Guelph police board backs officer

Two anonymous comments I received today:

Anonymous said...
Oh yes, the fact that the Chief of Police in Guelph is monitoring Mulder should be enough to appease Miss Gillman. This woman has been monitoring taser misuse and abuse for 5 years now and has never been far off the mark. Perhaps we should all consider learning more about this non medical police/taser coined condition "exited delirium" since a good majority of us will probably suffer from it if taser use is not curbed. However, very nice of Chief Davis to "feel sorry" for Ms. Gillman over the brutal tasering death of her brother Robert. This issue goes far beyond the death of her brother...it encompasses the tasering deaths of 409 citizens to date. The list of the dead continues to grow...and the list of concerned Canadians is growing with the mistrust of our police forces and their documented brutality and coverups. So who are we to believe...Chief Davis and his monitoring? I don't think so!!!

May 22, 2009 2:11 PM
Anonymous said...
But Mulder's company ~IS~ linked to Taser International. Perhaps indirectly, but the dots can be connected.

1) His company is an obvious clone of the US outfit, and the US outfit has been linked to Taser International in several ways. (A bit stupid to copy the logo if you're trying to maintain an air of independence isn't it?)

2) Mulder also admits that he was in direct contact with the US outfit. It would be interesting to review his communications records if push comes to shove.

3) Also the purpose of Mulder's outfit includes promotion of the convenient excuse for a taser-associated death ("excited delirium"), very similar to the US outfit.

Mulder can claim pure-as-the-driven snow independence, but we do not have to believe him.


May 22, 2009
Greg Layson, Guelph Mercury

Guelph Police Service Chief Rob Davis stands by his man.

Davis yesterday defended Const. Gary Mulder and his private business, called Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc., which bears a striking resemblance to an American company called Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths.

Both companies offer emergency responders training in recognizing potentially dangerous in-custody circumstances and offer strategies to reduce the risk of fatalities. Both also tout the existence of a condition called "excited delirium" and offer training on recognizing and handling it.

The American firm has corporate links to Taser International. According to Mulder, his does not.

In an email sent April 27, outspoken stun gun critic Patti Gillman, whose brother died after being Tasered, requested the Guelph Police Services Board once again examine its conflict-of-interest policies because Mulder was allowed to start a private company.

Gillman's concerns were examined again yesterday at the Guelph Police Services Board meeting. Davis prepared a report and supplemented it with a recent study that supported the use of Tasers.

"We investigated the concerns in her email and there is no connection (to Taser International)," Davis said. "We're standing firm that everything was done properly."

Davis said he is satisfied and will not monitor Mulder's business.

"Any time an agreement is reached between a member and the board and approval is granted, they are responsible to abide by the rules set forth," Davis said. "We don't monitor the approval once it's been made but if something comes to our attention we'll investigate it."

City of Guelph councillor Gloria Kovach, who sits on the police board, was also satisfied with Mulder's arrangement.

"Due diligence was done," she said. "We should be promoting extra educational opportunities like this."

Last year, Mulder organized a Guelph seminar on excited delirium. More than 300 emergency personnel attended.

Excited delirium is a controversial term that describes a state of mind and body in which individuals are agitated, exhibiting both incoherent speech and extreme strength. It is not, however, listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association.

Gillman doesn't subscribe to the theory. Davis does.

"I feel sorry for Patti Gillman and the loss of her brother, but we still need to be progressive in recognizing this and training people in recognizing this," said Davis, whose department has a policy to, if possible, call for an ambulance before using a Taser.

The report Davis prepared cited a study published in Blue Line Magazine. It concludes the Taser M26 and Taser X26, which the Guelph Police use, are both safer than some over-the-counter headache medicines.

Police praise Tasers

February 25, 2009
Scott Tracey, Guelph Mercury

Guelph's deputy police chief welcomed a position document released yesterday that would see all officers authorized to carry Tasers.

"We do support the use of Tasers . . . and in the future we'd like to see Tasers for all officers," Brent Eden said in an interview.

The Canadian Police Association and Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police issued a joint statement yesterday supporting so-called conducted energy weapons.

