police Department, said only that Belnap's decision vindicates Thompson and was correct based on evidence.

Possible lawsuit?

The Cardall family is disappointed Belnap didn't hand off the case to another county, said Porter, of Salt Lake City-based law firm Christensen and Jensen.

"It would be awkward for a county attorney in a relatively rural area to prosecute people he works with every day," she said.

Utah law, however, says county attorneys handle use of force investigations.

Any lawsuit filed by the Cardall family will face fierce contention from Taser International, which has only lost one case in the 97 lawsuits filed against the company since its inception in 1993, Tuttle said.

But the tide is beginning to turn, said California attorney Peter Williamson, who, along with co-counsel John Burton, recently won the first suit against Taser International.

A federal judge in the U.S. District Court for Northern California ordered Taser to pay $1.4 million in attorney fees to Williamson and Burton, who represented the family of Robert Heston, who was killed in 2005 after he was shocked multiple times while high on methamphetamine.

The 40-year-old man's father had called police for help to restrain his combative son. Five officers shocked Heston 25 times.

Judge James Ware ordered the company to pay attorney fees following a decision by a jury to award Heston's family $153,000 in damages. The jury found that Taser International didn't properly educate the police who stunned Heston about cardiac risks associated with the weapon.

In an explanation of why he awarded attorneys fees in the case, Ware wrote: "The notoriety of ... the first-of-its-kind verdict, in some circumstances, has prompted a number of Taser customers and prospective customers to consider the risk of repeated and prolonged Taser electric charges on individuals in an excited or delirious state."

Williamson said the company considers the verdict in the Heston case "a fluke."

"The only way we can get Taser to change its warnings and training is to sue them enough times that they finally capitulate," said Williamson, who believes the Cardalls have a strong case against Taser.

Changing targets

In an Oct. 12 bulletin, Taser told police not to aim a Taser at a suspect's chest. Shooting the device lower will incapacitate a suspect more effectively, it said. The bulletin notes police still can shoot at a chest lacking a better option.

Taser critics say the bulletin is the company's first admission that the weapons pose a cardiac risk --- an allegation the company denies. The company based its decision on best practices research and will help police avoid lawsuits from those who claim the devices cause injuries and other health problems, Taser's Rick Guilbault said in the bulletin.

Taser's bulletin states the risk of cardiac arrest when a Taser is deployed on a suspect is low, but notes reactions can't be predicted, particularly when other underlying medical conditions or drugs are added to the equation.

"We have not stated that Taser causes [cardiac] events in this bulletin, only that the refined target zones avoid any potential controversy on this topic," Tuttle said.

He added changes "specifically had nothing to do with the Cardall incident."

But Williamson is skeptical.

"It's interesting to note within the last 30 days, Taser has issued its [new training bulletin]," Williamson said, adding that in addition to the Cardall case, Taser is dealing with another pending California trial where a man died after being shocked in 2004.

Taser as a cause of death

Medical examiners nationwide have been sued for citing Tasers as a cause of death.

Last year, an Ohio judge ordered a medical examiner to remove Taser's name from three autopsies. The Summit County Medical Examiner's Office "offered no medical, scientific or electrical evidence to justify finding the stun gun was a factor in the deaths of two men in 2005 and another in 2006," The Arizona Republic reported in May 2008. Taser and the City of Akron had sued the medical examiner, claiming the examiners didn't have the proper education to decide whether Tasers contributed to the death.

The county's chief medical examiner contested the ruling, according to The Arizona Republic.

Taser also sued Indiana coroner Roland Kohr, who found the weapon contributed to a man's death in 2004.

Taser International dismisses what it calls misconceptions that the company targets medical examiners who make unflattering reports.

"This is simply not true," Tuttle said. "In the two instances that Taser has brought legal action regarding medical examiners, the lawsuits were to correct scientifically baseless opinions that resulted in very negative consequences to numerous entities and people."

Williamson disagrees. He said Taser intimidates medical examiners who find the stun guns lead to death.

"Very few medical examiners will stick their necks out on the line," he said.

Excited delirium theory nixed

Christensen's finding that Cardall did not die of excited delirium in Cardall is noteworthy. Speculation that the controversial syndrome killed Cardall has been widespread among law enforcement since he died. In a letter to the editor The Tribune published in June, University of Minnesota biomedical engineering professor Mark Kroll suggested excited delirium killed Cardall.

Kroll, a member of Taser's scientific and medical advisory board, wrote that: "Excited delirium is a widely accepted entity in forensic pathology and is cited by medical examiners to explain the sudden in-custody deaths of individuals who are combative and in a highly agitated state."

"The fundamentals of an excited delirium death are not that difficult to understand," Kroll wrote. "Our bodies have limits to exertion... If these limits are sufficiently exceeded, we will die."

Christensen's report states that Cardall displayed some symptoms of excited delirium, but he did not show signs of hyperthermia, a condition where the body produces more heat than it can expend. He wasn't involved in a physical struggle and didn't show "feats of superhuman strength," which is common in excited delirium cases.

"His initial cardiac rhythm is also different from the usual rhythm in cases of [excited delirium]," the report states.

Porter said Christensen's findings support the Cardall family's efforts to expose Brian Cardall's mistreatment. The family may file a lawsuit so that "the full truth emerges regarding Brian's death."

"They also want to feel reassured that steps are being taken to prevent other senseless deaths in the future," she said.

Friday, June 26, 2009

'Excited delirium,' not TASER, killed Brian Cardall

June 26, 2009
By Mark Kroll

I sit on the scientific and medical advisory board for TASER International and wish to comment on the column "Police search for a defense in death" by Rebecca Walsh ( Tribune, June 21).

Commenting on the tragic death of Brian Cardall, Walsh states that the TASER Electronic Control Device was "zapping Cardall full of 50,000 volts" and implies that it contributed to his death.

The actual pulse voltage delivered by the TASER X26 is 600 volts and that is in very short pulses.

This 100-fold exaggeration is provided by Amnesty International material. This anti-police activist group has long used exaggeration and innuendo against TASER ECDs as a significant fundraising tool.

It is helpful to discuss the most common electronic control devices -- electric fences. The TASER X26 ECD satisfies the Underwriters Laboratory electric fence standards and puts out only 40 percent of the output allowed. If the TASER ECD were actually dangerous, the ranchers in your readership would have to remove their electric fences lest they risk electrocuting the next person that walks into one.

Walsh scoffs at the deadly condition known as "excited delirium" syndrome. She states, "Promoted by a retired Texas medical examiner, excited delirium is not accepted by either the American Medical Association or the American Psychological Association." This represents another of the statements of Amnesty International.

Your readers can see what the AMA actually says about excited delirium by going to their website.

"Excited delirium" is a widely accepted entity in forensic pathology and is cited by medical examiners to explain the sudden in-custody deaths of individuals who are combative and in a highly agitated state.

Excited delirium is broadly defined as a state of agitation, excitability, paranoia, aggression and apparent immunity to pain, often associated with stimulant use and certain psychiatric disorders.

The signs and symptoms typically ascribed to "excited delirium" include bizarre or violent behavior, hyperactivity, hyperthermia, confusion, great strength, sweating and removal of clothing, and imperviousness to pain.

Excited delirium deaths have been reported in the medical literature for over 150 years. The exact term is found in medical textbooks beginning in the 1800s.

The fundamentals of an excited delirium death are not that difficult to understand. Our bodies have limits to exertion. If we were to run rapidly we would eventually tire and slow down or stop because our brain recognizes signals of overexertion such as acid in our blood. If we were to continue -- because our brain ignored such signals -- we would exert ourselves until we died. The body has limits for a reason. If these limits are sufficiently exceeded we will die.

Walsh adds, "Brian Cardall is missing key symptoms of excited delirium: He had no cocaine in his system. He was not massive or obese."

If your readers read the AMA statement on excited delirium, they'll see that these criteria are actually not required.

Our thoughts and prayers should be with the Cardall family that is suffering from their sudden loss. It does them a great disservice to repeat exaggerations and innuendo from the fundraising material of an activist anti-police group to incorrectly imply that police officers killed their son.

