EDITORIAL: Here's key in taser use: police using good rules

September 28, 2011
The Charlotte Observer

We don't argue with the idea that Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officers should be armed with the safest weapons available. So in that sense, the Charlotte City Council's decision to buy new Tasers that prevent officers from firing high voltages of electricity for more than five seconds at a pop makes sense.

But this move does not end concerns over the use of Tasers, associated with the deaths of two suspects in Charlotte in the past three years. These are not truly the "non-lethal" weapons that they are so frequently advertised to be.

Amnesty International says Tasers contributed to about 351 U.S. deaths between 2002 and 2008. The group also says 90 percent of those tasered were unarmed at the time.

Taser International, which provides most such weapons (and the company supplying the guns to the CMPD), points to a different view in a May study by the National Institute of Justice. In a look at Taser use by six police departments nationwide over a two-year period, the institute's researchers found 99.7 percent of those tasered suffered no serious injuries. Their conclusion: "The risk of human death due directly or primarily to the electrical effects of [Tasers] has not been conclusively demonstrated."

It's hard to reconcile those views. Yet even the study provides fodder for concerns. "Risk of human death ... not conclusively demonstrated" is not the same as no risk. And the study says data have shown significant health risks when Tasers are used against small children, people with diseased hearts, the elderly, those who are pregnant and some others. Researchers also acknowledged that many of the deaths after Taser exposure "are associated with continuous or repeated discharge of the CED..., especially when the individual may be under drug intoxication."

These are crucial caveats. In the March 2008 death of 17-year-old Darryl Turner, a CMPD officer tasered the teen for 37 seconds, a violation of police policy. The city paid the family $625,000 as a result, but admitted no wrongdoing. A federal jury ordered Taser International this summer to pay $10 million to the family. The company said it will appeal but in 2009 it released an advisory urging police not to shoot suspects in the chest, where Turner was shot. It also began pushing a version of its gun that allows only five seconds of current before officers can fire again.

The model the council agreed to has that feature and other safety measures including an audible "pre-warning" that the device is about to be used, said CMPD chief Rodney Monroe. Taser officials tout other benefits including the ability to fire a second time quickly without reloading.

Such features are welcome but they remain no substitute for officers having and following good guidelines about the use of these devices. In the past, that has been a problem for CMPD - and a costly one. If the officer in the Turner case had followed policy, the teen might be alive, the city wouldn't have had to shell out $625,000 to a grieving family, and the council might not be approving $1.83 million for new Tasers. That last cost is acknowledgment that officers could not be depended upon to abide by a policy of not tasering suspects past five seconds, the limit on a Taser blast unless the trigger is held down.

This move won't force officers to show good judgment and abide by strong guidelines. The new Taser allows more blasts in the Taser's battery life, and two blasts in quick succession. Studies show multiple Taser shots pose health risks even in healthy adults.

Tasers have been welcome tools to police officers in protecting the public, suspects and themselves. They have helped reduce the numbers of lethal incidents in which an officer is forced to discharge a gun. But Tasers carry dangers that should not be ignored. Training, officers following sound guidelines and vigilance about health risks are crucial to helping ensure tragedy does not result from Taser use.

Council approves $1.8M in new Tasers for CMPD

September 27, 2011
WSOCTV.com

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Charlotte-Mecklenburg police are getting new, and supposedly safer, Tasers. Although the non-lethal tools have been the focus of controversy over the past few months, police are confident Tasers are not a problem. Just to be safe, they asked city council for $1.8 million to buy the new models.

The X2 version has several new safety features. The shock only lasts five seconds no matter how long the officer holds the trigger. The amount of electricity is now more exact.

Police Chief Rodney Monroe said these new Tasers are the top of the line models. "We don't believe that there is a better model out there," he told council members.

Those safety features could have meant the difference between life and death in 2008 when Darryl Turner died after being shocked by a police-issue Taser, and again two months ago when La'Reko Williams died. Williams' family made an appearance at the meeting Monday night, wearing shirts memorializing the 21-year-old man, but did not speak about the new Tasers.

The lawyer Charles Everage said the council should not have voted on the Taser deal until it figured out why WIlliams died from the shock. "We're not here to express any emotion about it," he said.

Police haven’t been allowed to use their Tasers since Williams died. The weapons have been in a state of review and testing and the department have been reviewing their policies for using Tasers. In fact, for the first time, CMPD officials said officers have deployed Tasers 760 times since 2004.

Police said those are time officers may have been forced to draw their guns instead, but they did not say how many of those suspects were seriously injured.

In light of the new X2 model Tasers, only one Charlotte resident spoke out about the weapons being added to officers' arsenal.

"If they're going to use these instruments that do cause devastation and it does cause death, they should be better trained," he said.

Cardiologists at Presbyterian Hospital in uptown Charlotte said any Taser can be dangerous, regardless of the safety mechanisms built into them because all Tasers hit suspects with thousands of volts of electricity.

"There are plenty of average, healthy people that in very unique situations can have weird electrical cardiac events," said Cardiologist Kevin Sharkey. "You've seen people on the basketball court collapse and die from an arythmia they didn't know they had."

Police have not said when officers will get the new Tasers. Even when they do, they may not use them right away because officers may need new training.

Multiple use of stun gun 'inappropriate'

July 11, 2011
Miranda Forster, Sydney Morning Herald

A Queensland police officer was wrong to keep using a Taser on a man after initial blasts from the weapon failed to subdue him, a former police tactician has told a coronial inquest.

William Turner gave evidence in the Brisbane Coroners Court on Monday at the inquest into the death of Antonio Galeano, who was tasered multiple times by police.

The 39-year-old died on the floor of his girlfriend's home in Brandon, north Queensland, in June 2009.

Senior Constable Craig Myles has admitted tasering Mr Galeano eight times in an attempt to subdue him, although the Taser he used registered 28 applications of 50,000 volts.

The court was told at one stage the Taser was deployed continuously for 40 seconds.

Mr Turner, who was in charge of police tactical training in Queensland in 2009, said it was incorrect to use the weapon multiple times to no effect. "If it's not deploying properly he should have moved to another use of force option," Mr Turner said. "If it was a conscious decision to cycle (the Taser) it was inappropriate.

"To keep recycling the Taser and for him not to achieve control of Mr Galeano, I would have said that he'd really need to change his tactics because it wasn't operating for him in the correct manner."

He suggested in the heat of the moment Snr Const Myles may not have heard the Taser deploying or seen the effect on Mr Galeano.

Mr Turner said the initial decision to use the Taser was appropriate, given Mr Galeano was a known violent offender and appeared mentally unstable and under the influence of drugs.

"I think taking those things into account the decision for Myles to deploy the Taser was tactically sound," he said.

Mr Turner also defended the decision by Snr Const Myles and his partner not to call for backup before they arrived at the scene.

As they were the only officers on duty it would have taken up to 40 minutes for help to arrive, he told the court.

He admitted the officers could have called for medical help before they arrived at the scene as they knew Mr Galeano had been injured.

"A call for an ambulance at that time would have been a good thing," he said.