At a news conference on Parliament Hill, representatives of the two organizations alleged the public has been misinformed that the weapons cost lives.

Tasers have come under close scrutiny, especially during the past month as a public inquiry plays out in Vancouver into the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski, who died in October 2007 after being stunned with a Taser by four RCMP officers at the Vancouver International Airport.

Earlier this month, RCMP Commissioner William Elliott announced his organization had revised its policy for using the weapons, adding that risks involved with using them include "the risk of death."

Eden conceded there are risks to using Tasers, as there are with all weapons, but noted there have been situations in which they have prevented injuries to officers and civilians.

"There's definitely a risk to using them," the deputy said. "They are a use-of-force application and there can be a risk associated with any use-of-force option."

Guelph Police received Tasers in December 2002, but currently only front-line supervisors and members of the tactical unit are authorized to carry them.

"We support a provincial push to have all officers equipped with conducted energy weapons," Eden said.

The Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police passed a resolution in 2007 asking the province to allow all officers access to the weapons.

Yesterday, OACP president Ian Davidson said his organization is still waiting.

"If a police officer, legislatively, can be trusted to carry a firearm then surely he or she should be permitted to carry a conducted energy weapon," Davidson, chief of the Greater Sudbury police service, said in an interview.

Davidson conceded the weapons have "come under significant scrutiny" by the media, which has "raised some questions" about the safety of Tasers that must be addressed.

But he said he is confident legislators and the public will eventually embrace the weapons as a valuable policing tool.

"Although not without risk, the CEW is a very viable use-of-force option," Davidson said. "This is something that simply has to be in the hands of officers."

Eden conceded the most important element of wider Taser use would be training, noting use of the weapons is not currently part of the curriculum at the Ontario Police College.

He noted training has not been a serious issue in Guelph as the weapons are only used by tactical officers, who receive the most training in the police service, and by supervisors who necessarily have years of policing experience to rely upon.

EDITORIAL: We'd welcome fuller disclosure

January 21, 2009
THE GUELPH MERCURY

To the RCMP it was known simply as Occurrence No. 2007-34748. But in the form in which the document was publicly released to two major national media organizations last year, it was difficult to get a full picture of exactly what had occurred.

Through liberal use of a blackout pen, the name and rank of the police officer involved in the incident and the name of the officer's supervisor were among the pertinent details deleted. Also deleted was the name of Robert Dziekanski, whose death in a Tasering incident at Vancouver International Airport in 2007 provoked a national debate about the use by police of these controversial electronic stun guns.

The absurdity of deleting the Polish immigrant's name from an official police report into his death -- a report that was pried loose by The Canadian Press and the CBC through access to information legislation -- brought loud complaints from opposition MPs and human rights groups, who criticized the Mounties for suppressing key details about Taser cases.

Fewer complaints have been voiced following the release of an annual national freedom of information audit commissioned by the Canadian Newspaper Association, part of which related to police reports about Taser use.

The association, a non-profit organization that represents all of Canada's daily newspapers, set itself an ambitious goal: to seek the release of all reports prepared by officers at various Canadian police agencies during 2007 and 2008 related to the use of Tasers or similar electronic control devices.

Not surprisingly, only five per cent of those requests resulted in full disclosure. The Guelph Police Service was not among them.

Now let's make it clear -- Guelph Police do a better job than many of their counterparts when it comes to conveying information on Taser cases.

The Guelph force reveals details of Taser incidents its officers are involved in through summaries that are released quarterly -- and publicly -- at police board meetings. And we've reported on what's contained in those summaries.

But that's what they are -- summaries, a distillation of the official reports filled out by police officers about specific incidents. We're assured by the department that the summaries are more than a precis of an incident and that they contain "all of the details" -- with some notable exceptions.

Not included for public edification is the name of the officer who used the Taser, the name of the person who received the electronic jolt, or the exact date or time of an incident. Guelph Police say they are precluded from releasing those details under provincial privacy legislation -- which echoes the response from the RCMP in the case of the heavily censored four-page form related to the death of Robert Dziekanski.

