EDITORIAL: Anti-Taser critic worthy of praise

May 24, 2009
THE GUELPH MERCURY

No doubt some members of the Guelph Police Service and perhaps the Guelph Police Services Board feel otherwise, but outspoken police Taser-use critic Patti Gillman should be lauded for obliging both organizations to have a second look at something that troubles her.

Gillman, whose watchdog work and advocacy stems from the death of her brother following an arrest that saw him repeatedly shocked with Tasers, in Vancouver, is agitated over a private business started by a Guelph police officer.

The business, the Canadian Centre of the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc., came to upset Gillman in part for its many similarities to an American company. The American company, Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, has links and a business history with Taser International. Gillman appropriately considered it awry if the Canadian firm had like connections with Taser and wanted that explored.

Similar queries made by her of another Canadian police service led to that agency revising its conflict-of-interest policies.

She has no evidence of any inequitable issues related to the Guelph officer's company. Nor has any been established. But the basis for her feeling the need to call for a review of it are clear. The businesses sound alike. They engage in the same work -- training front-line emergency service workers in how to handle certain crisis situations. Their logos almost mirror each other. The founding Guelph officer has allowed publicly he had some co-operation on the startup of his business from its American peer. Further, both groups actively teach about excited delirium -- an alleged psychological and physiological state that has been politicized through its links to Taser-funded research and promotion.

We should want citizens to fairly question public agencies and agencies with public connections on their accountability and their transparency. Gillman did just so in this matter. And, the Guelph Police Services Board has added to the due diligence on this file because of her efforts.

Some will regard her as having wasted her energy and those of Guelph Police stakeholders. Others should regard this as active and responsible citizenship.

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.

Teamwork, training will help save lives

May 8, 2009
Letter to the Editor
The Guelph Mercury

Dear Editor - Re: Too Close For Comfort -- April 25

In response to your recent article, I do not believe the goals of the Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths were accurately portrayed to your readers. As an 18-year police officer and educator I see firsthand the value of teamwork and the importance of training.

The Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths is committed to protecting the lives of all persons involved by:

Delivering current, objective, and scientifically supported evidence to emergency personnel so they can continue to protect and serve;

Promoting teamwork among all involved emergency services to effectively manage crisis situations;

Maintaining and encouraging transparency in our conferences, training curriculum, and our practices; and,

Ensuring that honesty and integrity remain at the core of what we do, which includes accepting no funding from any outside organization, such as Taser, that would compromise the provision of impartial education.

There is little doubt that controversy surrounds the condition referred to by many as excited delirium. There have been unfortunate outcomes, including death, that have resulted. This is why the work of the Canadian centre is so important.

We want to ensure access for emergency personnel to the best possible education and research so that they can make the wisest decisions, no matter the situation they face.

The training helps emergency personnel increase their knowledge base so that they can continue to effectively serve and protect their communities.

Gary J. Mulder, President, Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc., Guelph

I received the following comment, which I post here so that it is not missed:

The US IPICD (Lawsuits) made half-assed attempts to obscure the links from Taser International. These links were exposed by bloggers and shown to be much tighter than had been portrayed.

Now we have a Canadian clone popping up with a trademark-violating copy of the US logo, the same role, similar relationships, and we're asked to believe that everything is on the up-and-up?

To be clear, if he says that money has changed hands, then I'm sure that they've made sure that no money has changed hands. Fine. That's not the point.

The fact is that the Canadian outfit really is an obvious clone of the US outfit, and Canadian critics aren't so stupid that we will allow ourselves to be fooled about the true purpose of this made-for-a-purpose outfit.

Mr. Mulder's company obviously exists to promote 'excited delirium' as a phony excuse that can be conveniently used to try to obscure the links from taser deployments to death.

The simple test of his independence is the following question:

Can a taser cause a death?

What's his answer?

Guelph to address Taser critic

May 5, 2009
Thana Dharmarajah
Record news services

The Guelph Police board will consider a letter this month urging it to examine its conflict-of-interest policies.

But Dave Clark, chair of the Guelph Police Services Board, says he doesn't share the concerns raised in the letter written by anti-Taser activist Patti Gillman of Belleville.

Gillman is an outspoken critic of police use of the stun guns. Her letter focuses on concerns she has about a private company started by a Guelph police officer.

She writes that Gary Mulder's Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc. bears a "striking resemblance" to the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths. The latter is a U.S. company with business links to Taser International, she says.

The police board discussed this issue last month but dropped it after Chief Rob Davis said Mulder's business presents no conflict-of-interest concerns. Mulder said his company is independent from the U.S. company and Taser and has never received funding from either.

Both companies promote their expertise in the prevention of in-custody deaths and offer training to front-line police officers and others in recognizing potentially dangerous circumstances surrounding some people in custody.

They also offer strategies to reduce the risk of deaths in such cases.

Likewise, the two companies tout the existence of a condition called excited delirium and offer training in how it should be handled.

The condition isn't listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric

Mulder's company is organizing a two-day conference on excited delirium in Niagara Falls on May 25 and 26.

Clark said he didn't seek legal counsel but a Toronto lawyer assured him Mulder wasn't in a conflict-of-interest because of his company.

"His role is a teaching role," he said. It's possible the police board will look at the policies of other police services, he said.

SEE ALSO: EDITORIAL: Anti-taser critic worthy of praise

How appropriate ...

Be sure to check out excited-delirium's shredding of the logo shared by the Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Death (whose president is Guelph, Ontario police constable Gary Mulder) and the American Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Death (which has been linked to Taser International). Seems "anyone" can hang a shingle for a centre or institute for the promotion of excited delirium - no medical credentials required!!

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

A letter I sent today.

Dear Chair and Members of the Guelph Police Services Board,

I am writing to you today, further to Thana Dharmarajah's April 25, 2009 Guelph Mercury article entitled Too Close for Comfort? and the editorial entitled A private firm, but a public flap which said: "The Guelph Police Services Board discussed this month a suggestion that it should review whether the officer might have a conflict of interest through running his private company. But the matter was dropped when Guelph Police Chief Rob Davis informed the panel the subject poses no such concerns." I would suggest to you, the members of the Guelph Police Services Board, that you reconsider whether this subject indeed does pose some significant concerns.