The inquest continues.

Study urges police to be cautious with stun guns

May 27, 2011
Dave Collins, Associated Press

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Police officers using stun guns should avoid shooting suspects multiple times or for prolonged periods to reduce the risk of potential injury or death, according to a new U.S. Justice Department study prompted by hundreds of police-involved deaths across the country.

Coroners and other medical experts on the study panel concluded that while the effects of prolonged and repeated stun gun use on the body are not fully understood, most deaths officially attributed to Tasers and similar devices are from multiple or lengthy discharges of the weapons.

The panel reviewed nearly 300 cases in which people died from 1999 to 2005 after police shot them with stun guns, but found that most of the deaths were caused by underlying health problems and other issues. Of those cases, the experts examined 22 in which the use of stun guns was listed as an official cause of death.

The study released Tuesday by the department's research arm, the National Institute of Justice, concludes that it's appropriate for officers to use stun guns to subdue unruly or uncooperative suspects, as long as police adhere to "accepted national guidelines and appropriate use-of-force policy." It also makes several recommendations, including medical screenings for all people shot with stun guns.

The experts also noted that evidence shows the risk of death from a stun gun related incident is less than 0.25 percent, and there's no conclusive evidence that stun guns cause permanent health problems.

"What this study suggests is, indeed, less-than-lethal technologies ... can be effectively used by law enforcement," said John Laub, director of the National Institute of Justice.

Justice Department officials said the study began more than six years ago after Amnesty International and other groups blamed many death of suspects in police custody on stun gun. Both Amnesty International and the United Nations Committee Against Torture have called the use of stuns guns a form of torture in some cases.

More than 12,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide had issued about 260,000 stun guns to officers as of spring of last year, the study said. Of the more than 600 arrest-related deaths in the U.S. each year, there are very few cases in which stun guns are cited the cause or contributory factor, the report said.

Officials at Taser International, the maker of the leading stun guns, said Thursday that there are no peer-reviewed medical studies that have found that prolonged or repeated use of Tasers cause death. In 2009, however, the company advised Taser users to try to avoid shooting people in the chest, because of a very low risk of a health problem.

Alvaro Garzon, a 46-year-old drug and alcohol addiction counselor from New Haven, said the study's cautions about firing stun guns multiple times make sense. Garzon has filed a brutality complaint with New Haven police saying a city officer shot him with a stun gun four times last year during a domestic disturbance call.

"After two times it should be enough," Garzon said in Spanish on Thursday while his daughter, Lina, interpreted for him. "You don't feel good after the second shot. I felt like I was burning inside."

Garzon, who was accepted into a probation program on a charge of assault on a police officer, said he was treated at a hospital for lung problems, and he continues to suffer from the trauma. The status of Garzon's police complaint wasn't immediately clear Thursday night.

Police across the country have faced heated criticism for stun gun deaths.

Connecticut state police are investigating the May 1 death of 26-year-old Marcus Brown, who authorities say was shot with a stun gun by Waterbury police while he was in the back of a police cruiser and handcuffed. Brown's family is calling for federal authorities to investigate; the official cause of death is still pending.

Waterbury police say Brown, who was about 5 feet 6 inches tall and 125 pounds, became combative. The officer who shot Brown, Adrian Sanchez, had been placed on administrative duty under normal procedures.

Earlier this month, Connecticut state police released an investigation report that showed how Middletown police last year shot 35-year-old Efrain Carrion 34 times with stun guns to subdue him while responding to a report that he was despondent and violent. Carrion died later that day.

The medical examiner concluded Carrion died of "excited delirium," a cause of death not recognized by many medical groups but one the Justice Department says is well documented. Several officers were cleared of wrongdoing in the incident.

Last year, a jury in Louisiana acquitted former Winnfield officer Scott Nugent, who was accused of shooting handcuffed suspect Baron Pikes eight times with a Taser gun and charged with manslaughter. Pikes later died.

In 2006, police in Green Cove Springs, Fla., shot a 56-year-old woman in a wheelchair 10 times with a stun gun and she died. Police say Emily Marie Delafield was swinging knives and a hammer at relative and police, and officers had tried to talk her into dropping the weapons before they were forced to subdue her. The officers' actions were found to be justified.

Lt. J. Paul Vance, a spokesman for Connecticut state police, said police officers never want to get into a situation where they're forced to fire Tasers or other weapons.

"Certainly you're looking for voluntary compliance from a suspect ... but unfortunately that's not always achievable," Vance said.

Tame the Taser

June 26, 2010
By: Marilyn Baker, Winnipeg Free Press

Taser International is now advising customers not to aim at the "chest area" when zapping people.

Apparently you are supposed to aim lower. Yikes.

Maybe they're worried that the fallout from the Braidwood inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski will slow their sales a little. Mr. Dziekanski was Tasered five times moments before he died at the Vancouver airport in 2007.

More likely they're worried that one of these days a lawsuit from a bereaved relative will finally stick, and, somewhere on this continent, some judge will finally decide that, yes, Tasers kill. I won't hold my breath though. The company reportedly spends more on litigation than it makes in profit, and last year boasted that it had won its 100th dismissal of a liability lawsuit.

Someone should tell their lawyers that they still offer an item called Practice Target in the Accessories section of their website which shows the chest as the bull's-eye (US$6.95).

Speaking of their website, it's the very model of a modern Internet shopping site. There are choices for women (picture of young mother with adorable daughter) and law enforcement people, shopping carts to fill, twitters, blogs, even testimonials!

Their marketing is very good, as is demand for their products. In fact, according to their latest investor relations information, share prices have increased.

So, why the sudden reluctance for customers to aim at the chest? Until this recent acknowledgment that tasers can be dangerous, Taser International has been anything but squeamish about using this weapon.

They insist that when "used properly" (they provide a free training DVD), their weapons are low risk.

Amnesty International disagrees. They claim that 334 people have died in the United States following a tTaser zap (2001-2008). In Canada, a CBC report lists, by name, the 26 people who have died proximal to taser use since 2003.

But Taser International insists that a case can be made that without tasers more citizen deaths at the hands of the police might have occurred.

I would like to see evidence to support this proposition. But we may never know. According to former RCMP complaints commissioner Paul Kennedy, the RCMP have engaged in "systemic under-reporting" of taser use.

I am concerned that our police are using Tasers more often and multiple times on the same victim. They were to be used where the only alternative was deadly force, but are now being used on people who are "non-compliant."

Kevin Bogg, assistant deputy minister to the solicitor general ministry for B.C., has stated that "I am very concerned about 'slippage' in taser use, where it is being increasingly used in lower risk situations."

Also, Tasers cause intense pain. Whether death ensues or not, the victim experiences extreme agony. The United Nations has labelled the use of Tasers as torture.

Phase I of the Braidwood inquiry concluded that Tasers can kill. It contains several recommendations, including that Tasers be used only the most dangerous of assaultive Criminal Code behaviours, and that victims of a Tasering get immediate medical attention.