But censored or not -- and the Mounties later apologized for the excessive secrecy surrounding its use-of-force Taser reports -- that RCMP document was released following a freedom of information request.

In the Canadian Newspaper Association audit, the responses to requests for the release of those so-called field reports ranged widely, from outright refusals to the release of the reports with key information, such as the names of those involved, removed prior to release.

This is an issue of public accountability. There's no reason for some Canadian police forces to feel it's their duty to release these reports, however censored they are, while others feel they can only safely release summaries of those reports.

Full reports, even with large sections blotted out because of privacy concerns, have the potential to provide the public with a fuller context and a better picture of how Tasers are used.

That's vital as the debate continues about when and how police use them -- or whether they should be used at all.

"Excited delirium" blamed for deaths

May 17, 2008
Adrian Humphreys, National Post

The message inside the meeting room was one thing -- "we're not talking about Tasers" one speaker said three or four times during a presentation to 250 police officers and paramedics -- but the chatter outside was quite another.

"I've been Tasered twice -- once sober and once drunk," said an officer during the break. "How many times have you used yours?" another asked a colleague. A third complained her force now makes her fill out a form every time she uses her Taser, while another described it as "kind of freaky" zapping someone for the first time.

As emergency personnel reached past the baskets of apples, cookies and chips during conference breaks, talk quickly turned to the Taser, the police-issue stun guns thrust into the public spotlight when an agitated Polish immigrant in Vancouver's airport collapsed and died after being hit by police Tasers and held to the ground.

Controversy over the increasing use of Tasers and the attention accorded in-custody deaths is, after all, why most are here, in Guelph at a conference hosted by the local police force on recognizing the signs of excited delirium.

While the Taser draws most of the heat, debate over precisely why people die after a brisk battle with police to restrain them -- whether using a Taser or not -- is growing as more attention is being paid to a condition that is only now being popularized.

On one hand, the officers and medics who are called to deal with the agitated and disturbed

people say they know the phenomenon well. They have seen the irrational responses, bizarre behaviour and hyperactivity of the people; they have felt their superhuman strength as they struggle.

Police readily grab hold of the medical terminology of "excited delirium" to describe it.

That excited delirium is a condition almost exclusively associated with a struggle with police, however, creates concern with some. One does not hear of a person dying of excited delirium during a barroom brawl or a fight with a spouse or when out camping or shopping.

"Anytime you see a specific condition being referenced in only one context it raises serious question," said Graeme Norton, the director of the public safety project with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

Opponents in the United States go further, saying the term is used to mask over-aggressive police force.

Excited delirium is a term that has been accepted in the United States by the National Association of Medical Examiners, but not by the American Medical Association. It has been dismissed as a "pop culture phenomenon" in the pages of the Canadian Medical Association Journal and listed as a contributing cause of death in several coroner's reports in Canada.

At Thursday's conference, such debate was pushed into the background. As the presentations progressed, few in the room seemed to be nonbelievers.

A jerky video projection showed a large young man -- naked and agitated -- walking down the street with only passing compliance with orders to stop that are repeatedly called out by a growing cluster of police officers anxiously fingering canisters of pepper spray in their latex-gloved hands.

When the man starts punching out large sections of a wooden fence, the officers move in, bathing him in spray and piling on him as he pushes back with apparent superhuman strength.

As the video of the confrontation finishes, Chris Lawrence, a trainer with the Ontario Police College, turns to conference attendees and parodies what critics of police are saying: "We'd like you to negotiate with this individual; we can't understand why you just can't talk to these people."

The room erupts in knee-slapping laughter.

"We don't do this because we want to; we do this because we have to," he said of police restraint techniques, including Tasers, pepper spray, batons, handcuffs and physical holds.

Mr. Lawrence studied 407 police-related deaths in Ontario that went to inquest and are archived at the police college. He found 35 cases where excited delirium was deemed a factor, either by name or by mention of common features. The first death was in 1988.

Only one involved a Taser, although more recent examples may still be in the inquest system and are not included in his study. All but one of the 35 victims was male. Their average age was 34.