In August 2005, in a complaint which I submitted to the Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner for British Columbia, I outlined my concerns about Victoria Police Sergeant Darren Laur, who strongly endorsed tasers and played a pivotal role in their introduction into Canadian policing, but had been shown to have financial ties to Taser International. It should be noted that, like Constable Mulder, Sergeant Laur DID have the approval of the Victoria Chief of Police to operate his private company. And, in fact, during the five months following my complaint to the OPCC, the Victoria Police Chief sought to have my complaint dismissed, because he personally felt there was no recognized default having been committed by Sergeant Laur. I continued to insist and the OPCC agreed that, pursuant to the BC Police Act, he was obligated to properly characterize and process the complaint. And so in January 2006, the Chair of the Victoria Police Board directed the Chief of Police to conduct an investigation.

The ensuing investigation, which was completed in August 2007, undertook to review the issues respecting conflict of interest and police officers, including a review of existing policies and practices and legal opinions from several jurisdictions both in Canada and elsewhere. During the course of the investigation, it was determined that the Chief of Police was a witness and, as such, his role as Discipline Authority was designated to the Chief of Police of the Port Moody (BC) Police Department.

A very thorough investigation concluded that the Victoria Police Department's policies dealing with conflict of interest issues were inadequate and that there did in fact exist a perceived or apparent conflict of interest in this case. A number of significant policy-change recommendations were made to the Victoria Police Board, which the Board in turn strongly supported. Those recommendations have now been implemented into a new and comprehensive Conflict of Interest policy that will give the public more confidence and should greatly reduce the number of instances where the off-duty interests of police officers would conflict with their roles and responsibilities to the police departments with whom they are employed.

The Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner for British Columbia, in its final review of the investigation, noted that the types of policy changes as a result of the investigation were worthy of other police departments to take note of and recommended that consideration be given to amending the BC Police Act to include a section dealing with conflicts of interest. The new Victoria Chief of Police, Bill Naughton, said "it [conflict of interest] is a common, but largely unexamined, area of concern in North American policing. This is not a Victoria issue alone, this runs across Canada, and as far as I know we're the only agency across Canada trying to take a serious look at this issue."

Fast forward to Constable Mulder's Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths and its "First Annual Excited Delirium Conference."

A February 13, 2009 article in the Toronto Star said: "The Mounties [RCMP] have also dropped the term "excited delirium" - a phrase that has no medical foundation, and was criticized earlier by the Commons Committee [on Public Safety and National Security], the RCMP's public complaints commissioner, independent consultants and civil liberties groups."

I suggest that all members of the Guelph Police Services carefully review the following media reports:

A two-part NPR (National Public Radio USA) investigative report from February 2007:
Part I - Death by Excited Delirium: Diagnosis or Coverup?
Part II - Tasers Implicated in Excited Delirium Deaths

Taser's Delirium Defense: How lawyers used junk science to explain away stun-gun deaths, Mother Jones, March-April 2009

Tasers in medicine - an irreverent call for proposals, Canadian Medical Association Journal, May 2008.

Police ethics adviser quits over sponsors - Concerns over role of companies like Taser International in funding lavish conferences were rebuffed, Globe and Mail, April 8, 2009

Finally, I urge you to visit http://www.excited-delirium.com/. The website's owner has uncovered many connections between Taser International, their lawyer Michael Brave, and the American Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Death and those who would promote excited delirium as a convenient cause for taser-associated deaths. The dash (-) in the website's address is critical because of the many similarly-named websites registered by Mr. Brave that include the words excited and delirium in the name.

And please keep in mind that so-called "excited delirium" has NOT been the common denominator in the at-least 405 deaths that have occurred proximal to the taser. Tasers ARE the ONE AND ONLY common denominator.

Notwithstanding the significant controversy surrounding tasers and excited delirium, and regardless of whether Constable Mulder has been or ever will be compensated directly or indirectly in ANY way by Taser International or the (American) Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Death or any other related organization or person, the facts which include (but are not limited to) his company bearing such a striking resemblance to the IPICD (which has so clearly been linked to Taser International), his "firm benefiting from some cooperation between the Canadian Centre and the IPICD regarding initial startup concerns and general business practices," and Taser International's use of excited delirium as a LEGAL DEFENCE to contradict its weapon's role in in-custody death lawsuits MUST be enough to prompt your Board to further investigate whether a conflict exists and whether the Guelph Police Service would want to be linked in any way to this controversy.

I do have a copy of the Victoria Police Department's new Conflict of Interest policy; however, while the policy has received Board approval, I understand that it may not yet have been delivered to the department's members and so I am unable to share it with you at this time. If you contact the Victoria Police Board directly, they may be willing to do so. And I would be more than willing to provide further background information to you, should you require it.

I look forward to a written reply from the Guelph Police Services Board at your earliest possible convenience.

Sincerely,


Patti Gillman
Owner of TNT - Truth ... not tasers

Too close for comfort?

April 25, 2009
Thana Dharmarajah, Guelph Mercury

An outspoken Taser use critic wants the Guelph Police Services Board to examine its conflict-of-interest polices because of a private company started by a city police officer.

Patti Gillman, a Belleville resident and creator of the Truth Not Tasers blog, said she's concerned about a firm started by Guelph Police Const. Gary Mulder because the company bears similarities to a like-sounding American firm with corporate links to Taser International.

Mulder's firm is called the Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc. The American firm Gillman is comparing it to is the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths.

Mulder denies any link between his company and the U.S. firm or Taser International. He has been cleared of any conflict of interest in this endeavour by Guelph's chief of police and the Guelph Police Services Board.

Both of the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths companies offer front-line police officers and others training in recognizing potentially dangerous in-custody circumstances and in offering strategies to attempt to reduce the risk of fatalities in such cases.

Likewise both also tout the existence of a condition called excited delirium and offer training on recognizing it and how it should be handled if it's suspected.

Excited delirium is a controversial label that describes an alleged state of mind and body in individuals where they have been described as being in a delirious state, with extreme strength and incoherent speech.

It has been frequently cited by some police sources as a medical condition of subjects encountered who were subsequently shocked by Tasers.

It is not, however, listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association, a guide for professional psychologists and psychiatrists.

Gillman -- whose anti-Taser advocacy developed after the death of her brother Robert Bagnell in 2004 after he received at least two electrical shocks from police Tasers -- is among those voices in the debate that questions the existence of excited delirium.

"It only seems to be cited when someone has been Tasered," Gillman said.

She said she is troubled by an excited delirium conference being staged next month by Mulder's company -- a two-day Niagara Falls event that will see a workshop led by a founder of the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths.