The Phase II report, released June 18, deals specifically with Robert Dziekanski's death and concludes that the RCMP use of the Taser was "shameful" and not justified.

Within an hour of the release of the Phase II report, the RCMP issued an unconditional apology to Mr. Dziekanski's mother for their role in the death of her son.

But Taser International also played a role. Unfortunately, the company does not accept that their stun gun can cause cardiac arrest. According to Rick Guilbault, Taser's VP of Training and Education, the carefully crafted message about avoiding the chest area, "where practical," is "risk mitigation, pure and simple."

I hope that Taser International will face the reality that their weapons do real harm and will revise its corporate and marketing culture.

I doubt it though. I wouldn't be surprised to see a backlash from them on the latest Braidwood report. They have a history of aggressive legal action in defending their products from liability.

This is a very complex issue. Tasers may well be an important part of the arsenal needed to fight crime. But our police need far more restraints, support, guidance and training than are presently given.

Commissioner Braidwood said, "I can't help but think that if the Taser was not there, they perhaps would have reverted to their former skills." Such skills include de-escalating situations and calming people down, not harming them.

I hope that the Braidwood recommendations are implemented by all police forces. Then perhaps Robert Dziekanski will not have died in vain.

MONTREAL Exclusive: Taming police Tasers - Public security panel Cops urged to use stun gun only when a life is at risk

June 11, 2010
JAMES MENNIE, The Montreal Gazette

Montreal police should continue to use Tasers but only when they're the sole alternative to a firearm, Montreal Island's public security committee will recommend next week.

But that recommendation is not the unanimous finding of the nine-member committee, The Gazette has learned. A minority report will recommend that Taser use by Montreal's police force be subject to a moratorium until more is known about just how dangerous the device can be.

During a series of public hearings this year, Montreal police representatives described the Taser -a stun gun that can deliver a 50,000-volt charge -as "an intermediate weapon" that would be used as an alternative to a firearm.

But the police representatives also noted that the device could be used to bring incidents involving heavily disturbed individuals to a quick conclusion -even when police use of a firearm is not necessarily the only alternative.

The committee's recommendation, which is scheduled to be tabled next week during a meeting of Montreal's agglomeration council, will seek to have the protocols for Taser use by police mirror those already in place for firearms -that the officer's life, or the lives of bystanders, be at risk.

The protocol would also allow a Taser to be used if the life of the suspect is at risk -police intervening in a suicide attempt, for example.

The recommendation also calls for a Taser, once drawn, to be used only once on a suspect, and for the public security committee to be notified of any technological or training changes that might affect the Montreal police department's use of the device.

The report will also recommend that rather than using a Taser on mentally disturbed suspects, police call in support from someone trained to deal with individuals who have psychiatric problems.

Taser use by police has been under scrutiny in Montreal since the 2007 death of Quilem Registre, 38, four days after being tasered six times by police after he was stopped for a traffic violation. Coroner Catherine Rudel-Tessier concluded that while cocaine and alcohol in Registre's system might have contributed it to his death, it was "difficult to believe (the taserings) played no role."

The hearings heard that about 100 Montreal police officers are trained to use the 17 Tasers in the department. Montreal police discharged Tasers during 11 incidents in 2009, and they drew them from their holsters without using them another seven times.

Police statistics show Tasers were fired 11 times and drawn as a threat three more times in 2008; fired 23 times and used as a threat 10 times in 2007; fired 17 times and used as a threat 11 times in 2006.

During the three years after their introduction in 2001, Montreal police pulled out the stun gun 14 times.

Manitoba policing agencies review RCMP's new Taser policy

Go Manitoba!! Now, there remains only NINE more provinces that need to distribute the RCMP's new policy on taser use to ALL municipal police agencies: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland.

"[Attorney General Andrew] Swan said his office WILL NOT ORDER municipal police agencies to adopt the new RCMP standards. That will be UP TO THEM he said, adding the RCMP tend to be "PERSUASIVE" when policies change."

The pressure is on - I'm sure Manitoba and the other nine provinces will eventually come around and do the right thing.

WINNIPEG -- The RCMP’s new policy on Taser-use has been distributed to all municipal police agencies in Manitoba, Attorney General Andrew Swan said Wednesday.

Swan said Manitoba Justice officials forwarded the policy Wednesday so that each of the 13 municipal forces, including the Winnipeg Police Service, were aware of what the Mounties were doing.

The RCMP introduced the new policy Tuesday. The revamped operational manual says officers should limit Taser use to incidents in which a person is "causing bodily harm" or will "imminently" lash out.

The new RCMP policy also says that when possible, Mounties should warn suspects they’re about to be zapped.

The directive mirrors a recommendation from former judge Thomas Braidwood, head of a B.C. public inquiry on Taser use prompted by the 2007 death of airline passenger Robert Dziekanski at the Vancouver airport.

The change also comes in response to criticism from human-rights advocates that the Taser was often being used to make people comply with police commands, not to defuse the most serious threats.

Swan said his office will not order municipal police agencies to adopt the new RCMP standards. That will be up to them he said, adding the RCMP tend to be "persuasive" when policies change.

Winnipeg Police Service spokesman Const. Jason Michalyshen said in a statement city police are satisfied with their current policy.

"The Winnipeg Police Service is aware of changes made to the RCMP policy and have reviewed their report," Michalyshen said in an email. "The Winnipeg Police Service is satisfied with its current policy as it is based on the totality of circumstances involved in each encounter and places the onus on the officer to justify and articulate its use."

Two years ago Michael Langan, 17, died after he was tasered by city police in a William Avenue back alley.

Two police officers had chased the teenager there after he stole something from a nearby car. An officer stunned Langan after he allegedly threatened officers with a knife. An autopsy report says Langan’s death was caused by a heart arrhythmia brought on by the Taser shocks. His family have said they intend to sue Taser International. A provincial inquest will also be called.

The RCMP policy also says multiple firings of the Taser may be hazardous. It also reinstates direction that officers must not use the stun gun for more than five seconds on a person and should avoid multiple bursts unless necessary.

Mounties restrict Taser use

May 5, 2010
Jim Bronskill, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA — The Mounties say that from now on they will fire stun guns at people only when those people are hurting someone or clearly about to do so.

Accused of relying too heavily on Tasers, the RCMP introduced new policies Tuesday to restrict their use to nipping violent confrontations in the bud.

The revamped operational manual says officers should limit Taser use to incidents in which a person is "causing bodily harm" or will "imminently" lash out.

Bob Paulson, an assistant RCMP commissioner, said the threshold is more specific than the previous one, defined as "a threat to officer or public safety."

"We feel that this is more precise," he said in an interview.

The directive mirrors a recommendation from former judge Thomas Braidwood, head of a B.C. public inquiry on Taser use prompted by the death of airline passenger Robert Dziekanski.

The RCMP changes come in response to the B.C. inquiry, new Alberta guidelines and persistent criticism from human-rights advocates that the Taser was often being used to make people obey police commands, not to defuse the most serious threats.

The new RCMP policy says that when possible, Mounties should warn suspects they are about to be zapped.