He found excited delirium deaths occurred over the years on every day of the week, but most often on weekends. All of the victims were either substance abusers (overwhelmingly cocaine) or suffering mental illness (most often schizophrenia) but rarely both at the same time. He found cases where the temperature was 31C and cases where it was -7.2C; cases in the biggest city and in rural northern Ontario.

"We cannot seem to eliminate the problem," he said.

Dr. Christine Hall, an emergency room doctor with the Vancouver Island Health Authority, addressed critics who dismiss excited delirium because it is not listed in the

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the standard guidebook to psychiatric diagnosis.

"It is not a diagnosis -- get over it," she said. "It is a state, a condition."

She compared it to other conditions, such as abdominal pain. Appendicitis might be the diagnosis for someone with abdominal pain. Excited delirium, she said, is a symptom or condition of an underlying disorder.

She echoed the contention that police restraint is typically necessary. "Psychiatrists do not undertake talk therapy with delirious people … the medic's job is not to capture people," she said. "Physicians and nurses do not undertake treatment on people who are trying to kill them."

Dean Popov, paramedic practice manager at Sunny-brook-Osler Centre for Prehospital Care, told the conference that no matter what police and medics do in these cases, it could end badly: "The outcome may still be negative, even if everything is done properly. We truly don't 100% know what is causing this yet."

See also: Excited-Delirium

Police learn about excited delirium

May 16, 2008
Lisa Varano, Guelph Mercury

The police encounter an agitated, paranoid, violent person who is naked and sweating profusely. Several officers are needed to restrain him because he is stronger than he looks and he won't stop struggling. He tries to kick out the windows of the police cruiser. Then, within minutes of quieting down, he is dead. What happened?

The person may have been in a state of "excited delirium," a medical condition that has garnered media attention recently.

Police officers and emergency personnel from across the province learned about the signs of excited delirium at a conference in Guelph yesterday.

The conference, organized by the Guelph Police Service, was the first in Canada to simultaneously educate the policing and medical communities about recognizing excited delirium. The condition has garnered attention recently because of some deaths in police custody.

Suspects in a state of excited delirium have died after being stunned with a Taser gun.

But an expert on excited delirium said deaths have also occurred in people who were not stunned. "We have no medical evidence" that police officers should not use a Taser on a suspect in excited delirium, said Dr. Christine Hall, an emergency room doctor and researcher in Victoria, B.C. She said research on excited delirium deaths should consider the effect of Tasers, but not fixate on the stun guns.

People in states of excited delirium have died of cardiopulmonary arrest in police cars, jail cells, ambulances and hospitals, Hall told 250 police officers and emergency medical technicians at Lakeside Church.

Excited delirium is not a diagnosis but rather a symptom of an underlying disorder, she said. Causes of excited delirium may include certain psychiatric illnesses, drug intoxication, alcohol withdrawal and heat stroke.

Police officers must restrain the person and describe the condition to medical personnel, Hall said. "What we're needing to start doing in Canada is to teach our nurses and our physicians what it is you're dealing with," she said.

Over the past decade Guelph Police have faced people a few times who may have been in excited delirium, said Constable Gary Mulder, a conference organizer and use-of-force trainer. None of them died in police custody, he said.

"First contact is the police. Then you get into medical involvement. Everybody has to treat it as a medical emergency," Mulder said. "We can't diagnose this person on the street. We're not doctors. We just have to recognize (excited delirium) and try to take the best possible course of action."

Excited delirium focus of meeting in Guelph (Ontario)

May 16, 2008
By THE CANADIAN PRESS

GUELPH -- Police officers and emergency personnel from across the province were in this city yesterday to learn about the signs of a controversial medical condition called excited delirium.

The conference, organized by the Guelph Police Service, was the first in Canada to simultaneously educate the policing and medical communities about recognizing excited delirium, which has garnered media attention in recent years because of some deaths in police custody.

Suspects in a state of excited delirium have died after being stunned with a Taser. But an expert on excited delirium said deaths have also occurred in people who were not Tasered.

Tasers subject of talk

October 26, 2007
THANA DHARMARAJAH, Guelph Mercury

Guelph Union of Tenants and Supporters (GUTS) are calling for a complete ban of Tasers by city police officers.