John Peters, the American firm's founder who is to appear at the Canadian company's event, started his firm with a corporate lawyer for Taser.

Attempts to arrange an interview with Peters weren't successful.

But Taser International spokesperson Steve Tuttle confirmed it gave setup grants to Peters' firm and has paid for Peters to speak about excited delirium and to do training about the subject at its Arizona headquarters as well as at various U.S. law-enforcement agencies.

Mulder said he wasn't aware of Peters previously receiving Taser International funding to speak about excited delirium and that isn't the case this time.

He said he will pay Peters and other speakers personally for their full speaking fees and recoup that expense from conference registration revenue. Tuttle confirmed Taser International isn't funding Peters to speak in Niagara Falls.

The conference will feature a session called Conducted Energy Devices: Are They Safe Options?

But Mulder said Taser International isn't sponsoring anything at the conference and no company will be advertising at it.

Further, Mulder said his company has never received funding from either Taser International or the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths.

In an email this week, he said his firm benefited from "some co-operation between the Canadian Centre and IPICD, Inc. regarding initial startup concerns and general business practices."

But in the same message, he added: "I can assure you that the Canadian Centre ultimately operates independently from the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc. or any other company."

Tuttle confirmed Taser International has no links or past funding relationship with Mulder or his firm.

"It's honestly and truly not my intention to have any association with Taser at all," Mulder said. "I am 100 per cent the owner (of this company). I have complete control over the company."

Guelph Police Chief Rob Davis said he doesn't see Mulder's personal business as a conflict of interest. Mulder signed a contract with the Guelph Police Service that his company wouldn't have any affiliation with it. "I'm satisfied that he's followed the proper protocol," Davis said.

As for the conference, Davis said he sees nothing wrong with Mulder educating others about the knowledge the officer has obtained in his policing career.

Mulder is an 18-year police veteran and has been assigned to the Guelph Police Service's training unit as a certified use of force instructor since 2003.

After fielding inquiries related to this story, Guelph Police Services Board chair Dave Clark asked at this month's board meeting whether the firm followed all Police Services Act requirements.

Davis responded at that session that it did and the matter was left at that.

Mulder said he believes in excited delirium and that he wants to educate emergency personnel about behaviours associated with it so they can act as a team when they encounter it.

"It's something that happens very fast and deteriorates very quickly and everybody's abilities and actions are being questioned," he said. "What I want to do is to provide the information so people can be informed to make the best decision under duress."

Gillman said the fact that Mulder is actively drawing attention privately to a condition that has gone "hand in hand" with Tasers in so many cases warrants a thorough police board review.

She said she is pondering a written request to that effect to the board.

In 2005, she complained to the Victoria Police Department about the involvement of one of its officers with Taser International. The officer had done a variety of paid work for Taser during the period of his employment with that police service. The department began modifying its conflict-of-interest policies after she raised that matter.

Gillman's brother died after an encounter with Vancouver police in June 2004. The 44-year-old was the subject of a 911 call to the downtown hotel where he lived and had smashed things in a common washroom.

A 2007 inquest jury found that being Tasered played no role in his death. It concluded his death resulted from "restraint associated cardiac arrest" arising from cocaine intoxication and psychosis. The jury offered no recommendations.

Gillman has said publicly she wants a moratorium on Taser use until there is more independent research on their use and possible connection to deaths that have followed their deployment.

EDITORIAL: A private firm, but a public flap

Logo of the "Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths"


Logo of the American "Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths"

April 25, 2009
Guelph Mercury

Compare the logos of a United States consulting and training firm with open ties to Taser International and an apparently independent company in the same field started by a Guelph Police Service officer.

You're left with a sense the two must be connected.

The Guelph police officer vows that's not the case. He asserts only that there has been "some co-operation" between his business, Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc., and its like-named and like-logoed U.S. counterpart, the Institute for Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, regarding "initial startup concerns and general business practices."

The Guelph Police Services Board discussed this month a suggestion that it should review whether the officer might have a conflict of interest through running his private company. But the matter was dropped when Guelph Police Chief Rob Davis informed the panel the subject poses no such concerns.

End of story?

Perhaps.

But not if Patti Gillman gets her way.

Gillman, an outspoken Canadian opponent of police Taser use and the survivor of a sibling who died after being hit repeatedly by a police Taser, wants a more rigorous and public review of this subject.

For her, the issue includes and goes further than the strikingly similar names and logos of the Taser-linked firm and the Guelph officer's business.

She's troubled by the insistence of principals for both firms as to the existence and purported best in-the-field strategies for front-line emergency workers to handle an alleged condition called excited delirium.

The medical and scientific community is yet to reach a consensus on the existence of this described condition, which is frequently mentioned by police services as afflicting persons just before they were shocked with Tasers.

Taser says it has paid to inform various stakeholders of the existence of excited delirium and how to recognize it. It says, one way it has done so is by hiring the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths and or its staff to offer speeches or training on the subject.

Gillman asserts the Guelph officer's private business efforts to tout the existence of excited delirium should spur more probing by the city police board about a potential for a real or perceived conflict of interest.

It will be interesting to see whether the police board takes this further.

EDITORIAL: Damaged goods

April 9, 2009
Prince George Citizen

If you are like most right minded Canadians, you can’t help but be saddened as you witness yet another spasm in the death spiral of the reputation of the RCMP.

As the shameful spectacle of the Braidwood Inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski illustrates, this is a brand in serious decline and along with it, the ability of the Force to command the respect that is essential if its 24,000 members from Iqaluit to Corner Brook are to be able to do their jobs effectively.

To quote the philosopher Sophocles, “Nobody has a more sacred obligation to obey the law than those who make (or enforce) the law.”

To gain some understanding of how the reputation of the RCMP has been reduced to this state, first go to YouTube and watch the video footage of Robert Dziekanski in his final moments, www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPe_hf7aBXM, then consider the following:

1.”Members know or ought to know that whatever misadventure happens to them, the Force will stand by them so long as there is some justification for doing so.” “That policy has been in effect for over 30 years.” Ex-RCMP Commissioner William Higgitt, in an internal memo and comments presented to the Commission of Inquiry Concerning Certain Activities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 1979.

2.”There has been a tendency to look at this as a black and white situation...I would ask Canadians to reflect for a moment before they jump to conclusions.” RCMP Commissioner Ward Elliott March 22, 2009 (commenting on the Dziekanski case.)