The policy continues to advise that multiple firings of the Taser may be hazardous. It also reinstates direction that officers must not use the stun gun for more than five seconds on a person and should avoid multiple stuns unless truly necessary.

It also calls for better records on Taser use and more testing to make sure the devices are operating correctly.

The RCMP now issues quarterly reports on Taser use but they lag a year behind.

"It’s not timely enough," said Paulson. "It’s not acceptable and we’re going to improve that."

The RCMP watchdog, which has sharply criticized the force’s stun-gun policies, welcomed the announcement as a "significant improvement."

Restricting Taser use to the "clearly defined threshold" of bodily harm should help reduce the risk of "usage creep" — the tendency to stun people as a convenient means of making them comply, said Ian McPhail, interim chair of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP.

AUSTRALIA: Police look for new taser brand

September 4, 2009
Couriermail

THE Queensland Police Service may junk its 1200 Taser guns if a more suitable model is found, police commissioner Bob Atkinson has confirmed.

Commissioner Atkinson said a search for another brand which limits each Taser cycle to five seconds would begin immediately, in the wake of a report recommending changes to their use.

The joint Crime and Misconduct Commission-Queensland Police Service review was prepared after the death of a man at Brandon, near Townsville.

Amphetamines addict Antonio Galeano, 39, suffered a heart attack after he was Tasered repeatedly during a violent domestic disturbance in June.

The report found that since the start of the year, multiple deployments of Tasers have occurred on 20 occasions not including the Brandon incident, and in 11 instances the Taser cycles lasted longer than five seconds. In three of those instances, Tasers were used for 10 seconds at a time – or twice the recommended cycle.

The CMC wants the weapons modified so each deployment can last no longer than five seconds but manufacturer Taser International has said that is not possible with the current model.

Mr Atkinson said it was an issue the QPS would examine further, including looking at alternatives to the $2000 Taser "in the interests of safe usage".

"First we need to find out whether the technical specifications the CMC would like to be introduced can actually be incorporated into one of these devices," he said.

Australian distributor for Taser International, George Hateley, said there was no market for Tasers that capped the number of deployments and limited cycles. "Most police forces don't want that and I wouldn't like the police to limit that sort of thing. You can imagine in a stressful situation and they squeeze the trigger and it doesn't go off again. It could be disastrous," he said.

"You wouldn't tell a police officer to load his gun with only one bullet. Why do that with Tasers?"

Instead, Taser International had developed a new semi-automatic model known as the X3, which could be deployed on three people at the same time, Mr Hateley said.

Other changes recommended by the report are a trial of cameras on Tasers, an increase in training for police from 10 to 14 hours, and a change in the threshold for use to "risk of serious injury to a person".

The new policy also prohibits officers from aiming the Taser at a person's head or neck.

AUSTRALIA: Tasers face ban after findings they can kill

"Fears that Tasers would be used as a compliance tool may have come to fruition around Australia."

September 3, 2009
The The Australian

THE controversial Taser stun guns may be scrapped in Queensland after a review warned that the weapons could kill and could not be modified to prevent a repeat of the death of a man this year when he was shot 28 times with the 50,000-volt device.

The joint Crime and Misconduct Commission-police review, launched after the June heart-attack death of north Queensland man Antonio Galeano, has ordered an overhaul of police training and operational policy, requiring the stun guns to be used only when there is a "risk of serious injury".

The review, to be released today and obtained exclusively by The Australian, marks the first time an Australian authority has recognised the possibility the stun guns can injure or kill, especially when fired repeatedly at a person.

"The possibility of Taser use causing or contributing to death is possible and cannot be ruled out," the review warns.

The Arizona-based manufacturers have repeatedly denied the weapons can kill.

The report is expected to influence the nationwide rollout of Tasers, amid mounting evidence the weapons are being used by police as an everyday compliance tool and not as a non-lethal substitute for a standard gun in high-risk situations.

Sources have told The Australian a coronial investigation has concluded that amphetamine addict Galeano, 39, was deliberately shot 28 times, each time for a duration of up to five seconds, after he confronted police with a steel bar at his unit in Brandon, south of Townsville.

It was initially claimed the stun gun might have malfunctioned or that there was a glitch with the built-in computer system recording the number and duration of shots from the weapon.

But investigators will allege the policeman repeatedly Tasered Galeano, who dropped the metal bar after the first few shots, while he lay unarmed and writhing on the floor.

He died minutes later while still in handcuffs.

Civil liberties lawyers called for a criminal investigation into the death of Galeano in June, when The Australian revealed he had been shot 28 times.

Until then, police had claimed he had been shot only two or three times.

It will be announced today that the freeze on the rollout of Tasers to 3000 general duties officers -- ordered after the death of Galeano -- will be maintained while police move to implement the recommendations of the review.

Meanwhile, the 1200 Tasers with the Queensland police force will remain in operation. But the use of Tasers is under threat, with the CMC recommending they be modified so a single shot lasts no longer than five seconds, and that a limit be put on the numbers of times the weapon can be fired.

Police have been told by the manufacturer that "at this stage, this is not feasible with the Taser X26" -- the $15,000-a-piece weapon being used in Queensland and around Australia.

The review recommends that Queensland Police fit an automatic video device on the weapons, which records every time the Taser is pulled from its holster.

Queensland police last year refused to buy the weapons with the optional "Tasercam" because of the cost.

Civil liberties lawyer Scott McDougall, director of the Caxton Legal Centre, said police should be forced to table in parliament every deployment of the stun guns in Queensland.

He said an independent medical study should be conducted on the weapons, and a freeze on their use should be implemented until the findings were released.

"We have clients who were Tasered who were not offering any resistance to police," he said.

"Fears that Tasers would be used as a compliance tool may have come to fruition around Australia."

Police officer to face disciplinary hearing over Taser use

August 13, 2009
CBC News

An Edmonton police officer will face an internal disciplinary hearing related to an incident in 2002 in which he used a Taser stun gun repeatedly on a teenager who was passed out at the time.

Alberta's Law Enforcement Review Board ordered Edmonton Police Chief Mike Boyd to charge Const. Mike Wasylyshen with using excessive force and insubordination.

In its ruling, the board said Randy Fryingpan, then 16, was passed out drunk in the back seat of a broken-down car when the Taser was used on him. The board ruled there was no evidence to justify the use of the Taser.

The board has also ordered Edmonton Police to bring in a officer from another police service to preside over the disciplinary hearing "in the interest of providing a fair hearing."

In 2005, former acting police chief Daryl Da Costa decided Wasylyshen would not face any charges because he felt the allegations were unfounded.

The ruling by the Law Enforcement Review Board follows a lengthy appeal by Fryingpan's mother.

Taser introduces 3-stun gun

July 27, 2009
CBC News

Leading stun gun manufacturer Taser International Inc. unveiled on Monday a device that is capable of deploying three shocks without having to be recharged — a move that comes just days after a British Columbia inquiry urged stricter limits on the use of the weapons.