Mark Kroll teaches in the biomedical engineering department at the University of Minnesota.

*******************************************************************

Comment by Excited Frauds: 6/26/2009 3:35:00 AM

Taser Spokes-Puppet, Mark Kroll, knows his medically invalid Taser Propaganda quite well. "Excited Delirium" was first used by the director of an insane asylum in the 1800's, and the gentleman was regarded as a QUACK.

As Mark knows, no one has ever been diagnosed as having died of "Excited Delirium" without 2 factors being present: 1.) A law enforcement officer 2.) A method of restraint being used or abused.

That makes "Excited Delirium" one of medicines MIRACLES! A "medical condition" which only occurs in the presence of a police officer or jail guard, who is trying to control a person with a method of restraint. And those taser shockers are often the restraint being used, although hand-cuffs and hog-ties also appear, as well as an officer putting his weight on the person.

Ask yourself this question: "If excitedly delirius persons are on a One Way Path to Certain Death, why aren't at least 25% or 50% of these persons dying BEFORE the taser or hog-tie is used? Why aren't excitedly delirius people dying when the officer yells "Taser! Taser! Taser!" once in a while?

The ANSWER is that the simple presence of the law enforcement officer can not trigger a "medical condition", and if it could, suspects should be dying WITHOUT the restraint or taser being applied.

There is a principle of Logic called Occam's Razor, which roughly says that usually the explanation using the fewest variables will be the correct explanation.

What killed Brian is quite simple ~ he was agitated for a period of time, then confronted and assaulted by a peace officer using a Taser and he died ~ Occam says the Taser killed him, as it should, since the Taser barbs were lodged below his skin and across his heart, which is a muscle and is directly affected by a Taser "electro-muscular control device". The Taser worked perfectly to control Brian's most important muscle - his HEART, and it went into fibrillation, eventually leading to his death.


Comment by Excited Frauds: 6/26/2009 7:39:00 AM

Mark Kroll mentions Underwriters Labs and Electric Fences ......"The TASER X26 ECD satisfies the Underwriters Laboratory electric fence standards and puts out only 40 percent of the output allowed.

"Sorry, Mark, but that is a LIE in sheep's clothing. Tasers have NEVER been submitted or reviewed for electrical safety by Underwriter's Labs. In fact, Tasers can't be used in the rain, because they will short-circuit. They aren't even "water-proof".

Mark's company - Taser International - was WARNED by "UL", in a letter, to Cease using its name or logo, in any Taser marketing material, since UL had never been asked to test Taser electrical properties or safety.

Mark knows this, yet he uses the "UL" name to make it seem that Tasers are safe, and UL agrees. Early Tasers were sold to law enforcement, using marketing materials which fraudulently mentioned "UL" Standards, to make foolish cops believe they are "UL Safe". That was a Taser LIE, and UL threatened Legal Action, if the stun gun maker didn't remove ALL references to their Labs.

The fact that Mark Kroll would use the "electric fencing" comparison, shows how shallow and deceptive he is.

Mark holds no medical degrees. He's not a medical doctor.

I suspect that Mark Kroll knows full well that Tasers can kill, and he even knows the medical path to Taser electrocutions.

Why don't you request UL to test your dangerous devices, Mark? Are you afraid of the results? Why don't you ask the FDA to approve your Taser "medical device", since it works just like those FDA Approved heart devices you are associated with?

Sadly, in many situations Tasers can induce irregular heart rhythms, especially when the Taser barbs puncture the skin across the heart. That's when they are deadliest.

"Excited Delirium" doesn't pass the Laugh Test. It is Junk Medical Science, used to hide police and Taser International responsibility in unfortunate, but too common, Taser electrocutions.

************************************************************************

See also: Electrical Standards (March 4, 2005 - Arizona Republic) which said, in part:

Underwriters Laboratories, which has certified billions of consumer goods for electrical safety, says the graph that Taser is using does not reflect any study of the stun gun's safety. UL spokesman Paul Baker says the graph is supposed to apply to an electric fence. "We take issue with that data in relation to Taser," he said. "Underwriters Lab does not agree with Taser." The graph is based on a decades-old study that measured how much current passing through an electric fence it would take to induce ventricular fibrillation. Baker said he is surprised that Taser is still using the graph since the lab publicly stated last month that it has no bearing on the stun gun. As for the IEC standards, Ruggieri sits on the committee charged with developing and maintaining those standards. He has also helped write standards for Underwriters Laboratories. He said the standards Taser cites do not address repeating pulses used by the stun gun.

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Family of dead man sues city, police over Taser shots

#327. February 7, 2008: Richard Earl Abston, 53, Merced, California

March 31, 2009
Merced Sun Star

"... The lawsuit doesn't name Taser International, but (attorney) Nisenbaum believes the device played a role in Abston's death, even though the autopsy doesn't list it as a contributing factor ... The MEDICAL REPORT WASN'T FINISHED UNTIL THE CORONER MET WITH A DOCTOR WHO SERVES ON THE COMPANY'S [Taser International's] SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY BOARD, he noted."

See also "Judge rules for taser in cause of death decisions."

Monday, March 09, 2009

Landmark Documents Just Filed in A Florida Case: BOLANDER v TASER

I can't figure out how to link to these items individually but look for them (including links) at Charly D. Miller's site:

Kirkham Identifies Two Additional MODES OF USE (Applications)That TASER INC and Its “Experts” Have Knowingly Failed to Identify Within Official Documents, Studies, and Sworn Statements

©2007 Taser Slides, With Instructor Notes, Demonstrating Taser’s Knowledge Of MORE Than Just “Two Modes” of Taser Use.

Dr. Waxman Corrects His Previous Testimony After Learning of TASER’s Misinformation

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Taser's Delirium Defense

By Bernice Yeung
Mother Jones - March/April 2009

By all accounts, Patrick Lee was having too good a time at the Mercy Lounge, a Nashville rock club. He'd commenced the September 2005 evening by dropping a few hits of acid. Before long, the 21-year-old was tripping and determined to climb onstage. A bouncer eighty-sixed him and called the cops, who, according to witnesses, found Lee outside the club, babbling incoherently. Things went downhill fast. Lee made a move toward an officer and was hit with pepper spray. He ran a few feet and stripped off his clothes. The cops deployed their Tasers­, jolting Lee 19 times in all. By the time paramedics arrived, witnesses say, he was unresponsive. He died 39 hours later. The cause, a county medical examiner concluded, was "excited delirium."

For the past five years, this has been a common conclusion in deadly incidents involving Tasers, and the nation's top seller of electric stun guns prefers it that way; Taser International Inc. has twice sued medical examiners who cited its products as a contributing factor in a subject's death. At the same time, the company aggressively promotes awareness of excited delirium, an ill-defined condition that helps it fend off lawsuits. Thanks partly to testimony from a cast of ED proponents, several with financial ties to the company, Taser has lost just one wrongful-death case at trial out of 33 filed against it since 2001. (Dozens more lawsuits are pending.)

Taser's lone courtroom defeat, which it may appeal, involves Robert Heston, a California meth user who died after 25 jolts. Last June, the family's lawyers convinced a jury that Heston most likely died not of ED, but rather of cardiac arrest due to metabolic acidosis—a temporary state in agitated individuals that may be exacerbated by excessive Tasering, recent animal studies indicate. But in January, a suit by Patrick Lee's parents was dismissed after Taser argued that excited delirium was the culprit. "We look at excited delirium as a responsibility-shifting mechanism," says Peter Williamson, an attorney for the Hestons. "It's a way for the police department, the officer, and Taser to shift responsibility to the victim."

The company insists its devices never kill, but Amnesty International, the only organization to have compiled data on the issue, says there have been 334 fatalities following Taser jolts since 2001. In 69 of these cases, autopsy reports specifically cited ED as a cause of death.

"Of all in-custody deaths [not involving firearms], excited delirium syndrome is the most common form," notes Vincent Di Maio, a Taser expert witness, retired Texas medical examiner, and coauthor of the 2005 book Excited Delirium Syndrome: Cause of Death and Prevention.