3. Be professional, be prepared and know the facts. Be patient. State who you are and why you are there. Ask for an interpreter, as required. Allow people an appropriate amount of space. Let person(s) vent their frustrations. www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca Conducted Energy Weapon-Verbal Intervention. Instructions to RCMP officers summarizing verbal and non-verbal communication, negotiation, mediation and conflict management skills.

4. Question? Why does the RCMP website have a link to The Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths 2007 Conference? This is an event whose main sponsor is LAAW International Inc., and whose president, Mr. Michael Brave, also happens to be lead counsel for TASER International, the controversial supplier of the weapon used on Robert Dziekanski. As the politicians say, check out the optics on this one.

Like a scene from the movie Groundhog Day, the RCMP keeps reliving the same mistakes that saw it ripped apart in the 1980s, when the RCMP Security Service was shut down and replaced by a civilian agency, the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS)

Then, as now, the motto “Maintain the Right” was replaced by “Maintain the Force” (no matter the cost).

While replacing former commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli was a step in the right direction in moving the Mounties away from this old-school thinking, it is clear that his replacement, Commissioner William Elliott, is incapable of leading the cultural change needed to bring the Force into the 21st century. He needs to go.

For the good of Canadians and people like Robert Dziekanski, for the sake of the RCMP and the members who put on the red serge for all the right reasons, and especially in the interest of preserving public trust in our national police force, and the criminal justice system.

If Mr. Dziekanski’s death leads to a major overhaul of the Force, it will not have been in vain.

From Truthnottasers: STAY WITH ME HERE.

Here is a link from the RCMP website to The [AMERICAN] Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths 2008 Conference (http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/?eng=http://www.ipicd.com/seminars/symposium.html)

Click on View this website now.

Tsk, tsk, tsk - the least the RCMP could do is link to the CANADIAN CENTRE for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths INC. (ccpicd.com)

The nice people over at The [AMERICAN] Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths (ipicd.com) link to the CANADIAN CENTRE for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths INC. http://www.ipicd.com/docs/2009_Canada_Conf_Bro.pdf

Now APPARENTLY, the "CANADIAN CENTRE" (whose president is Guelph, Ontario police office Gary Mulder) and the "AMERICAN INSTITUTE" are IN NO WAY connected to each other. A simple look at the friendlies, the links, the speaker lists and logos would strongly suggest otherwise.

How STOOPID do these people think we really are?????

A very long, very strange trip indeed gets EVEN STRANGER

PLEASE FOLLOW ALONG VERY CAREFULLY

HOW DID WE GET FROM HERE:

Taser expert backs ban on cops' private deals
December 12, 2007
Rob Shaw, Times Colonist

A Victoria police expert in Tasers, whose involvement with the company that manufactured the devices sparked a conflict-of-interest investigation, says he backs a department proposal to ban officers from doing personal business with weapons manufacturers. Sgt. Darren Laur, reacting to reports questioning his association with Taser International Inc., and its effect on subsequent reviews of the device, said he had the full support of the Victoria department to work with the company.

Still, he agrees that creating new guidelines, as the Victoria force plans to do, would help "separate perception and reality on these conflict-of-interest issues, because it can cloud the water," he said.Laur's involvement with Taser began in 1999, when the company paid him as the Victoria department's use-of-force expert to travel to Arizona to train as a master instructor. Rival company Tasertron had also paid him to travel to train in California in 1998. His training, and a 1999 report he wrote about the devices, made him Canada's foremost expert on Tasers. He is widely credited with introducing the devices to Canadian police, and the Victoria police became the first department to try, and then adopt, Tasers into regular use.Laur also runs his own company, Personal Protection Systems Inc., which Taser paid a total of $498.07 US to travel to Alaska and Oregon to teach Taser use in 2000. Laur's company, which he owns with his wife, went on to design a Taser holster. Taser International purchased the design for $5,076.25 US in stock in 2001. Laur cashed the stock in 2003, for an undisclosed amount.Each situation was approved by the serving police chief, said Laur. "I've always fully disclosed that, and I've always been very sensitive to the conflict-of-interest issues," he said yesterday.

Nonetheless, an internal review of Laur's ties to Taser said he had projected an "apparent and perceived conflict of interest."

The review, which concluded five months ago, was sparked by a a public complaint from Ontario resident Patti Gillman in 2005. Gillman's brother, Robert Bagnell, died in 2004 when Vancouver police hit him with a Taser during an altercation. After his death, Vancouver police asked their Victoria counterparts to conduct an independent review of Taser safety. Laur was appointed to the review panel, although he said he focused only on medical issues and not Taser use because of his ties to the manufacturer. The final report contained a disclosure of Laur's business with Taser. Gillman hired a lawyer and filed a complaint.

Victoria police Insp. Cory Bond's subsequent internal investigation concluded Laur was not technically in conflict because he fully disclosed his dealings with Taser, had sold his stock nine months before the report, and received department approval for all his actions. However, Bond also wrote there "remains a reasonable perception" that he "might have been affected by his prior financial interest in Taser." In retrospect, the department should not have put him on the review panel, she said. The B.C. Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner, which reviews internal investigations, agreed with her report.Despite the findings, acting police chief Bill Naughton said Laur has been "upfront and straightforward from the very get-go and I think suggestions he has been otherwise are incorrect."

Gillman said she is not pleased with the investigation. "I would like to see police and weapon manufacturers held at complete arms length from each other," she said yesterday.

As a result of the complaint, Victoria police have proposed a step towards such an arrangement.The department wants to ban officers from doing personal business with weapons manufacturers as part of a pending overhaul in its conflict-of-interest policies. Under the rules, officers who train with weapons companies as part of their duties would not be able to profit by creating a private business and becoming trainers for the weapons company.

Weapons companies often pay for officers to attend their own training seminars, hoping it will encourage a police force to buy their products, such as Tasers, bean-bag guns, incapacitating sprays or other items. It is a common, but largely unexamined, area of concern in North American policing, said Naughton.

"This is not a Victoria issue alone, this runs across Canada, and as far as I know we're the only agency across Canada trying to take a serious look at this issue," said Naughton.

The conflict-of-interest rules will also force Victoria officers to fully disclose the private businesses they run outside of policing, their stock holdings and any business ties that could be conflicts. The guidelines are being reviewed by department lawyers before becoming official policy, said Naughton.

Meanwhile, Laur said he thinks people are trying to put blame on his Taser reviews because of recent deaths that occurred after Tasers were used on suspects.