Typically, law enforcement officers using stun guns — also known as conducted energy weapons — have to reload after each deployment. Officers using the weapons no longer have to wait to deploy the weapons again, and now can deliver multiple shocks in quick succession.

This capacity could help officers who have missed a target or have more than one suspect to subdue.

Whether or not law enforcement officers should be given the ability to shock people multiple times has been a contentious issue in Canada. One of the recommendations of a report on stun gun use released Thursday by former B.C. Appeal Court justice Thomas Braidwood suggests such use is unwarranted and potentially deadly.

Braidwood recommended in his report that stun guns be used only in single five-second bursts in most cases, rather than multiple bursts. He cited increased medical risks associated with repeated shocks, and recommended that paramedic assistance be requested in every medically high-risk situation.

Though the report recommended a number of stricter limits on the use of the weapons, it stopped short of calling for an outright ban. The British Columbia government promptly adopted all of the recommendations outlined in the report.

The use of the weapons has sparked widespread controversy in Canada, particularly in the aftermath of the death of Polish man Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver International Airport in October 2007. His death, which came after he was stunned with Tasers multiple times by RCMP officers, prompted the Braidwood inquiry and the release of last week's report.

Braidwood will also specifically probe Dziekanski's death in a second report, which isn't expected for months.

Details coming next month
Arizona-based Taser was quick to dismiss Thursday's report. The company said after its release that it appears that "politics has trumped science."

The recommendations in the report are based largely on speculation and ignored key facts, Taser said.

Taser unveiled its new device on Monday to hundreds of law enforcement officers and distributors at its annual conference. It costs $1,799 US, compared with $799 US for the older model, though Taser spokesman Steve Tuttle said there will be "very generous" trade-in programs for law enforcement agencies.

Like the older models, the new stun gun shoots two barbed wires that deliver electrical current for several seconds, temporarily immobilizing people from a distance.

Details on when the new device will be made available will likely come next month, said Tuttle.

Taser company says stun gun strikes won't kill

June 19, 2009
The World Today
Reporter: Annie Guest

PETER CAVE: The company that manufactures the stun gun at the centre of a furore in Queensland has hit back at its critics.

Taser International says regardless of whether its stun gun was used three times - as originally reported by police - or 28 times as later came to light, it would not have killed North Queenslander Antonio Galeano.

The company says that Amnesty International's claim that the Taser is linked to more than 300 deaths worldwide is wrong because no coroner has ever made such a finding.

It comes amid reports the officers involved in last Friday's incident need protection themselves.

Annie Guest reports from Brisbane.

ANNIE GUEST: By this time last week Antonio Galeano had been dead for several hours and the community was told he'd been hit with a stun gun three times.

But with the admission by Queensland's Police Service and its Minister that the Taser had actually been fired 28 times at the North Queensland home, there have been many questions about the weapon.

A request for an interview with US-based Taser International leads to a phone call from its Australian weapons distributor called Breon Enterprises.

Its director is George Hateley and he says he's also a spokesman for Taser International.

GEORGE HATELEY: In a very highly confrontational and life threatening situation, you won't always recall exactly what you did in real life and sometimes people talk about slow motion type things that happen in those high intense situations.

ANNIE GUEST: So if an officer won't perhaps necessarily recall how many times the Taser was discharged, does Taser International say there is a safe upper limit as to how many times it should be discharged?

GEORGE HATELEY: There is nothing set in concrete because you continue to use force proportionate to the threat.

ANNIE GUEST: And Queensland Police echoes this view. It surprised many yesterday when a superior officer said there was no prescribed limit for the amount of times a Taser could be used on somebody.

So there is no number of Taser strikes considered unsafe to the human body?

GEORGE HATELEY: No, no, no. It is a very safe piece of equipment to use in comparison to everything else that policemen have got on their belt at the moment.

ANNIE GUEST: But there are claims by groups such as Amnesty International that Tasers have been linked to hundreds of deaths. Do you then say that that has never happened, that a Taser has never caused harm to a human body that has led to a death?

GEORGE HATELEY: That's right, yes. There is no evidence by anyone in the world to directly attribute Taser to a death.

ANNIE GUEST: So no coroner has ever linked Taser to a death?

GEORGE HATELEY: A direct death, no.

ANNIE GUEST: So while there has been a lot of criticism that this Taser was apparently discharged 28 times and not the three originally reported, what you are saying is that in terms of the man's ultimate death, it's irrelevant.

GEORGE HATELEY: Well, his death is not irrelevant but the...

ANNIE GUEST: The Taser being fired.

GEORGE HATELEY: Yes, yes, good, yep.

ANNIE GUEST: Taser International's defence of its weapon through its Australian distributor comes as the stun gun wins qualified support from one independent Australian expert who did a safety analysis of the weapon back in 2003.

The retired biomedical engineer John Southwell says the Taser can be a good tool for law enforcers.

JOHN SOUTHWELL: I think they are in some cases. I think the operators though need to be trained specifically, specifically in the use of them.

ANNIE GUEST: And John Southwell says important information about Tasers includes the fact that they don't work on everyone.

JOHN SOUTHWELL: The Taser only works on around 95 per cent of people so that there will be some that it won't work on; and if it doesn't work the first time, I don't think you should keep on actually doing it repeatedly.

ANNIE GUEST: Meanwhile it has been revealed the officers called to Antonio Galeano's home a week ago reportedly now need police protection because they've received threats.

The Police Union says it knows nothing about it. However it has called for calm.

PETER CAVE: Annie Guest reporting.

Australia: Man died after 20 hits from stun gun

June 17, 2009
The Australian

THE north Queensland man who died last week after police used a stun gun on him was shot more than 20 times with a 50,000-volt Taser, prompting calls for an investigation into the use of the weapon and possible criminal charges against the officer involved.

Data downloaded from the officer's stun gun -- now being rolled out to police across Australia -- has revealed that amphetamines addict Antonio Galeano was shot at least 20 times, each for a duration of five seconds, before he collapsed and died while in handcuffs.

Capsicum spray had also been used on Mr Galeano during the incident, early Friday morning at a unit in Brandon, south of Townsville.

Police initially told the media that an unnamed senior constable had only used the weapon three times on Mr Galeano, 39, who earlier had allegedly assaulted a woman and was wielding a metal pipe when confronted by the officer and his partner, a first-year constable.

But The Australian can exclusively reveal that an inbuilt system in the controversial weapon -- which automatically records each time the weapon is fired -- indicated Mr Galeano was shot more than 20 times.

Mr Galeano was repeatedly shot, using the gun's "probe mode", which according to the website of US manufacturer Taser International, fires darts into the target, before a triggering delivers 19 pulses a second of about 1300 volts for five seconds.

"But the weapon also develops an open circuit arc of 50,000 volts to traverse clothing in cases where no direct contact is made," the website adds.

The Australian could find no other incident in the world where law enforcement has been reported to have deployed the gun more than five times in a single incident.

Queensland Council for Civil Liberties vice-president Terry O'Gorman last night said the revelations warranted an unlawful killing investigation into the police involved. "The focus of the investigation should not be about possible disciplinary action but whether manslaughter charges should be laid," he said.