But as a medical condition, the term is meaningless. "We have no idea what any of the causes are, what the biology behind it might be, what underlies it, how being in this state leads to death with supposedly some intervention with a Taser or other force," says Matthew Stanbrook, a faculty member at the University of Toronto medical school.

Purported ED signs range from "bizarre" behavior to sweating and high body temperature, attraction to shiny objects or glass, foaming at the mouth, a penchant for disrobing, aggression, and superhuman strength. Such symptoms could result from "alcohol withdrawal, acute schizophrenia, bipolar disease, stimulant drug intoxication, psychological illness plus stimulant drugs, hypoglycemia, an infection of the brain. I could go on," says Christine Hall, a Canadian ER physician who researches in-custody deaths.

"The bottom line is this," says Andrew Dennis, a Chicago surgeon, part-time police officer, and medical researcher who coauthored three studies of Taser's effects on swine. "You have a lot of people who are acting psychotic, and often law enforcement is asked to deal with them. Some subgroup of this population is going to die, and we don't know why. This potential at-risk group is the quote-unquote excited delirium group. But there are no common threads to identify this at-risk group. As far as I'm concerned, everything discussed about excited delirium is conjecture."

None of these concerns have stopped Taser from talking up ED in training sessions, literature, and court filings. The company attends conferences for police chiefs and medical examiners, where it distributes ED-related literature, and has doled out free copies of Di Maio's book. It also sends unsolicited materials to medical examiners when an in-custody death occurs in their jurisdiction. In 2002, Taser released a statement for police to use if someone died in a Taser-related incident. "We regret the unfortunate loss of life," it begins. "There are many cases where excited delirium caused by various mental disorders or medical conditions, that may or may not include drug use, can lead to a fatal conclusion."

The expression first appeared in medical documents in the 1800s, and for a time it was associated with deaths in asylums. It fell into disuse during the 1950s and was revived in the 1980s, essentially to describe the agitated state of cocaine addicts. Since then, ED has been the subject of dozens of articles aimed at law enforcement. (Among the authors are Jeffrey Ho, an ER doctor whom Taser pays to conduct studies and testify—he got $70,000 during a recent 12-month stretch—and Mark Kroll, a member of Taser's science advisory board who has cashed in at least $2.5 million in company stock options.)

The term has also gained traction among medical examiners and coroners. "People are looking for an explanation for some of these deaths," notes Stanbrook, "and this syndrome provides an answer that's convenient." (In an unpublished survey last year by a national medical examiners group, 67 of 187 MEs said Taser's litigi­ousness would affect their conclusions in cases involving stun guns.) Last October, prompted by the term's growing popularity in law enforcement, the American College of Emergency Physicians resolved to study whether ED should be considered as a diagnosis.

Several people I spoke with credit Taser for helping popularize excited delirium. Dennis, the surgeon-cop, first heard the term, he says, at a company training session five years ago; Shao-Hua Lu, a psychiatrist who treats addicts at Vancouver General Hospital, hadn't heard of ED before 2007, when he began working on a Canadian government probe of Taser safety. "No [practicing] medical doctor would write down 'delirium' on a death certificate as a cause of death," says Lu, who trains Canadian Mounties to identify mental health problems, including various forms of delirium, in their subjects. "I don't understand why MEs would write that."

Taser insists that any corporate outreach involving ED relates to safe use of its products. "We don't teach anything about excited delirium," says spokesman Steve Tuttle. "We let law enforcement agencies know that they need to be aware of it."

But the company is remarkably tight with America's foremost ED training and advocacy business. The Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths (ipicd) was cofounded by police trainer John Peters and an old acquaintance, Michael Brave, Taser's national litigation counsel.

At the time, Peters later stated in a deposition, he was reworking his firm's training regimen after hearing from other stun-gun merchants. "Some of the manufacturers said, you know, '[Police departments] are paying out lots of money in these lawsuits, and it's hurting us because they don't have money left over to buy our product.'"

In 2005, Peters filed corporate papers for the ipicd listing himself and Brave as the founding directors. Within six months, the institute was leading eight-hour sessions at Taser's Scottsdale, Arizona, compound, teaching cops to recognize ED and often touting Tasers as the most effective tool for subduing agitated individuals. In the first two years, Brave estimated in a deposition, Taser paid $70,000 to $80,000 for the sessions. To date, Peters says, the ipicd has certified some 10,000 officers worldwide as in-custody death prevention instructors.

Taser also pays the way for Peters and ipicd instructor David Berman to speak at outside conferences, directs business Peters' way, and helps plug the ipicd's annual conference in Las Vegas, where past presenters have included Taser-backed researchers and employees. A flyer for last October's three-day shindig, which drew 250 attendees, promised the "historic" opportunity to help form a "general consensus about excited delirium that will then be published in leading medical, legal, and law enforcement journals." As an expert witness for Taser, Peters charges $5,000 plus $2,750 per day; in 2007, he was paid about $42,000.

Peters sees nothing inappropriate about his Taser connections. "We are not aligned with them at all," he says, although "we did not distinguish ourselves enough" at the start. (Brave, now listed as an inactive director, says he remains a legal adviser at ipicd.) In any case, the institute will continue in its quest to entrench ED as a medical and psychological diagnosis, Peters says, "to quiet these folks" who don't believe it exists.

These folks include Heston attorney John Burton, who, not surprisingly, finds the ipicd/Taser bond problematic. "These guys want to help the police stop killing people, and they're trying to build a liability defense for when they do," he says. "The two things are in direct conflict."

Brave, for his part, has nothing but contempt for the company's critics. "How much more damage are we going to do to police officers by continuing to put forth this ignorant rhetoric?" he asks. "A druggie's mommy hires a plaintiff's attorney, and now we need to blame someone. Do we blame the person who sold them the drugs or the mommy who let them take the drugs or the kid who actually took the drugs? No. We blame the police and Taser, because they were present at the time of death."

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Review held on use of stun gun during NS medical emergency

September 24, 2008
The Canadian Press

HALIFAX — Paramedics were discussing a glucose injection to calm a struggling diabetic when police in Amherst, N.S., caught them off guard by jolting their patient with a stun gun, the director of the province's emergency services said Tuesday.

Dr. Andrew Travers, the medical director of Emergency Health Services, said the paramedics would have advised against using a stun gun on the man if local police had asked. "The paramedics would come back and say there's other ways we can approach this," he said in an interview.

Details of the incident on Sept. 14 emerged Tuesday after the man's wife told the Amherst Daily News that she grew concerned for her husband when she couldn't wake him up, so she checked his blood sugar and found it was low. She called 911 when the 34-year-old man started coughing and was having difficulty breathing. As he awoke, he wouldn't let the paramedics administer an intravenous, so they asked police officers who had been sent to the home to help.

"I left the room because it was very crowded and I was upset," the woman, whose name was withheld, told the Amherst Daily News. "All of a sudden I heard the officers telling him they were going to Tase him. I ran down the hall yelling to them, 'He doesn't understand,' but they zapped him anyway. "I told them to get out of my house. They stood in the hallway for a while and then left. After that an IV was put in."

Travers said that the two paramedics called the emergency medical centre in Halifax to indicate the 220-pound man was difficult to approach. The centre sent a team of three officers to assist.

Deputy chief Ian Naylor of the Amherst police force said when the officers arrived, the man wouldn't allow the paramedics to apply the IV, so two officers held his arms and a third sat on his legs. When he struggled, one of the officers fired the stun gun for one second into the man's abdomen, said Naylor.

The police decision to use the device came moments after the paramedics said they were giving up on the IV, said Travers. "They couldn't put an intravenous in because he was moving around too much. So the paramedics said, 'Can we give this alternative therapy?' and as they were saying this the police made the decision to Taser the patient," Travers said.

They decided to use a needle to treat the man instead, he added. "When they realized that an IV wasn't going to work, the paramedics had realized that an injection by a small needle might reverse the process." After the needle was administered, the man's blood sugars rose, and he calmed down, said Travers.

The paramedics then provided the man with several tablets to raise his blood sugar levels and they stayed with him for about an hour. He decided not to go to the hospital.

Naylor said a full internal review will be completed on the incident and the statements by the paramedics will be taken into account. "I'm not aware of that specific information, but part of our internal review of the process would be to obtain information from the Emergency Medical Service they might have," he said.