TO HERE:

From http://www.excited-delirium.com/
Thursday, August 21, 2008

IPICD (Institute for the Prevention of Deaths in Custody), LAAW, Micheal Brave & "Excited Delirium"
IPICD (aka Institute for the Prevention of Deaths in Custody) is sponsored by LAAW.LAAW is basically lawyer Micheal Brave. Mr. Brave has registered at least two Internet domain names with 'excited delirium' in the URL. These domain names are redirected to point to IPICD. And thus the circle is complete:...IPICD <> LAAW = lawyer Brave <> "Excited Delirium" URLs <> IPICD...So, what does this have to do with Taser?Taser's chief litigation lawyer is (or was?) a certain lawyer named Mr. Micheal Brave, Esq. etc. You're either in on it, or you're being played like a trumpet.

It should also be noted here that Michael Brave is also the whois owner of the Electronic Control Devices: Legal Resources website.

TO HERE:

From the Toronto Star
February 13, 2009

"The Mounties have also dropped the term "excited delirium" – a phrase that had no medical foundation, and was criticized earlier by the Commons committee, the RCMP's public complaints commissioner, independent consultants and civil liberty groups."

TO HERE:

Taser's Delirium Defense
How lawyers used junk science to explain away stun-gun deaths.
From Mother Jones
March/April 2009

I highly recommend you read the entire article by clicking on the above link.

"… But the company [Taser International] 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 ...

... 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." "

ONLY TO END UP HERE:

First Annual Excited Delirium Conference

Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc.

PRESIDENT: CONSTABLE GARY MULDER, GUELPH POLICE SERVICE

A few of the speakers at the conference:

DR. JOHN PETERS JR., PHD.INSTITUTE FOR THE PREVENTION OF IN-CUSTODY DEATHS, INC. (see Mother Jones above) (see also, from February 2007, the two-part National Public Radio investigative report here: Part I - Death by Excited Delirium: Diagnosis or Coverup? and Part II - Tasers Implicated in Excited Delirium Deaths)
Chris Lawrence, a trainer with the Ontario Police College (Canadian excited delirium "expert" and coroner's inquest witness)
Dr. Christine Hall, big-time taser fan and Canadian excited/agitated delirium proponent, employed by "Vancouver Island Research", has an e-mail address at the Canadian Police Research Centre as follows: chris.hall@cprc.org - see Public risk from tasers: Unacceptably high or low enough to accept? (Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine, January 2009) and "expert" witness at MANY Canadian coroner's inquests, including that of my brother Robert Bagnell.

The Canadian Centre is proud to be hosting its First Annual Excited Delirium Conference. "Are You Prepared?" brings together North America's preeminent leaders on this topic. This 2 day conference will provide those in attendance, regardless of their knowledge base, a greater understanding of what is required when faced with a potentially deadly situation. From first contact by police, fire and EMS requirements, this conference will prepare those emergency services with the ability to recognize and act accordingly. Not only will this conference educate the "first responders," it is designed to inform the Emergency Physicians on best practices based on solid research and scientific findings. The goal of our conference is to simply promote teamwork and early recogition of a medical emergency which has manifested itself into a difficult and rapidly deteriorating situation.

"ONE OF THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES POLICE OFFICERS AND EMERGENCY PERSONNEL FACE IS HOW TO HANDLE INDIVIDUALS ACTING IN VIOLENT, ERRATIC AND BIZARRE WAYS – OFTEN REFERRED TO AS EXCITED DELIRIUM. SUDDEN DEATHS HAVE OCCURRED, PUTTING THE ACTIONS OF ALL INVOLVED AND THEIR AGENCIES UNDER AN INTENSE PUBLIC MICROSCOPE. THIS EVENT BRINGS NORTH AMERICA’S PREEMINENT LEADERS TOGETHER FOR A COMPELLING 2 DAY DISCUSSION ON THE TOPIC OF EXCITED DELIRIUM."

Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc.

MY COMPANY
The Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc. is a new company founded by president Gary Mulder. Gary brings with him a wealth of knowledge, experience and a long list of contacts known throughout North America for sudden, "In-Custody Deaths" including those described as "Excited Delirium." A current and sworn Ontario police officer in his 18th year, Gary is currently a certified Use of Force Instructor with a foundation in Tactics and Rescue. As a trainer for the past seven years, Gary has attended numerous training courses and has organized several successful conferences on the topic of Excited Delirium, as well as other police related topics.

MY GOAL
My goal is to provide transparent, unbiased information and education to any relevant stakeholder so that they might be able to make informed decisions in critical situations while they protect everyone involved.

MY MISSION
To Provide Honest, Ethical and Factual Information.

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

A search for this incorporated "Canadian" centre at Industry Canada and Sedar returned no results for this "Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc."

A whois search for the company's website http://www.ccpicd.com/ did return the following:

Domain Name : ccpicd.com
Registrant:Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc.627 Arkell RoadRR#2Guelph, ON N1H6H8CADomain name: CCPICD.COMAdministrative Contact:Mulder, Gary 627 Arkell RoadRR#2Guelph, ON N1H6H8CA519.241.6080Technical Contact:Administrator, DNS 5915 Airport RoadSuite 1100Mississauga, ON L4V 1T1CA+1.8008530954 Fax: +1.8009799587Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.Record last updated on 12-Mar-2009.Record expires on 05-Dec-2009.Record created on 05-Dec-2008.Registrar Domain Name Help Center:http://domainhelp.tucows.comDomain servers in listed order:ns2.officelive.comns1.officelive.com

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."

Getting Tased - Part 2: Beware of the 'excited'

June 13, 2008
By Molly Priesmeyer, The Minnesota Independent

Tasers were originally created as a firearm alternative—a weapon that didn’t kill, supposedly. But Tasers have become a popular police tool to use on suspects suffering from what Taser International calls “excited delirium," a term coined in the 1980s after cocaine use become more widespread. According to the Minneapolis Police Department, all officers on the Crisis Intervention Team, which mostly deals with unarmed persons who are on drugs or mentally ill, carry a Taser. Experts say "excited delirium" is a mythical condition used to boast Taser sales, and that its increasing rationale in Taser use is leading to more deaths.

Since the firm Taser International went public in 2001, deaths from stun guns, or Tasers, have grown steadily. In fact, the increase has been so profound that the National Institute of Justice is conducting its own study on the weapons, to be released in 2009. There is no way to get accurate reporting before 2003 on deaths occurring during arrest, since, oddly enough, there was no central documentation of such deaths until a law passed in 2000 created the Deaths in Custody Reporting Program.