"The amount of shots using this high-voltage weapon is completely contrary to appropriate guidelines and against evidence that a Taser is not supposed to be used more than once in a given period."

The senior constable, who shot the Taser, has told investigators from police Ethical Standards Command that he only Tasered Mr Galeano several times.

Police are also investigating whether the Taser malfunctioned during the incident or if the data recorded on the gun is incorrect.

But George Hateley, the exclusive distributor of Tasers in Australia, yesterday said a malfunction was unlikely.

"It is an outside possibility," he said. "And the data taken off the weapon is very accurate."

Mr Hateley said the weapon could be shot 196 times before it needed to be recharged.

The data on the Taser sparked Police Minister Neil Roberts and Commissioner Bob Atkinson to suddenly freeze the rollout of the tasers on Monday and order a Crime and Misconduct Commission review of Taser policy and training in Queensland.

But at the time, Mr Roberts and Mr Atkinsion refused to reveal the reasons behind their decision, saying "new evidence" was the property of acting state coroner Christine Clements, who is investigating the death.

Queensland police last night said they could not comment about the death because "it is currently the subject of a coronial investigation".

At least 1200 Tasers have been distributed to police in Queensland, after former police minister Judy Spence ordered 2500 guns be rolled out to general duties officers mid-way through a year-long trial.

Amnesty International has claimed that Tasers have been linked to more than 300 deaths worldwide.

RCMP boss and Solicitor General pick busy news day for Taser revelations

June 1, 2009
By Charlie Smith, Georgia Strait

Call me cynical and jaded, but I am somewhat suspicious about the timing of two Taser-related news stories today.

In the first instance, Solicitor General and former RCMP officer Rich Coleman ordered the immediate recall of 578 older-model M-26 Tasers.

Coleman's announcement came conveniently after the last witness appeared at the Braidwood Inquiry on May 26.

Final arguments will begin on June 19 at the inquiry, which is probing the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver International Airport in 2007 after being stunned five times by a Taser.

The solicitor general also chose one of the busiest news days in recent memory.

The morning began with General Motors seeking bankruptcy protection.

There was also an Air France plane that went missing over the Atlantic, with all the passengers and crew presumed dead.

Here in Vancouver, there was a riveting tale of a high-school student being arrested, allegedly with a hit list of students and staff at Templeton secondary.

If Coleman's spin doctors in the public-affairs bureau wanted to ensure there would be minimal coverage of the Taser announcement, they picked the right day to leak the news. It ranks up there with TransLink holding its annual general meeting on election day.

Meanwhile, RCMP Commissioner William Elliott also showed a similar knack for timing his Taser-related revelation of the day.

Before the Senate defence and national security committee in the late afternoon in Ottawa, Elliott declared: "We are very sorry for Mr. Dziekanski's death, and are committed to learning as much as possible from this terrible event."

Elliott promised senators that there will be "further change" in the RCMP's policy regarding Tasers.

This comes after CBC Radio-Canada reporter Frederic Zalac exposed last March how the Mounties actually loosened the rules on the use of the stun guns by lifting a restriction on multiple uses.

Elliott told senators today that it wasn't the RCMP's intention to allow Mounties to make more liberal use of their Tasers.

Perhaps the RCMP's spin doctors have advised Elliott that allowing the force to zap suspects several times might not be such a good idea--particularly while this is being examined as part of the high-profile public inquiry into the death of Dziekanski, who himself was the recipient of five jolts.

Would repeated Tasering of a suspect be considered an abuse of police power?

May 28, 2009
Steve Lombardi, Attorney
InjuryBoard.com

This case may answer the question in Iowa: Once under control would repeated Tasering of a suspect be considered an abuse of police power?

The Courts define what force is legitimate police power and when the use of force becomes punishment. It is the court's that mete out punishment sanctioned by state law; whereas police enforce the laws. Police are not authorized by the Constitution to punish. It's all about the separation of powers under the United States Constitution.

This Iowa case may answer the question of whether it is justified police action or an unconstitutional abuse of police power to use multiple Tazing of a person under arrest. As you can imagine once a person is under control further Tasering is akin to torture. The police are supposed to enforce the laws, but are not authorized to act as judge and jury as far as punishment goes.

What this case may answer may also demonstrate the difficulty of proving damages in a civil case for the manner in which the Taser was used. If it’s legal to Taser a person at least once, then what pain and suffering does a second, third and fourth Taser event add? If at least one Tasering is legal then you won’t be allowed damages for that first event; only for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th events. But if the Taser makes your nerve pulses ineffective can a person continue to feel painful stimulus? If not how then can you suffer pain? Perhaps the experts will be able to tell us if the Tasered suspect can still feel pain but is simply unable to respond. This damage case will require medical experts on the issue of the Taser and a person’s ability to feel pain after undergoing a Taser event.

I have to wonder how, if the Taser is so effective, can anyone justify multiple Tasering events?

Canadian authorities have been analyzing the use of the Taser by it’s own police forces and seem more concerned than is American law enforcement.

The ACLU of Florida petitioned the SCOTUS to review a case involving multiple Taser events on the same person during an arrest. You can download the 67 page Petition for Review by following the link.

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. Whether a deputy sheriff violated the Fourth Amendment by administering three separate five-second-long direct contact “drivestun” Taser shocks, over a two minute period, to a handcuffed, nonviolent misdemeanor traffic arrestee who had already collapsed to the ground sobbing, who never actively resisted arrest or attempted to flee, and who never posed any danger to himself, the officer or the public, when the sole purpose of the Taser shocks was to administer pain to prompt the arrestee to stand up.

2. Whether a reasonable police officer had fair notice in 2004 sufficient to deprive him of qualified immunity that it violated the Fourth Amendment to administer three separate fivesecond-long direct contact “drive stun” taser shocks, over a two minute period, to a handcuffed nonviolent misdemeanor traffic arrestee who had already collapsed to the ground sobbing, who never actively resisted arrest or attempted to flee, and who never posed any danger to himself, the officer or the public, when the sole purpose of the Taser shocks was to administer pain to prompt the arrestee to stand up.

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING

Petitioner is Jesse Daniel Buckley, plaintiff-appellee below.

Respondent is Jonathan Rackard, Deputy Sheriff of Washington County, Florida, in his individual capacity, defendant-appellant below.

Amnesty International USA covers the use of Tasers multiple shocks in a single arrest. See Canada: Inappropriate and excessive use of tasers.

2.1 Multiple or prolonged taser discharges
Amnesty International's research into deaths following taser use in the USA and Canada indicates that many of those who have died had been subjected to multiple or prolonged shocks. In Canada alone, all six of the deceased in 2005 and 2006 were shocked multiple times with a taser; in one case up to 12 times in three minutes.

Amnesty International believes that repeated shocks should be avoided unless absolutely necessary to avoid serious injury or death and prolonged shocks beyond the five-second discharge cycle should be prohibited.