Naylor said officers only applied the stun gun when they felt he was a danger to himself or others. "The officers did apply physical restraint. That included three police officers. There was one officer at each shoulder and one on the legs," he said. "Because of the man size and strength they couldn't control him. The third officer on the officer's legs was literally picked up in the air."

Naylor said the officers considered other options, and decided the one-second "touch stun" would be the most effective. Naylor said every incident involving a stun gun is reviewed.

Meanwhile, the man's wife said her husband bit off part of his tongue during the incident and couldn't walk for three days. "I am very upset and feel he was Tasered for no reason. It was cruel for them to do that considering the state he was in," she said. The woman said her husband is a big man but is not a risk to anyone. "The scream that came out of my husband when he was Tasered was the worst thing I have heard in my life."

Dr. Mark Kroll, the head of the medical advisory committee at Taser corporation, said the use of the device by the police may have been the best choice. "If somebody has significantly low blood sugar, and its so low they're not functioning, they need to be taken under control so their life can be saved," he said in a telephone interview.

Kroll noted that using a Taser wouldn't have any impact on the diabetes itself.

"The alternatives are clubbing, pepper spraying and wrestling. ... It would appear to me that the electronic control device would be the safer approach because it resolves the conflict most quickly."

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Taser International refrains from suing the US Government

As far as I know, Taser International hasn't yet launched a lawsuit against the US National Institute of Justice (NIJ), but has instead praised this arm of the US Department of Justice for acknowledging, among other things (see below), that "many aspects of the safety of CED technology are not well-known, especially when used on populations other than normal, healthy adults." But indeed, why would they? A lawsuit, in this case, would be akin to tasing themselves in the heart, when the report (in its complimentary moments) relies on the "expertise" of some of the founding members of the Taser International fan club, including, for example, a member of the company's own advisory board, Mark Kroll, and this Jeffrey Ho guy who, from what I heard, got a ride to the Braidwood Inquiry in a Taser jet.

Have a look at the Selected References section of the Study of Deaths Following Electro Muscular Disruption (Interim Report).

Even CEO Rick Smith is acknowledged on the list of those whose "information, insight and knowledge benefited the development of this interim report."

Keep in mind that the US Government would be seen by the manufacturer as an outstanding prospective client.

Here is the Taser International PR machine in action today:


TASER International Commends Department of Justice Study Which Concludes That Law Enforcement Need Not Refrain From Deploying Conductive Energy Devices

Expert Panel Finds There is No Conclusive Medical Evidence to Indicate a High Risk of Serious Injury or Death From the Direct Effects of Devices

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., June 26, 2008 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- TASER International, Inc. (Nasdaq:TASR), the market leader in advanced electronic control devices (ECDs), commends the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) interim report, Study of Deaths Following Electro Muscular Disruption, for its invaluable independent findings regarding conducted energy devices (CED) such as TASER(r) brand ECDs.

The study was undertaken by NIJ, the research, development and evaluation agency of the U.S. Department of Justice, to "address whether CEDs can contribute to or cause mortality and if so, in what ways," according the reports background. The expert panel of physicians, medical examiners, and other relevant specialists in cardiology, emergency medicine, epidemiology, pathology and toxicology concluded that, "(a)lthough exposure to CED is not risk free, there is no conclusive medical evidence within the state of current medical research that indicates a high risk of serious injury or death from the direct effects of CED exposure."

"The findings from this two-year NIJ study contribute greatly to the significant body of independent research and analysis concerning the safety of TASER electronic control devices," commented Steve Tuttle, Vice President of Communications for TASER International.

Other findings contained in the interim report, which was released earlier this week, include:

"Law enforcement need not refrain from deploying CEDs provided the devices are used in accordance with accepted national guidelines;"

"The potential for moderate or severe injury related to CED exposure is low;"

"CEDs can produce secondary or indirect effects that may result in death;"

"There is currently no medical evidence that CEDs pose a significant risk for induced cardiac dysrhythmia when deployed reasonably;"

"Research shows that human subjects maintain the ability to breathe during exposure to CED;"

"CED technology may be a contributor to 'stress' when stress is an issue related to cause of death determination;"

"Excited delirium is one of several terms that describe a syndrome characterized by psychosis and agitation and may be caused by several underlying conditions;"

"Excited delirium that requires subdual carries with it a high risk of death, regardless of the method of subdual;"

"Current human research suggests that the use of CED is not a life-threatening stressor in cases of excited delirium beyond the generalized stress of the underlying condition or appropriate subdual;"

"There is no medical evidence that exposure to CED has an effect on body temperature;"

"The purported safety margins of CED deployment on normal healthy adults may not be applicable in small children, those with diseased hearts, the elderly, those that are pregnant and other at-risk individuals. The effects of CED exposure in these populations are not clearly understood and more data are needed. The use of a CED against these populations (when recognized) should be avoided but may be necessary if the situation excludes other reasonable options;"

"The medical risks of repeated or continuous CED exposure are unknown and the role of CEDs in causing death is unclear in these cases. There may be circumstances in which repeated or continuous exposure is required but law enforcement should be aware that the associated risks are unknown;" and

"All CED use should conform to agency policy. The decision to use a CED or another force option is best left to the tactical judgment of trained law enforcement at the scene."

NIJ expects to release a final report in 2009.

The complete interim report (21 pages), Study of Deaths Following Electro Muscular Disruption, can be found at: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/222981.pdf.

Wednesday, May 07, 2008

Jonathan Kay on the best corporate media department in the world (even if they did get my name wrong)

May 7, 2008
Jonathan Kay, National Post

The people who man the media shop at Taser International Inc. are the aces of the corporate flak world. You write anything — anything — even vaguely skeptical (let alone downright negative, in which case they rattle their legal sabers) about stun guns, and they, er, zap you with an inbox full of electro-spin.

Case in point: my Tuesday column about this week's Canadian Medical Association Journal study on the health risks of being stun gunned, which earned me (or, should I say, "Jay") the note below. True, the guy not only got my name wrong, but also the name of my article (which he seems to have confused with Marni's blog post on the same subject). Still, it's the thought that counts.

Jay,

I read with interest your column entitled “Watch where you put that Taser” which appeared last Friday. As such, I wanted to make certain you had a copy of the official statement issued by TASER International related to the discussion article published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal. The statement is attached below.

Related to the CMAJ article and editorial, TASER International will point out that Dr. Stanbrook’s editorial is based primarily on a 2005 article from the Arizona Republic as his ONLY source that TASER International has “’sponsored research to prove the Taser's safety,’ he continues. ‘Just about all the research, as it turns out.’” Over the three years since that article was written, much of the research by the Governments of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and leading academic and medical institutions has been funded independent of TASER International. To date, there are more than 120 major studies or analysis of TASER devices and TASER technology with more than 80 percent of them funded independent of TASER International. In fact, the US Department of Justice has been a prolific funder of TASER research recently and one of the first to fund human studies.

Finally, I have provided you with a press release issued this morning by TASER International regarding a Summit County, Ohio law suit involving erroneous medical examiner reports in three cases involving TARSER devices. I thought that you find this of interest and relevant.

<<080505 Summit Co OH Lawsuit.doc>>

My best,

Peter

________________________________________________

The following is the official statement of TASER International regarding the Canadian Medical Association Journal article “Cardiac stimulation with high voltage discharge from stun guns”:

The manuscript released today by researchers at the University of Toronto appears to be a discussion paper that offers no new research. Rather it appears to be simply a discussing of prior papers and findings. TASER International is dismayed by attempts to present this information as something it is not.

Most important to note is that the authors of this manuscript themselves, in their conclusion, clearly state that there are “many studies suggesting that stun guns do not affect the heart” and that, “the evidence and studies presented in this review suggest that, in some circumstances, stun guns may stimulate the heart while discharges are being applied. However, there is no conclusive evidence to show whether stun gun stimulation (under certain electrophysiological conditions) can result in cardiac arrhythmias late after stun gun discharge.”