Even after its passage, the reporting program acknowledges huge gaps in departments reporting deaths from Tasers and/or stun-guns. What we do know is that at least 34 people have died in the United States this year after being Tased, two of them in the Twin Cities.

Here’s how one of those cases unfolded:

On Jan. 15, 29-year-old Mark Backlund is driving to the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport from New Brighton to pick up his parents during rush hour. Backlund crashes into a minivan on Interstate 694. Five Minnesota State Patrol officers, two of them in training, immediately arrive on the scene. About eight minutes later, Backlund is unresponsive after being Tased three times. He is pronounced dead at the hospital.

According to video released by the State Patrol, Backlund appears to slowly, confusedly reach for the ignition when an officer approaches his open passenger-side window. The image, which lasts about four seconds and came from a camera-equipped Taser, is the only close shot of Backlund the State Patrol recorded. The video cuts to a car-mounted video that records an officer asking “Sir, are you all right? Are you diabetic?” The officer tells the other two uniformed patrol offices that Backlund won’t respond to him.

Backlund then tries to swing at one of the officers, the State Patrol says. He is Tased once. Seconds later, Backlund is dragged from his car and laid face down on the shoulder of 694 while three officers restrain and Tase him at least two more times. Backlund struggles and screams for five minutes before falling silent.

At this point, at about eight minutes into the video, the trainees are laughing at an answer to a question that’s unintelligible. Then one asks, “Did you get a good Taser video?” He looks back at the flashing cop car. Backlund is still silent. About 30 seconds pass until someone says, “He is not responsive.” No one administers CPR.

“He’s got blood all over his face,” someone mentions on two occasions as cops and paramedics hover over him, presumably clean up his face, and place him on a stretcher. Almost three minutes go by between the moment Backlund is announced as “unresponsive” and the time he is placed in the ambulance that has been on the scene the entire time.

Later, an autopsy on Backlund will be inconclusive. According to the report, he also had cocaine and prescription drugs in his system.

At one point in the video, an officer says that when he arrived on the scene, before Backlund was Tased, that Backlund appeared “stunned.” Indeed, Backlund appears like he’d just been in a car accident.

A serious disorder or a serious con?

Canadian police psychologist Mike Webster says using Tasers on suspects who appear confused or agitated is fairly common. Even those behaviors are what Taser International calls “excited delirium,” an unexplained hysteria that can cause death, as Taser has claimed in court.

Webster has trained officers for more than 30 years in crisis intervention. He’s consulted with both the FBI and RMCP in Canada in conflict disputes and dealing with suspects in crisis situations. He says “excited delirium” is not a real psychological diagnosis, but a cunning way of turning common behaviors cops encounter every day into an affliction that turns people into unpredictable monsters possessed by the unknown. “There’s no reputable medical or psychological or psychiatric association that recognizes it as a disorder,” Webster says.

Webster says Taser International’s marketing has served to create an expectation in police officers that the only way to deal with someone in that situation is with a Taser. “When you see someone who is exhibiting these behavioral characteristics—they’re agitated, they’re incoherent, they’re sweating profusely, they’re aggressive—immediately the police person thinks, this is ‘excited delirium.’ Can’t deal with them. I need to Taser them.”

According to Webster, police departments have simply replaced crisis intervention tactics with Tasers. “Crisis intervention training or first-response training teaches officers to assist people in regaining their mental balance by speaking in calm tones, adopting neutral body postures. That’s not happening. And if the only tool you have in your tool box is a hammer then the whole world starts to look like a nail. Soon, everybody looks like they’re suffering from excited delirium.”

Call it ‘usage creep’

Minneapolis Police Department spokesperson Sgt. William Palmer says that all 135 officers on the department’s Crisis Intervention Team, which deals primarily with mentally ill persons, are required to carry a Taser. In 2006, a Taser was deployed in 232 Minneapolis police encounters. (Palmer was unable to supply numbers for 2007 and 2008.)

“Tasers are not really designed to be used against persons who are armed,” he says. “It can be done, and is taught with the addition of lethal backup, but this training is primarily for persons armed with edged weapons, not firearms. We use the Taser many, many more times on persons who are not armed. The Taser is a tool primarily to be used on persons who exhibit physical resistance to officers.”

Palmer says that officers on the Crisis Intervention Team can use the Taser if the person is physically resistive to officers. “The Taser is the restraint tool of choice for persons who are under the influence of mood-altering substances or who are in mental health crisis, as it is not a pain compliance tool,” Palmer says. “Persons in these conditions often do not feel pain and other pain compliance tools and techniques are not as effective.”

Webster challenges this notion. “To me, that is unacceptable, “ he says. “The initial, permissible usage scenario did not include using the weapon as a come-along or a time-saver. That is usage creep. There has been a tremendous creep away from the original, permissive usage scenario for this weapon, which was to prevent grievous bodily harm.”

A Taser monopoly

One of the biggest proponents of Tasers who has become a de facto spokesperson for “excited delirium” is John G. Peters, founder of the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths—an organization dedicated to training officers in recognizing and managing “excited delirium.” Peters is also is an adjunct faculty member in the Taser Training Academy.

But that’s not the only specious connection Peters –- who has been called to testify on “excited delirium” — has to Taser International. Peters—whose résumé lists a B.A. in criminal justice, an M.B.A. and a Ph.D. in applied management from various colleges—also bills himself as a litigation consultant and expert witness who charges $5,000 for case development with an expert report and $2,000 per day for depositions and testimony.

At a recent public inquiry into the use of Tasers by police in Vancouver, B.C., Dr. Zian Tseng, a San Francisco cardiologist and electrophysiologist, told the panel that the Taser creates serious risks to the heart. Tseng began studying Tasers three years ago, and found the device could induce cardiac arrhythmia.

And though Minneapolis police tend to use the Tasers more on people on “mood-altering substances” than not, according to Palmer, Tseng said the risk of death from the Taser shock is far greater if there is adrenaline or illicit drugs coursing through the body or if the person has a history of heart or other medical issues.

When Tseng first announced to a San Francisco journalist that he was studying the weapon, he was immediately contacted by Taser International, which offered him a grant to pay for his research. Unlike Peters, Tseng declined Taser International’s offer.