The Canadian Police Research Centre noted in its 2005 Technical Report that "police officers need to be aware of the adverse effects of multiple, consecutive cycles of a CED on a subject" because "the issue related to multiple CED applications and its impact on respiration, pH levels and other associated physical effects, offers a plausible theory on the possible connection between deaths, CED use and people exhibiting symptoms of CED.(12)

In April 2005, the US Department of Defense released a report which concluded that while available data suggests that healthy adults would not be at significant risk from the taser, "if long periods of uninterrupted EMI [Electromuscular Incapacitation Device] activation did occur, the risk of unintended adverse effects such as cardiac arrhythmia, impairment of respiration or widespread metabolic muscle damage could be severe".(13)

Taser International is the main manufacturer of taser stun guns. In June 2005, in light of a number of lawsuits by relatives of those who died after being shocked by tasers, and the fact that the use of their product was being listed in autopsy reports, the company included a warning that there were potential health risks in the use of its product in a training bulletin.

Taser International on May 3, 2004 issued a Memorandum of Law concerning the Taser Conducted Energy Weapons.

The legal concerns usually raised regarding the TASER conducted energy weapon generally fall into two categories:

1. What are the legal restrictions on the use of a TASER conducted energy weapon; and

2. What is the impact of a TASER conducted energy weapon on legal liability in a use of force incident. The purpose of this Memorandum of Law is to address these issues in the context of U.S. Federal and State regulations and case law.

Is this an exercise of legitimate police power or an abuse of power?



Police Tasers: excessive force or necessary tool?
The Christian Science Monitor
May 28, 2009

Washington - From isolated cases across the country, a debate is emerging over the use of electric stun guns as a "pain compliance" device by law enforcement.

At issue isn't whether police can use the weapon, known as a Taser, to protect themselves from dangerous suspects or to prevent a criminal from escaping. That is its designed purpose. Instead, the question is to what extent police may use a stun gun against someone who is not actively resisting arrest but who is passively refusing to obey a police command.

To some officers, such refusal is a form of resisting arrest and constitutes grounds to shoot 50,000 volts of electricity into that person's body in five-second bursts. When a person is tased, the central nervous system is overridden and the person experiences a seizure accompanied by intense pain.

Such tactics would be unconstitutional in a police interrogation room.

By contrast, during an arrest or roadside traffic stop, there are no clear standards for when police use of a stun gun for "pain compliance" might violate Fourth Amendment protections.

Officials at UCLA recently agreed to pay a student $220,000 to drop a lawsuit against the university in connection with a November 2006 incident in which the student was repeatedly tased after refusing a police order to leave the school library.

Last week, the US Supreme Court declined to take up the case of a handcuffed Florida motorist who was tased three times because he disobeyed a deputy sheriff's command to stand up and walk to a patrol car.

Given the proliferation of police stun guns, the issue is expected come up with increasing frequency across the country, according to civil libertarians.

A controversial alternative to guns

Developed in the 1990s, stun guns have helped reduce injuries to both police officers and suspects by offering officers a safer alternative to a firearm or a night stick.

Today there are more than 375,000 stun guns being used at 13,400 law enforcement and military organizations in 44 countries, according to Taser International, the manufacturer of the leading brand of stun gun.

But stun guns have come under increasing scrutiny. According to Amnesty International, more than 300 individuals have died after stun gun encounters in the US in the past nine years. And even their nonlethal use has been controversial.

Los Angeles police tried to use a stun gun against Rodney King before his arrest degenerated into the now infamous police beating.

In September 2007, campus police at the University of Florida used a stun gun to neutralize a disruptive student at a John Kerry speech. The student's plea, "Don't tase me, bro," became a popular tee shirt slogan.

In the case of the Florida driver, the Supreme Court justices offered no explanation for their decision not to hear his case. The move lets stand a federal appeals court decision that found the deputy's actions reasonable and justified.

"I hope [law enforcement officials] don't see this as open season to tase anyone who doesn't do exactly what they are told," says Tallahassee lawyer John Jolly, who successfully represented the deputy in the Florida case.

"In the end it is all going to come down to a question of reasonableness under the circumstances," Mr. Jolly says. "If a reasonable person would think that use of force is going to accomplish a lawful objective and make it less likely that somebody gets hurt, they can do it."

The tasing of Jesse Buckley

The Florida case involves a motorist named Jesse Buckley who was pulled over for speeding on a remote Florida highway in March 2004.

Mr. Buckley was issued a traffic ticket, but became distraught and refused to sign it. Washington County Deputy Sheriff Jonathan Rackard placed Buckley under arrest, cuffing his hands behind his back. As instructed, the motorist exited his car and headed toward the patrol car.

Before he reached the cruiser, Buckley collapsed to the ground. The encounter was captured on the video camera mounted on the dashboard of Mr. Rackard's cruiser. The video has been posted on the Internet.

The deputy tried to lift Buckley, but he went limp and started sobbing. Buckley was warned that if he didn't get up he would be shocked with a Taser.

"I don't care anymore," Buckley said. "Tase me."

The deputy tased him three times before backup arrived, and the two officers walked Buckley to the patrol car.

Photos of Buckley's body later revealed 16 burn marks.

Buckley filed a lawsuit against the deputy for excessive use of force by a police officer. A federal judge refused to throw out the lawsuit, but a divided panel of the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta sided with the deputy. The suit was dismissed.

"The government has an interest in arrests being completed efficiently and without waste of limited resources," wrote Chief Judge J.L. Edmondson in the 2-to-1 decision. "Even though [the motorist] was handcuffed, he still refused repeatedly to comply with the most minimal of police instructions – that is, to stand up and to walk to the patrol car."

In a dissent, District Judge Beverly Martin said that "no reasonable officer could have believed that the force used by [the deputy] was necessary in response to the situation at hand."

Judge Martin added: "The question in this case is whether a taser gun may be used repeatedly against a peaceful individual as a pain-compliance device – that is, as an electric prod – to force him to comply with an order to move."

Courts loath to second-guess police

The appeals court decision creates a dangerous legal precedent permitting the use of tasers to force compliance with police orders, says Miami lawyer Michael Masinter, who represented Buckley.

"It isn't hard to envision police officers dealing with anti-abortion protesters or civil rights protesters – pick your political issue," he says. "There is nothing in this decision that forbids police officers from using tasers to break that up."

Jolly views the case differently. He says police officers face an array of dangers during roadside stops and that it is wrong to second-guess split second judgments after the fact.

"This guy could turn from sobbing basket-case into a raging wild man at the snap of a finger. That officer is in a surprisingly difficult situation," Jolly says.

Mr. Masinter disagrees. "Mr. Buckley was no threat to anybody," he says. "There was no active resistance here and therefore no authority to use this kind of force."

Jolly says the courts – including the Supreme Court – are generally reluctant to second-guess a police officer acting alone in a potentially dangerous situation. "In baseball, all ties go to the runner," he says. "In federal civil rights litigation against individual officers, all doubts go to the officer. Close calls are his."