The authors, also in their conclusion, acknowledge that final conclusions should not be drawn solely from the referenced pig studies and call for human studies to be done: “In our view, it is inappropriate to conclude that stun gun discharges cannot lead to adverse cardiac consequences in all real world settings. We believe that the findings that stun gun discharges are able, under specific circumstances, to stimulate the heart should be taken into account in future studies involving people. Whether stun guns can stimulate the heart can only be established if one can record electrical activity in the heart during a discharge, especially when the vector of discharge is directed across the heart. Additional research studies involving people will help to resolve the conflicting theoretical and experimental findings, and they could lead to the design of devices with electrical pulses that cannot stimulate the heart.”

To this point exactly, three human studies on the effects of TASER® electronic control devices will be presented at the Heart Rhythm Society’s Heart Rhythm 2008 , May 14-17, 2008, in San Francisco, CA USA. The studies include:

(Thursday May 15, 2008) Presenting Rhythm in Sudden Custodial Deaths After Use of TASER® Electronic Control Device, Charles Swerdlow, MD, FHRS, Mark W. Kroll, PhD, FHRS, Howard Williams, Mazda Biria, MD, Dhanunjaya Lakkireddy, MD and Patrick J. Tchou, MD. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, San Marcos Police Department, San Marcos, TX, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.

(Friday May 16, 2008) Can Electrical-Conductive Weapons (TASER®) alter the functional integrity of pacemakers and defibrillators and cause rapid myocardial capture? Dhanunjaya R. Lakkireddy, MD, Mazda Biria, MD, Esam Baryun, MD, Loren Berenbom, MD, Rhea Pimentel, MD, Martin P. Emert, MD, Kevin Kreighbaum, RN, Mark W. Kroll, PhD and Atul Verma, MD. Mid America Cardiology @ University of Kansas Hospital, Kansas City, KS, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, Southlake Regional Health Center, Toronto, ON, Canada.

(Friday May 16, 2008) Echocardiographic Evaluation of Human Transcutaneous TASER® Application Along the Cardiac Axis, Jeffrey D. Ho, MD, Donald M. Dawes, MD, Robert F. Reardon, MD, Anne L. Lapine, MD, Jeremy D. Olsen, MD, Benjamin J. Dolan, BA and James R. Miner, MD. Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, Lompoc District Hospital, Lompoc, CA.

The Heart Rhythm Society is the international leader in science, education and advocacy for cardiac arrhythmia professionals and patients, and the primary information resource on heart rhythm disorders. Its mission is to improve the care of patients by promoting research, education and optimal health care policies and standards.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Chicago study calls Taser's safety claims into question

January 30, 2008
CBC News

Taser stun guns may not be as safe as their manufacturer claims, according to a study carried out by Chicago researchers, CBC News has learned.

The team of doctors and scientists at the trauma centre in Chicago's Cook County hospital stunned 11 pigs with Taser guns in 2006, hitting their chests with 40-second jolts of electricity, pausing for 10 to 15 seconds, then hitting them for 40 more seconds.

When the jolts ended, every animal was left with heart rhythm problems, the researchers said. Two of the animals died from cardiac arrest, one three minutes after receiving a shock.

The findings call into question safety claims made by Taser International, the Arizona company that makes the stun guns, which are used by dozens of police departments across Canada.

According to Taser International's website, "independent medical and scientific experts have determined Taser devices to be among the safest use-of-force options available."

Taser director Mark Kroll has also published a paper called Safety of Taser Electronic Devices, in which he says when electricity kills, it is an immediate death that occurs within four seconds because electricity can't linger in a living being's body "like a poison."

But Bob Walker, one of the lead researchers on the Chicago study, said the fact that one of the pigs died three minutes after being stunned is significant.

"It says that the effect of the Taser shot can last beyond the time when it's being delivered," he said. "So, after the Taser shock ends, there can still be effects that can be evoked and you can still see cardiac effects."

Officers need to ask questions: researcher

Dr. Andrew Dennis, a trauma surgeon and ex-police officer who worked on the study, said if Tasers can affect pigs, more research needs to be done to study how safe the stun guns are. In the meantime, police should question when, and on whom, they use the devices, he said.

"The officers need to question themselves and ask themselves, 'Is this the appropriate situation for this device?'" Dennis said. "They need to have the understanding that this is not a truly benign device.

"What I would not want to see is an individual police officer thinking that this device can used with impunity, because I think there are certain risks to this device."

Stun gun safety was called into question after Robert Dziekanski, a 40-year-old Polish man, died at Vancouver International Airport after being shocked with a Taser by police on Oct. 14, 2007. Dziekanski's death renewed calls for a moratorium on Taser use.

'The human studies are clearly much more relevant'

Other Taser studies have been done on pigs and humans in the past — some finding medical problems with the stun guns, and others not — but the Chicago researchers said they wanted to do a study where subjects were exposed to longer bouts of the guns' electrical currents.

Because the researchers opted for 40-second jolts, their ethics board wouldn't allow them to use human subjects.

Rick Smith, the CEO of Taser International, doesn't think much can be concluded from the Chicago study because it focused on pigs that weigh less than 100 pounds and have a very different physiology from humans. Smith said studies done on humans have shown Tasers don't pose a serious health threat. "The human studies are clearly much more relevant to policy-makers, and to people that are interested in the science of how Tasers affect people," he said.

Dr. Jeffrey Ho, a researcher who has studied stun guns in the past, but was not involved in the Chicago study, stressed that the guns may not have the same effect on people as they did on the pigs in Chicago. "I think animals are good surrogates for research models in some situations," said Ho, an associate professor of emergency medicine at the University of Minnesota. "In my modelling, I prefer to use humans."

However, pig studies have been used as evidence in arguments for and against stun guns in the past. Even the Taser International website points to studies on pigs in which the outcomes suggest the stun guns aren't a serious safety risk.

Friday, November 30, 2007

Tasers safer than Tylenol, engineer tells conference

Friday, November 30, 2007
CBC News

A biomedical engineer with ties to the company that makes Tasers insists that the stun-guns are safer than Tylenol. "You have Tylenol in your home? As far as an electronic controlled device killing you, this stuff is safer than Tylenol," Dr. Mark Kroll said Thursday in Las Vegas.

Kroll, an adjunct professor at California Polytechnic State University who specializes in electrical currents, made his comments while addressing a group of 360 doctors, police officers, lawyers and medical examiners attending a three-day conference on sudden death and in-custody deaths.

Kroll and some of the other medical specialists and law enforcement officials who spoke at the conference stressed that Tasers do no harm, despite the outcry over the death of Robert Dziekanski, a Polish man who died last month after RCMP officers stunned him with a Taser gun at the Vancouver International Airport.

The federal government is examining the case, as are officials from Poland and the B.C. Coroner's office.

Kroll insisted Tasers are safe under all circumstances, and have never been proven to have directly killed anyone. He said they don't output enough electricity to kill, even if people are stunned several times.

There are several myths surrounding the stun-guns that are not true, Kroll said.

"One myth is that these devices can affect the heart. That myth has almost died out but you still see it once in awhile," he said. "Another myth is that they're more dangerous [if the person being hit with a Taser is on] drugs, but one of my favourite myths is that these devices can harm pacemakers."

Kroll said even though he consults with Taser International, the maker of Tasers, and sits on the company's advisory board, he said he does not speak for the company. (HUH??) Others at the sudden death conference, which ends Friday, also had ties to Taser International — three researchers in attendance are consultants with the company, while Taser paid for 10 of its employees to attend.

John Peters, who directs the U.S. Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, said his organization is not influenced by Taser International, despite the ties. "We're not funded by Taser, we teach at the Taser academy a couple of times a year, but that's it," he said. He conceded that his conference did not include the work of researchers who raised safety questions about Tasers. "Their studies were very small, they were isolated," he said. "I thought it wasn't a good fit."

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Stun gun makers sue experts over safety criticisms

March 9, 2006
James Randerson, The Guardian

The company that manufactures the stun guns used by police is suing two technical experts who claim that the weapons can kill, in a move which some scientists say is intimidation.

The electric Taser guns, which use a 50,000-volt shock to incapacitate suspects, were adopted by police across the country in 2004.