Webster finds Taser’s response to Tseng chilling. “Taser has a monopoly on this,” he says. “Taser created the instrument. Taser manufactures the instrument. Taser trains people on the instrument. Taser pays for studies. They’ve got an entire monopoly.

“If we know the device was safe, it’d be one thing," he says. "But we know people are dying from it.”

And so far, Taser International has only lost one wrongful death suit of the at least 69 filed against the company. Backlund’s family is still looking into the cause of his death.

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."

Taser manufacturer picked up Ontario Deputy Chief Coroner's tab to give lectures

November 30, 2007
CAROLINE ALPHONSO AND JESSICA LEEDER AND OMAR EL AKKAD, The Globe and Mail

I have long held that Dr. Cairns is/was in a conflict of interest, but no one else seemed to notice. In May 2005, I wrote a letter to the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services outlining several concerns I had with Dr. Cairns in respect to tasers - some from as far back as December 2004, six months after my brother died. In August, I finally received a letter from the Assistant Deputy Minister which shrugged off my concerns and instead gave the doctor a glowing reference. The media deserves much credit for picking up on this issue and staying with it - there's still so much that people don't know. Keep connecting the dots!

TORONTO; LAS VEGAS -- Taser International and another company closely linked to the manufacturer have paid the way for Ontario's deputy chief coroner to lecture at their conferences on the phenomenon of "excited delirium," a medically unrecognized term that the company often cites as a reason people die after being tasered.

James Cairns, one of the country's most high-profile coroners, who publicly advocates the use of the stun gun, has become one of the top Canadian experts Taser officials turn to for help shoring up public support for their products in times of crisis. Since the death of Robert Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant, at Vancouver International Airport last month, Taser has repeatedly urged journalists to contact Dr. Cairns for his pro-taser views.

Dr. Cairns has recently given seminars at two conferences hosted by Taser International - one in July in Chicago and another last year in Las Vegas. He has also spoken at a Las Vegas conference for the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, a small private company with ties to Taser. It is headed by John Peters, a communications specialist who often acts as a course instructor for Taser International. Its only other director is Michael Brave, a Taser legal executive.

Dr. Cairns was slated to deliver a talk yesterday, titled "Excited Delirium Deaths: Public Inquiry Process; ED Training for Ontario Provincial Police Officer and its Impact on the Coroner's Office" at the institute's 2007 conference. He dropped out because he was testifying at an inquiry in Ontario, where he admitted to shielding disgraced pathologist Charles Smith.

In an interview with The Globe and Mail yesterday, Dr. Cairns said he doesn't believe his participation at the conferences is a conflict of interest. He said he attends the conferences on vacation time and paid his own way to attend the first one.

However, he allowed Taser and the institute to pay his hotel and travel expenses for subsequent conferences.

Bonita Porter, Ontario's chief coroner, said it is not uncommon for members of her staff to have expenses paid by conference hosts. "If he's going to share our experiences and it might improve public safety anywhere, I don't see how that could be considered to be a conflict," she said.

But Dr. Cairns's attendance raises questions about the appearance of bias when probing the issue of whether tasers can kill. While he has not presided over any taser-related inquests, his expert opinion on the role of tasers in certain in-custody deaths has often been solicited. At a 2005 inquest, he testified that an Ontario man, who was tasered three times by police and died less than an hour later in hospital, was not killed by the taser because of the time lapse between the shocks and his death.

The year before, Dr. Cairns urged the Toronto Police Services Board to expand the use of tasers, saying: "I am absolutely convinced tasers will save lives instead of taking lives. And I hope some day, if I am in the position, please taser me before you shoot me."

Dr. Cairns defended his attendance at various Taser conferences. He said he doesn't accept a fee for speaking to avoid any potential conflicts of interest. "I am not an agent for Taser or anything else. I do not own Taser shares. I wanted there to be no conflict of interest," he said, adding: "I have been invited to many other conferences across the world to talk about things. In those situations, it's always the same."

Taser International did not return phone calls.

According to Mr. Peters's write-up of the 2006 Taser conference in Las Vegas, Dr. Cairns gave a talk in which he "graphically emphasized ... that none of the numerous in-custody death cases which he has been intimately involved with were caused by the deployment of Taser devices."

On the subject of hosting a seminar on excited delirium at the Taser conferences, Dr. Cairns said: "I think the more that we understand about all these issues, the better."

Symposium aims to define 'excited delirium'

November 30, 2007
OMAR EL AKKAD, The Globe and Mail

Critics say the medically unrecognized condition is a way to protect police officers from allegations of wrongdoing

LAS VEGAS -- In an aging ballroom at Las Vegas's Imperial Palace hotel usually reserved for a celebrity impersonators show, 360 cops, doctors, lawyers and others have gathered to talk about why people sometimes die in police custody.

The second annual Sudden Death, Excited Delirium and In-Custody Death Conference is under way in Las Vegas, bringing together dozens of experts on a controversial area of research. Most of the speakers - who range from emergency medicine doctors to researchers to current and former police officers - know each other on a first-name basis, having given talks at similar conferences for years. Most of the attendees have paid between $600 and $700 to be here.

While the three-day conference is specifically about in-custody death and excited delirium - an unrecognized medical condition - many of the nearly 20 talks inevitably touch on the role of tasers. As such, the conference has attracted greater Canadian attention since the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver International Airport last month.

In fact, Canadians play a major role in this conference, as well as excited-delirium research in general. Officers from Ottawa, Vancouver and Edmonton police forces are here, including members of the RCMP. Two of the conference's key scheduled speakers are Canadian, including James Cairns, Ontario's deputy chief coroner, who dropped out at the last minute.

"The goal is to educate as many people as we can about excited delirium," says John Peters, conference organizer and head of the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths. "There's a wide array of issues."

However, the key issue is excited delirium, a collection of symptoms that is quickly becoming the leading explanation offered when a person dies in police custody or after a taser is used. According to the various speakers at the conference, signs of excited delirium can include erratic behaviour, profuse sweating and superhuman strength.

Critics, who include civil-liberties groups and plaintiffs in myriad lawsuits against both Taser International and police departments, say the condition is actually a vague collection of descriptors designed to protect police officers from allegations of wrongdoing. But there are virtually no such critics at this conference, only hundreds of researchers and front-line officers who'll readily stake their reputations on excited delirium being a very real medical emergency.

"I would have used agitated delirium," says Christine Hall, a Canadian emergency medicine doctor and leading expert on excited delirium. "When people hear the word excited, they think of birthday parties or going on a trip to Hawaii."