Dissecting the Evidence

Quite an interesting story from top to bottom about Dr. Nizam Peerwani, one of the highest-profile medical examiners in the United States. I recommend reading the entire report, however, I have only copied a portion of it here. Clicking on the title of this posting will take you there.

May 27, 2009
PETER GORMAN, Fort Worth Weekly

...

There's another area of human rights work where Peerwani is a player in a much different way. Amnesty International and other groups around the world for years have complained about the abuses of Taser electric-shock weapons by police agencies - especially in the United States and in Texas in particular.

Questions have been raised about several cases in which people died after having been tasered - in most cases, repeatedly - by Fort Worth police. Those deaths, in part, led the police department to change some of its policies on Taser use a few years ago.

In one 2005 case, Eric Hammock, a Midland architect and cocaine user, died after Fort Worth police tasered him 25 times during a nine-minute span. Peerwani's autopsy showed very little cocaine in Hammock's system for a regular user, yet he ruled the cause of death an accidental cocaine overdose.

Peerwani said there are reasons why even a small amount of cocaine can lead to death. As for the role of the shocks from the Taser, he said police told him that the computer chip in the weapon (which records how many times and for how long it is discharged) had malfunctioned, and they couldn't tell how many times it had been fired.

In fact, records eventually released to the Weekly by the police department, long after the death, showed the 25 firings just before Hammock died.

"If that case occurred today, I would look at it very differently," Peerwani said. "And if I had known he had been hit with that weapon 25 times, I would also have looked at it differently. But the whole issue with those weapons is a difficult one," he said.

It's still very difficult to determine the role a Taser charge may play in a death, but, Peerwani said, "What we can learn from history is that there are people in certain excited states who perhaps should not be shocked."

He has taken note, he said, of the actions of Taser International, the company that makes the weapons and that has a policy of suing medical examiners who find Tasers as having contributed to or caused a death.

"That can be very intimidating, of course," he said. But, he added, it doesn't affect his decisions. "We are working on a case right now where the Taser was used, and we are looking at it very closely. And if we determine that the Taser was a contributing factor, we will be clear on that."

...

Was Justice Served in Nashville Police Taser Verdict?

From Nashville Scene - Photo Caption: "Say hello to my little friend, Mr. Excited Delirium"

May 20, 2009
By Jack Silverman, Nashville Scene

If Metro police did not use excessive force in the controversial 2005 death of Patrick Lee after a Taser incident, as was determined by a federal jury this week, I'd hate to see what happens when they do use excessive force.

Lee, who was under the influence of LSD and had stripped naked in the Mercy Lounge parking lot, was surely acting strangely. But clearly he wasn't armed, and at worst he was a public nuisance. That three Metro cops would need 19 Taser shots to subdue an unarmed, naked 21-year-old seems suspect, to say the least. And if he was that hard to subdue, what was the urgency if he wasn't threatening anyone?

The verdict is particularly troubling because the listed cause of death, "excited delirium," seems to have become a vaguely defined code term for unexplained deaths in police custody, particularly involving Tasers, as can be seen over and over and over and over again.

In a story reported shortly after the death, Metro medical examiner Bruce Levy told the Scene that, after a preliminary autopsy, "There was no clear-cut cause of death," and that he found "a multitude of superficial injuries" consistent with a parking lot struggle, but no broken bones or internal injuries.

And for those who think the LSD might have killed Lee, they're wrong. Pretty much any medical text on the subject will tell you that, while the drug can make you act pretty crazy, it won't kill you, even in very large doses.

I'd be curious to know how many deaths attributed to "excited delirium" did not involve Tasers, or at least police intervention of some sort.

Metro Police Chief Ronal Serpas' thoughts on the subject? "The Metropolitan Police Department continues to believe that Taser devices are an asset to law enforcement that actually help save lives and reduce injuries to officers and suspects."

Man petitions court to charge Mounties for using Taser on him

May 19, 2009
CBC News

A retired soldier who says RCMP officers used Tasers on him while he was handcuffed was in court Tuesday to take on the Mounties.

Matthew Gray, 47, is presenting evidence at a hearing in provincial court in Winnipeg this week in an attempt to get a judge to authorize criminal charges against 15 officers and three civilian members of the RCMP.

The Portage la Prairie, Man., man says he suffers from post-traumatic stress, bipolar and anxiety-panic disorders. In June 2003, he wanted to be admitted to a mental-health facility, so he called a hospital psychiatric ward for help.

According to court documents filed in 2005, the hospital called RCMP, fearing Gray might be a danger to himself.

There was some confusion over whether Gray's committal to hospital would be voluntary or involuntary, and RCMP say he became violent and aggressive and a scuffle ensued. RCMP documents indicate Gray was handcuffed at his own request and a Taser was used on him twice in the hospital.

Taser used in ambulance
After he was given sedatives, the Taser was used again — more than once — during an ambulance ride to another hospital in Winnipeg, according to RCMP documents. An RCMP weapon-use report filed in court says Gray became "extremely aggressive" in the ambulance and freed himself from some restraints.

Officers used the Taser in the ambulance out of fear for the safety of ambulance attendants, police officers, other drivers on the road and Gray himself, RCMP said.

There is some dispute over how many times the Taser was used on Gray. He alleges it was used as many as eight times. The RCMP say it was four times, while hospital records indicate six.

Gray said police assertions that they arrested him under the Mental Health Act are false. Consequently, he believes police had no jurisdiction to detain him or use force against him.

He told the court he is also presenting facts to support his belief that RCMP officers are trying to cover up what happened to him. He says he has been the victim of a smear campaign by the federal force to discredit his reputation.

The Crown has appointed independent prosecutor Marty Minuk to observe the hearing but at this point, Minuk is not involved in the proceedings.

19 stuns from Tasers not excessive in Patrick Lee's death, jury says

"The officers "were doing their best with the tools they were given," said John M.L. Brown, Mays' attorney."

Sickening.

May 18, 2009
By Michael Cass • THE TENNESSEAN

A federal jury decided Monday night that Metro police officers were not at fault in the death of a man who was shocked as many as 19 times by Taser stun guns in 2005.

After deliberating for most of the day, the jury decided the three officers — Jason Creagan, Jonathan Mays and Jaime Scruggs — did not use excessive force in their handling of Patrick Lee, a 21-year-old who acted strangely and resisted arrest outside a downtown nightclub.

Lee was under the influence of LSD and stripped off all of his clothes during the incident. He died two days later.

Lee's parents, Bud Lee and Cindy Lundman, sued the officers, Metro government and Taser International in 2006. U.S. District Judge Aleta A. Trauger dismissed all claims against Taser and some against Metro in January.

The officers "were doing their best with the tools they were given," said John M.L. Brown, Mays' attorney.

Dan Ruiz, Lundman's brother, said the family was very upset by the jury verdict.

"I don't know how that could happen with the evidence that was presented," Ruiz said by phone from West Palm Beach, Fla. "But that's the court system.

"My sister is pretty devastated. Her boy was killed, and she wanted vindication. But that's not going to happen right now."

Ruiz said he didn't know if his sister, a missionary in Ecuador, would appeal the verdict.