The weapons are marketed as "non-lethal", but critics disagree. Since 1999 about 120 deaths have been linked to the weapon's use worldwide, but the manufacturer, Taser International, says that in all cases other factors were the cause.

Currently 28 out of 43 police forces in England and Wales and four of eight Scottish forces use the stun guns. Between April 2003 and January this year they have been fired 97 times by English officers.

The company is suing two scientists who have raised safety concerns. "[The company has] a lot of money and they are playing hardball," said forensic engineer Peter Alexander, secretary of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) engineering section. The company denies it is trying to silence legitimate criticism.

Both men facing legal action say they have been putting forward legitimate technical arguments, and that the company is using the courts to extinguish dissent. One of the defendants, Roland Kohr, is a forensic pathologist and medical examiner for Vigo County, Indiana. He performed an autopsy on James Borden, who died after being "Tased" six times while in police custody in November 2003. Dr Kohr concluded that the electric shock had contributed to Mr Borden's death.

Last month, Dr Kohr was due to speak on Tasers at the AAFS annual meeting in Seattle, the premier international meeting for forensic experts, but following legal action by Taser International, his lawyers advised him to pull out.

"In essence I am being sued for giving my opinion," Dr Kohr said. "Draw your own conclusions as to the timing of this. Maybe their whole intent was to prevent me from speaking at this meeting." Thomas Bohan, of MTC Forensics in Maine, said even if Dr Kohr was wrong, his evidence should be heard: "When medical examiners rightly or wrongly make a judgment in a case, they should be able to do that without the threat of legal action."

Taser International is also suing James Ruggieri, a certified professional engineer from Virginia. The action was initiated just before publication of a paper last year in a peer-reviewed journal. This argued that the Taser's power output is higher, and therefore more dangerous, than the company claims. He had also been intending to speak in Seattle, but pulled out.

Rick Smith, CEO of Taser International in Scotsdale, Arizona, said: "We did not sue Dr Kohr because of his medical opinion." He claims both men are part of an organised campaign which is advancing "wildly flagrant and defamatory" claims about stun weapon safety and that Mr Ruggieri does not have the necessary technical expertise to evaluate the device. Dr Kohr denied any knowledge of an organised campaign.

Mr Smith says there is no evidence that Tasers can kill, but added that they are not risk-free. To properly assess the risks, he said, the stun guns should be compared with alternatives such as pepper spray, batons and firearms. The company has documented more than 900 "saves" in which a suspect was subdued safely using a Taser, rather than being shot.

British police use them only as an alternative to firearms, but Angela Wright of Amnesty International said Taser International was lobbying the government to extend this. "It is in their interests to see it used as widely as possible," she said.

One case study presented in Seattle suggested that Tasers can kill healthy subjects. Amy Sheil at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, described the death of a fit, 28-year-old black prisoner who had attacked prison guards with a pencil. The man was "Tased" six times, culminating in a 169-second bout of electricity. "This is a very long duration," she said, concluding that the Taser had stopped his heart.

Mark Kroll, a cardiologist on Taser International's scientific advisory board, rejects Dr Shiel's verdict, claiming a Taser shot is simply not powerful enough. "The safety factors are enormous," he said.

He pointed out that an independent study by the UK police scientific development branch last year concluded that it was unlikely Tasers could influence the electrical functioning of the heart in healthy people.

Wednesday, January 05, 2005

Heart expert warns about using tasers

January 5, 2005
Sabin Russell, San Francisco Chronicle

UCSF doctor says jolt can interrupt pumping of blood

When 50,000 volts of electricity from a Taser surge across the body, it can instantly incapacitate a person -- more safely than a blow from a police baton or a blast of pepper spray, its manufacturer contends.

But cardiologists are concerned that, in certain cases, the device might also interrupt the rhythm of the human heart, throwing it into a potentially fatal chaotic state known as ventricular fibrillation.

Rather than pump blood in sequence through its four chambers, a heart in ventricular fibrillation writhes uncontrollably, wiggling like a bag of worms. It is a common cause of sudden death.

Dr. Zian Tseng, a cardiologist at UCSF, believes Tasers are potentially dangerous because a jolt of electricity, at just the right moment in the heartbeat cycle, can trigger ventricular fibrillation.

He ought to know. He uses a precisely timed jolt to throw the hearts of his patients into ventricular fibrillation on a regular basis.

Tseng installs implantable electric defibrillators into the chests of heart patients who are at risk of sudden cardiac arrest. The devices are miniature versions of the electric paddles used to jolt a stalled heart back into its proper rhythm. Vice President Dick Cheney is the most prominent American with such a device implanted in his chest.

Before Tseng can wheel a patient out of the operating room, he must test the new defibrillator by stopping the heart, and watching to see if the life- saving implant does its job.

"There are vulnerable periods in the cardiac cycle, when shocks can cause dangerous arrhythmias,'' Tseng said.

Known as a T-wave on the heart monitor, the brief pause in pumping takes up about 3 percent of a heartbeat's cycle. Tseng times his jolt of electricity for that moment, to stop a heart, so the defibrillator can automatically start it again.

People using Tasers, he said, risk jolting a person at precisely the wrong instant. "I think they are dangerous,'' he said. "If you are shocking someone repeatedly, it becomes a bit like Russian roulette. At some point, you may hit that vulnerable period."

Cardiologists also know that the window in which a jolt of electricity can halt a heart expands significantly when a patient is treated with certain drugs, or when the body is flooded with the fear hormone, adrenaline. Patients with underlying heart problems are also more vulnerable to the condition.

Executives at Taser International are aware of the heart's vulnerability to ventricular fibrillation, but they insist their device is safe. The electrical current used in an operating room to stop a heart is 30 times higher than that produced by a Taser, said Mark Kroll, an electrical engineer and board member of the Scottsdale, Ariz., firm. Medically induced fibrillation involves applying a current directly to the inside of the heart, he added, while a Taser's current is applied to the clothing and skin.

"The current delivered by a Taser is too weak to induce ventricular fibrillation,'' he said.

Kroll acknowledged that adrenaline does increase vulnerability to ventricular fibrillation, and that many subjects facing police arrest are pumped up with the hormone. But he said there is no evidence it lowers the threshold to a point that would make Tasers dangerous.

"If anything, a Taser is reducing deaths," Kroll said. "Many subjects are in a terminal stage of a drug overdose. The quicker police can get them under control, the quicker they can get medical help."

UCSF cardiologist Tseng said that, as a precaution, police should carry automatic electronic defibrillators in their cars, so they might revive someone whose heart has been stopped.

And while Kroll said Tasers are not responsible for stopping hearts, he agreed with Tseng on that point: "I think cops should carry defibrillators anyway.''

Sunday, July 18, 2004

As police use of tasers rises, questions over safety increase

July 18, 2004
Alex Berenson, The New York Times

AZARETH, Pa. — As the sun set on June 24, something snapped in Kris J. Lieberman, an unemployed landscaper who lived a few miles from this quiet town. For 45 minutes, he crawled deliriously around a pasture here, moaning and pounding his head against the weedy ground.

Eventually the police arrived, carrying a Taser M26, an electric gun increasingly popular with law enforcement officers nationwide. The gun fires electrified barbs up to 21 feet, hitting suspects with a disabling charge.

The officers told Mr. Lieberman, 32, to calm down. He lunged at them instead. They fired their Taser twice. He fought briefly, collapsed and died.

Mr. Lieberman joined a growing number of people, now at least 50, including 6 in June alone, who have died since 2001 after being shocked. Taser International, which makes several versions of the guns, says its weapons are not lethal, even for people with heart conditions or pacemakers. The deaths resulted from drug overdoses or other factors and would have occurred anyway, the company says.

But Taser has scant evidence for that claim. The company's primary safety studies on the M26, which is far more powerful than other stun guns, consist of tests on a single pig in 1996 and on five dogs in 1999. Company-paid researchers, not independent scientists, conducted the studies, which were never published in a peer-reviewed journal. Taser has no full-time medical director and has never created computer models to simulate the effect of its shocks, which are difficult to test in human clinical trials for ethical reasons.