Recently Guelph Police Chief Rob Davis expressed a desire to outfit every front-line officer with a stun gun.

Currently, only tactical unit officers and front-line supervisors carry Tasers. However, individuals from the anti-poverty organization said the money would be better spent on city social services.

GUTS organizers are gathering Nov. 3 at Norfolk United Church at 1 p.m. to speak about the impacts of Tasers. They will be joined by a speaker from Amnesty International, which is also calling for a ban on stun guns.

There've been far too many deaths after the use of stun guns, said GUTS organizer Curtis Snoba.

Last week a man who was acting erratically at Vancouver International Airport died after police used a Taser on him, Snoba said. A Quebec man also died recently following the zap of a stun gun, which was used because the intoxicated man became aggressive during questioning, he said.

Some health experts, Snoba said, have questions whether it's safe to use stun guns on a subject who is intoxicated or under the influence of drugs.

In July, a Guelph man was stunned by police because he was acting irrationally and was suspected of being intoxicated, Snoba said.

"What we think is ridiculous is that they would Taser a man who they knew was already drunk."

Under the Guelph Police Service's Use of Force model, police officers are allowed to use Tasers on subjects that are assaultive to police officers, Snoba said.

But he doesn't believe Guelph Police officers are using their Tasers in appropriate situations.

Deputy police chief Brent Eden said police officers are authorized by law to use Tasers and every officer assesses the situation before determining whether employing a Taser is appropriate.

Under the Use of Force model, some situations where officers can deploy a Taser are to prevent being overpowered when violently attacked, disarm a dangerous person armed with an offensive weapon and control a potentially violent situation.

Eden said Tasers are used as an alternate use of other force.

"If there's a situation where you can use a Taser to render someone unable to fight . . . by far that choice will be preferable to shooting somebody," he said.

At GUTS' gathering next Saturday, participants will brainstorm on ways to keep Tasers out of Guelph, Snoba said.

Guelph Union of Tenants and Supporters calls for ban of police tasers in Guelph (Ontario)

September 6, 2007
Guelph, Ontario

The Guelph Union of Tenants and Supporters is calling for an immediate ban on Tasers being issued to city Police.

Currently only Supervisors and the Tactical Squad are issued Tasers. The Police Chief has called for Tasers to be issued to every front-line officer. There are several recent reports of inappropriate and excessive use of Tasers in Guelph.

GUTS supports the recent findings of Amnesty International. The group has recently published a report titled "Canada, Inappropriate and Excessive use of tasers."

Amnesty states that the Taser is supposed to be an alternative to deadly force yet is consistently used too early in the use of force model. Also Amnesty states "None of the studies carried out in Canada into the use of tasers meet Amnesty International's criteria for an independent, impartial and comprehensive inquiry into their use and effects.."

On July 25, 2007 a Guelph man was tasered by police, because he was suspected of being intoxicated and acting irrationally. The General Warnings put out by Taser, states that “... drug intoxication or chronic drug abuse, and/or over-exertion from physical struggle may result in serious injury or death.” Despite the lack of an immediate risk of death being posed to the officers involved, they chose to taser this man. The Guelph Police are in contravention of both International Law and the General Warnings put out by the manufacturer.

On the night of April 15, 2005 the Guelph Police arrested a woman for public intoxication. Following a strip search, she was placed in an interrogation room. When she refused to stand up, she was tasered by the Guelph Police. Tasers in combination with the influence of alcohol can be fatal. Moreover, since she was sitting down, the woman clearly was no physical threat to the officers.

These two cases highlight that the manner in which the Taser is being used in Guelph, and more broadly Canada, is in contravention of the UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by law Enforcement Officials. GUTS believes that under international law, the manner in which Tasers are being used in our community would fall into the category of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

It is GUTS' position that the leadership and highly trained units in the Guelph Police do not have the training nor inclination to correctly use tasers. Clearly the culture of policing in Guelph is not conducive to proper use of tasers and they should be banned until proper training is given, proper research is conducted, and proper accountability measures are in place.