Dr. Hall, who is at this year's conference and has been asked to speak at next year's, says much in the same way that abdominal pain can be a symptom of a medical condition such as appendicitis, excited delirium is a collection of symptoms that could point to serious underlying medical problems. The end goal of such conferences, she says, is to allow police officers to spot the signs of what could be a medical emergency.

But as many people at the conference point out, the first step to getting medical help for someone showing signs of excited delirium is to get them restrained. "People say, 'You should just get him to a hospital,' " Dr. Hall says. "But how?"

There are, however, many problems with legitimizing excited delirium. For one thing, the myriad symptoms can blur the line between someone suffering from cocaine-induced excited delirium and someone with low blood sugar - especially for police officers, who generally aren't trained to make a medical diagnosis.

While excited delirium is not a recognized medical condition, it has been listed as a cause of death in several coroner jury inquests in Canada and the U.S. - Taser International has often said that excited delirium, not its devices, is the cause of death in many cases where people were hit with a stun gun and subsequently died.

The presenters at the conference are well aware of the possibility that they could be perceived in conflict of interest. Some of them disclose that their research is funded by Taser. Two such presenters conducted research on the negative effects of taser use on the human body; they found very few.

How Taser International wins in the courtroom

November 28, 2007
OMAR EL AKKAD AND JESSICA LEEDER, Globe and Mail

Ignorance, conspiracies and media bias fuel most of the negative sentiment toward the device, company's lawyer contends

The world's most popular maker of "electrical control devices" employs an aggressive strategy that has resulted in the company, Taser International, winning virtually every lawsuit launched against it.

A recent string of deaths in Canada after taser use has put several Canadian law-enforcement agencies under intense scrutiny. In both the United States and Canada, such deaths have resulted in myriad lawsuits against both Taser and individual police and security departments.

But police departments and other organizations that end up being sued can turn to the company for more than just moral support. The company will provide scientific information, statistics and guidance on defence experts. They'll also provide information on the experts that the plaintiffs have lined up.

In a 118-slide PowerPoint presentation created and presented at a law-enforcement and security conference earlier this year by Michael Brave, Taser's national litigation counsel, the lawyer contends that most of the lawsuits and negative sentiment toward tasers are actually based on ignorance, conspiracies and media bias. He also outlines such explanations as PDPCT: "plaintiffs' deep pocket causation theories," which he describes as the belief that "He who has the deep pockets caused the death."

In the presentation, Mr. Brave also criticizes several studies on tasers for being too conservative on when the devices should be used. Specific U.S. medical examiners are also criticized for their work on several cases.

Mr. Brave, a former intelligence chief with the U.S. Department of Justice, is also listed as a director for the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc., a private, Las Vegas-based company headed by a man named John Peters, who often acts as a course instructor for Taser International at the company's headquarters in Arizona.

The company bills itself as "the clearing house and training provider for sudden and in-custody deaths and related information" and was created in spring, 2005. That same year, Taser stock took a beating amid constant criticism and concerns over the safety of its products, including a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into the company's safety claims.

(In his presentation, Mr. Brave addresses the period of criticism in 2005, which he attributes to ignorance and bias, not scientifically reliable information. This portion of the presentation is titled: "2005 to present - The hysterical attacks !!!!!")

The Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths does not publicize its link to Taser International officials. Mr. Brave is listed as a mere "adjunct faculty" member on the institute's website.

However, there seems to be a significant overlap between the two companies' philosophies. Some of the institute's most recent offerings feature lessons for police administrators on how to manage the fallout when officers are involved in an incident that results in death, including how to control media coverage.

Taser officials repeatedly say the company's products have never officially been confirmed as the cause of death.

"If you look at this history of this, not one of the deaths in Canada - not one - has ever been listed as caused by a taser," Steve Tuttle, a spokesman for the company, said in an interview last week. Mr. Tuttle did not return calls seeking comment about Taser's strategy yesterday.

However, in the United States, where deaths that have raised questions about a link to tasers far outnumber Canadian incidents, newspapers and civil- liberties groups have documented several cases where local medical examiners initially linked tasers to in-custody deaths.

In his presentation, Mr. Brave highlights some of these cases, showing in each one how, in later depositions, the doctors responsible backed away from linking tasers to those deaths.

Mr. Tuttle said Taser doesn't tell police where to place its product on the "use of force spectrum," which ranges from simply talking to a person, to using deadly force.

However, Mr. Tuttle said the taser is safer than many alternatives on the lower end of the spectrum.

"I don't see anybody asking for a ban of batons. But it's barbaric. It's a caveman tool. You're hitting somebody with something like a baseball bat as hard as you can in certain areas of the body. Then it doesn't work. Then you use a taser, which ends the situation instantly," he said. "If you compare this to a palm strike, hands down the taser is a winner."

Recently, there have been numerous calls for moratoriums on the use of electronic control devices. The use of tasers was singled out by the United Nations Committee Against Torture, which stated that "the use of these weapons causes acute pain, constituting a form of torture."

Mr. Tuttle said the calls for moratoriums are "absurd."

"It's a step backwards in law enforcement evolution that we've helped create," he said. "Ninety per cent of people you deploy this on have a quick reaction that you'll never read about in the paper.

"Has it saved lives? Absolutely. Is it the most effective non-lethal tool out there? Hands down. We've found the winning ingredient."

STUN GUN CASES

In his PowerPoint presentation on legal issues surrounding taser use, Taser International legal counsel Michael Brave highlights a number of cases involving stun guns.

In one case from 2005, a Sacramento police officer was sued for excessive force after he shot a man with a gun in the buttocks. The officer intended to draw his taser, but instead pulled out his firearm.

A similar incident from June of last year is also included. A man in Washington State had climbed a tree and remained there for several hours, according to the presentation.

"Deputies were unsure whether the man was intoxicated, on drugs, or possibly experiencing a psychotic episode," the presentation reads. "One deputy attempted to discharge a TASER device at the man, but when it did not work asked another deputy to fire a TASER device. Instead of grabbing the TASER device, the deputy grabbed and fired her gun."

The presentation also lists a couple of incidents of accidental taser and "Electronic Control Device" discharge. In one case from February of 2006, a Florida officer accidentally discharged a taser on his daughter.

The presentation also lists, without elaborating: "Recent incident of officer accidentally discharging ECD into daughter's eye."