What is more, aside from a continuing Defense Department study, the results of which have not been released, no federal or state agencies have studied the safety, or effectiveness, of Tasers, which fall between two federal agencies and are essentially unregulated. Nor has any federal agency studied the deaths to determine what caused them. In at least two cases, local medical examiners have said Tasers were partly responsible. In many cases, autopsies are continuing or reports are unavailable.

The few independent studies that have examined the Taser have found that the weapon's safety is unproven at best. The most comprehensive report, by the British government in 2002, concluded "the high-power Tasers cannot be classed, in the vernacular, as `safe.' " Britain has not approved Tasers for general police use.

A 1989 Canadian study found that stun guns induced heart attacks in pigs with pacemakers. A 1999 study by the Department of Justice on an electrical weapon much weaker than the Taser found that it might cause cardiac arrest in people with heart conditions. In reviewing other electrical devices, the Food and Drug Administration has found that a charge half as large as that of the M26 can be dangerous to the heart.

While Taser says that the M26 is not dangerous, it now devotes most of its marketing efforts to the X26, a less powerful weapon it introduced last year. Both weapons are selling briskly. About 100,000 officers nationally now have Tasers, 20 times the number in 2000, and most carry the M26. Taser, whose guns are legal for civilian use in most states, hopes to expand its potential market with a new consumer version of the X26 later this summer.

For Taser, which owns the weapon's trademark and is the only company now making the guns, the growth has been a bonanza. Its stock has soared. Its executives and directors, including a former New York police commissioner, Bernard B. Kerik, have taken advantage, selling $60 million in shares since November.

Patrick Smith, Taser's chief executive, said the guns are safe. "We tell people that this has never caused a death, and in my heart and soul I believe that's true," Mr. Smith said.

Taser did not need to disclose the British results to American police departments, he said. "The Brits are extremely conservative," he said. "To me, this is sort of boilerplate, the fine print." In addition to Taser's animal trials, thousands of police volunteers have received shocks without harm, Mr. Smith said.

But the hits that police officers receive from the M26 in their Taser training have little in common with the shocks given to suspects. In training, volunteers usually receive a single shock of a half-second or less. In the field, Tasers automatically fire for five seconds. If an officer holds down the trigger, a Taser will discharge longer. And suspects are often hit repeatedly.

Over all, Taser has significantly overstated the weapon's safety, say biomedical engineers who separately examined the company's research at the request of The New York Times. None of the engineers have any financial stake in the company or any connection with Taser; The Times did not pay them.

Relatively small electric shocks can kill people whose hearts are weakened by disease or cocaine use, said John Wikswo, a Vanderbilt University biomedical engineer. But no one knows whether the Taser's current crosses the threshold for those people, Dr. Wikswo said.

"Their testing scheme has not included the possibility that there is a subset of the population that is exquisitely sensitive," Dr. Wikswo said. "That alone means they have not done adequate testing."

Mr. Smith said Taser would eventually run more tests. "In a perfect world, I'd love to have studies on all this stuff, but animal studies are controversial, expensive," he said. "You've got to do the reasonable amount of testing." Comparing Taser's tests with the studies conducted by makers of medical devices like pacemakers is unfair, he said.

Dr. Andrew Podgorski, a Canadian electrical engineer who conducted the 1989 study, said he was certain that Tasers were dangerous for people with pacemakers. More research is needed to determine if other people are vulnerable, he said.

"I would urge the U.S. government to conduct those studies," Dr. Podgorski said. "Shocking a couple of pigs and dogs doesn't prove anything."

In More Officers' Hands

Many police officers defend the Taser, saying the weapon helps them avoid using deadly force and lowers the risk of injury to officers. Tasers let police officers subdue suspects without wrestling with or hitting them, said David Klinger, a former police officer and a criminology professor at the University of Missouri at St. Louis. And Tasers are surely safer than firearms.

"I think it is appropriate for deployment in the field," Mr. Klinger said. "You trust this guy or gal with a gun, you should be able to trust them with a less lethal device."

But human rights groups say the police may be overusing the Taser. Because the gun leaves only light marks, and because Taser markets it as nonlethal, officers often use it on unruly suspects, not just as an alternative to deadly force, said Dr. William F. Schulz, the executive director of Amnesty International USA. In recent incidents, officers have shocked a 9-year-old girl in Arizona and a 66-year-old woman in Kansas City.

"We think there should be controlled, systematic independent medical studies," Dr. Schulz said. "We would like to see these weapons suspended until these questions are answered."

A study by the Orange County, Fla., sheriff's office showed that officers used pepper spray and batons much less after getting the guns. But the use of Tasers more than made up for that drop, and the department's overall use of force increased 58 percent from 2000 to 2003. Last week, several police departments in Orange County agreed to restrict the use of Tasers to situations where suspects are actively resisting officers. The sheriff's office is not part of the agreement and says it is still studying the matter.

State and federal agencies do not keep tabs on Taser use, so no one knows how many times officers have fired the weapon. Officers have reported close to 5,000 uses of the M26 to Taser, but the company says the actual number is much higher.

Little evidence supports the theory that Tasers reduce police shootings or work better than other alternatives to guns, like pepper spray. Because of their limited range, Tasers are best in situations where an officer using a Taser is covered by another with a firearm, officers say.

A 2002 company study found that nearly 85 percent of people shocked with Tasers were unarmed. Fewer than 5 percent were carrying guns.

In Phoenix, which has equipped all its officers with Tasers, police shootings fell by half last year. Taser trumpets that statistic on its Web site. But last year's drop appears to be an anomaly. This year, shootings are running at a record pace, according to the Phoenix police department.

A 2002 study in Greene County, Mo., found that Tasers were only marginally more effective than pepper spray at restraining suspects. Pepper spray worked in 91 percent of cases, while the Taser had a 94 percent success rate.

The largest police departments have been slow to embrace the Taser. The New York Police Department owns only a handful of Tasers, which are used by specialized units and supervisors, a spokesman said.

'Gold in Those Hills'

The M26 was introduced only five years ago, but the technology is much older. John Cover, an Arizona inventor, created the Taser in 1969. Its name stands for "Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle," an allusion to the Tom Swift series of science fiction novels.

Engineers have known for generations that relatively small electric currents cause painful and uncontrollable muscle contractions. Tasers operate on that principle, firing barbs that are connected by wire to the gun and flood the body with current. The gun can deliver its shock even if the barbs do not break the skin because its current can jump through two inches of clothing.

Weak currents are not inherently dangerous if they stop in a few minutes. But stronger shocks can disrupt the electrical circuitry of the heart. That condition, ventricular fibrillation, causes cardiac arrest in seconds and death in minutes, unless the heart is defibrillated with an even larger shock.

The exact current needed to cause fibrillation depends on technical factors like the current's shape and frequency, as well as the heart's condition, said James Eason, a biomedical engineering professor at Washington and Lee University. But because fibrillation is so dangerous, scientists can conduct only limited human trials. They must estimate the threshold of fibrillation from animal trials and computer models.

Still, the broad parameters for fibrillation are known, and the first Taser from Mr. Cover had a large safety margin. In 1975 the Consumer Product Safety Commission concluded that weapon, which was 11 percent as powerful as the M26, probably would not harm healthy humans.

Then, in March 1976, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms claimed it had jurisdiction over the weapons because gunpowder propelled their barbs. The firearms bureau essentially outlawed them for civilian use; no federal safety standard was ever created.

But the original Tasers were bulky and often ineffective. For almost two decades, they remained a niche product used by a few police departments.

That began to change after 1993, when Mr. Smith and his brother Thomas created a company to market electric weapons to civilians. Patrick Smith, who had just graduated from the University of Chicago business school, saw enormous potential for an alternative to firearms.

"I just figured I'm going to go to out to Arizona, and I'm going to scratch and sniff and dig, and figure there's going to be gold in those hills," Mr. Smith said in an interview.

In January 1995, the Smiths introduced their first electric gun, which was powered by compressed nitrogen. As a result, the weapon was not regulated by the firearms bureau and could be sold to civilians.

For the next several years, the company struggled, as concerns over the gun's power kept sales slow. By 1999, the company, now known as Taser International, was near bankruptcy, with only $50,000 in the bank and $2.7 million in debt.

"It was pretty humiliating," he said. "We had completely wiped out my parents financially."

Testing

Hoping to stay afloat, the company introduced the Advanced Taser M26 in December 1999. The weapon closely resembled a handgun, a feature many police officers liked, and was very powerful.

According to Taser, the gun produced 26 watts of power, four times the power of the earlier model. A field test in 2001 by the Canadian police showed that the M26 was even stronger, with an output of 39 watts.

(Stun gun power is usually gauged in watts, a measure of electrical energy, even though the biological effects of electricity are more closely related to current strength, measured in amperes. Electrical engineers often compare the flow of electricity to a river: amperes are like the river's speed, while watts are the amount of water flowing by each second. As watts increase, amperes rise, but more slowly.)

Taser's sales rose as officers learned about the new gun. At meetings with police officers, company representatives encouraged them to receive a half-second shock to feel the weapon's power for themselves. "These guys would leave just absolutely evangelical about the product because we would just drop them all," Mr. Smith said.

In its marketing, the company touted the safety of the M26, saying it had been extensively tested.

But Taser had performed only two animal studies before introducing the M26.

In 1996, Taser hired Robert Stratbucker, a Nebraska doctor and farmer, to test the weapon. Dr. Stratbucker, who is now Taser's part-time medical director, shocked a pig 48 times with shocks as large as those from the M26. The pig suffered no heart damage.

Three years later, the company hired Dr. Stratbucker and Dr. Wayne McDaniel, an electrical engineer, for an animal test at the University of Missouri. The scientists shocked five anesthetized dogs about 200 times with the M26. The dogs did not suffer cardiac arrest, although one animal had changes in its heartbeat, according to a report.

Taser has repeatedly said the studies proved that the M26 was safe. But the biomedical engineers who reviewed the gun's safety for The Times said Taser should have conducted far more research.

"I don't think there has been a definitive study saying that yes it can contribute to death or no it cannot," said Dr. Raymond Ideker, an electrophysiologist and a professor in the cardiology division at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Taser must test more animals and vary the shocks they receive to find the gun's safety margin, Dr. Ideker said.

In addition, while Taser claims that its Missouri study proves that the gun is safe for people who have used cocaine, it never tested animals dosed with cocaine. Because cocaine substantially increases heart attack risk, and Tasers are used on people who have taken cocaine, that omission is a serious flaw, said Dr. Wikswo of Vanderbilt.

The company should also examine risks other than fibrillation, some scientists say.

Dr. Terrence Allen, a former medical examiner in Los Angeles who examined cases in the late 1980's when people died after being shocked with earlier-model Tasers, said he was sure the weapons could be lethal. Taser is misrepresenting the medical evidence, said Dr. Allen, who has consulted for people who have sued the company.

Dr. Mark W. Kroll, a Taser director and the chief technology officer of St. Jude Medical, one of the largest pacemaker manufacturers, said Taser had adequately tested its weapons and they were safe. External pacemakers deliver much larger charges and do not cause fibrillation, he said.

Dr. Ideker countered that pacemakers and Tasers could not be easily compared, because the Taser's shock is very short and powerful, while a pacemaker delivers its charge over a much longer period.

Although Taser has performed only rudimentary studies of the M26, it has more closely studied the X26, the gun it introduced last year. In a 2003 study at the University of Missouri, Taser found that a shock roughly 20 times that of the X26 caused a healthy, anesthetized 85-pound pig to fibrillate.

Mr. Smith cites the 2003 Missouri study as proof that all Tasers have a safety margin of 20-to-1 or more. But the new gun puts out a charge only one-fourth as large as the older model, a fact Taser does not generally advertise.

The study said nothing about the M26, or about hearts stressed by disease, drugs or physical activity. "I think another test is warranted," Dr. Ideker said.

Taser did not test the older gun, which is associated with nearly all the deaths, because "we believed that the M26's safety record and prior testing speaks for itself," Mr. Smith said. "Could it be done? Absolutely. There's time and expense involved."

The X26 has become Taser's biggest seller, based mainly on the company's claims that it is even stronger than the M26 despite its small size and lower power. The company says the new gun enables electrical current to enter the body more efficiently.

No independent agency has tested the guns side by side, and in Taser's patent on the M26, Mr. Smith himself argued that weaker guns were often ineffective because they do not deliver enough current to incapacitate suspects. But neither deaths nor concerns about effectiveness have dampened police support and investor enthusiasm for Taser International. Stock analysts predict Taser will have $15 million in profits on sales of $60 million in 2004. Investors have bid up the company's shares 60-fold since last February, giving Taser a value of $1.2 billion.

The Smith brothers and their father, Phillips, have sold $46 million in Taser shares since November, according to federal filings. They still own $130 million worth of shares. Other Taser executives and directors have sold $14 million in stock. Mr. Kerik, the former New York police commissioner and a director, has sold $900,000 in stock. Mr. Kroll of St. Jude Medical has sold $1.7 million.

"It's been great," Patrick Smith said of the company's recent success. But making money is not his main goal, he said. "If we could get a Taser on every officer's belt,'' he said, " it would save hundreds of lives or thousands of lives a year."

Deaths and Questions

Meanwhile, the number of Taser-associated deaths is rising. In June alone, at least six people died, the most ever in one month: Eric B. Christmas, James A. Cobb, Jacob J. Lair, Anthony C. Oliver, Jerry W. Pickens and Mr. Lieberman.

The circumstances of the deaths vary widely. Among the six, Mr. Pickens was the only one hit with the X26.

Mr. Cobb fought for several minutes after being shocked, which suggests that fibrillation could not have caused his death. Some of the other men collapsed immediately, according to news reports and witnesses. Some of the men were fighting with the police when officers shot them. Others simply refused to obey orders.

Mr. Pickens was one. On June 4, in Bridge City, La., the police were summoned to help calm him after an argument with his 18-year-old son, Taylor Pickens. Jerry Pickens confronted the police in the family's front yard.

"My dad, he had been drinking, and he was kind of hostile toward the police,'' Taylor said. "He kept trying to go back inside the house, and they said, 'If you're going to go back into the house we're going to Taser you.' " Mr. Pickens who was unarmed, began to walk inside, Taylor said.

"They counted down three, and then they shot him in the back," Taylor said. "My dad stiffened up, and fell back." Mr. Pickens hit his head on a cement walkway and began foaming at the mouth, Taylor said.

Sharon Landis, Taylor's mother and Mr. Pickens's wife, said officers did not need to shock her husband. "They could have pepper-sprayed him, they could have grabbed him," she said. "He's 55 years old, and these are big burly cops."

Mr. Pickens was pronounced brain-dead that day and removed from life support three days later, Ms. Landis said.

Toxicologic tests on Mr. Pickens are being conducted, said Gayle Day of the Jefferson Parish coroner's office. A spokesman for the sheriff's office said he could not comment on a continuing investigation. Mr. Smith said he could not comment on Mr. Pickens's death.

Three weeks later, Kris Lieberman died in Pennsylvania. The officers who shocked him were the only witnesses to his death, which the Pennsylvania State Police are investigating. But Mr. Lieberman's parents said the state police told them that their son was shocked twice and collapsed afterward. [Stan Coopersmith, chief of the Bushkill Township Police, whose officers responded to the call, said he could not comment on the incident until the state police finish their investigation.] But Taser said that the police chief had told the company that Mr. Lieberman fought briefly after the shocks and that an automatic defibrillator used by the officers indicated Mr. Lieberman was not fibrillating when he collapsed.

"I would suspect the autopsy will find a cause of death that does not include the Taser," Mr. Smith said.

Mr. Lieberman's parents say that he was troubled but that he did not use drugs. Police officers searched Mr. Lieberman's home after the shooting and did not find drugs, his parents say. Toxicologic tests are pending, the Northampton County Coroner said.

Mr. Lieberman's father, Richard, a plain-spoken farmer, said he had not decided whether to hire a lawyer. He simply wants to know if the gun caused his son's death. "If he was the problem, we have to accept it," Mr. Lieberman said. "If they were the problem, they have to accept it."

Eric Dash contributed reporting from New York for this article.