EDITORIAL: Zapped by taser backers

December 7, 2011
RICK MARTINEZ, News Observer

I figured the call I made last week for North Carolina's law enforcement agencies to ban their officers from using stun guns and Tasers would be a lonely one. I just didn't realize how lonely. Opposition to my proposal has been nearly universal.

Eric Pagone sent an e-mail that sums up the blowback I've received electronically and in person. Pagone wrote: "Tasers are part of a force continuum. When you remove a tool such as the Taser, which is at the higher end of the continuum, an officer may be forced to resort to deadly force (gun). ... an overwhelmingly large percentage of the population (100%), are susceptible to negative health effects when struck by gunfire.

"Statistics you are referring to sound like people who say some car accident victims died as a result of wearing their seatbelts. The positive impact clearly outweighs the negative for seatbelts and Tasers. For those who don't want to be Tased ... don't live a high risk life style in which run-ins with the law are the norm."

Not surprisingly, I also received a nasty, but professional, response from Steve Tuttle of Taser International, who may have felt blindsided by my conclusions after I called the company inquiring about the status of a $9.2 million federal court judgment against it in the 2008 death of 17-year-old Darryl Turner in Charlotte. For the record, here is Tuttle's original response to me.

"TASER believes the court erred in not allowing evidence of contributory negligence or a jury instruction on contributory negligence by Mr. Turner which would be a complete bar to recovery under North Carolina law. As a result we are seeking judgment to overturn the verdict."

Tuttle also objected to my conclusion that a Taser jolt from a Scotland Neck police officer rendered 61-year-old Roger Anthony brain dead. Tuttle has me on that point. Only a medical official can make that determination. Still, both Tuttle and I agree a Taser was "involved" (Tuttle's word) in events that resulted in Anthony's brain death and expiration after he was taken off life support a few days after his arrest.

Tuttle, and others, accused me of not doing my homework. Not true. I studied the research I could find, including an often-cited study from Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center which concluded that Tasers were overwhelmingly safe. But I took Tuttle's advice and read two National Institute of Justice (NIJ) reports issued earlier this year: "Study of Deaths Following Electro Muscular Disruption" and "Police Use Of Force, Tasers And Other Less-Lethal Weapons."

I can see why stun gun supporters like these studies. Both say the chances of a person being killed by a Taser shock are remote, and the report on police use emphatically declares that Tasers lessen the threat of injury to officers and suspects.

However, both also conclude that for some people, a stun gun jolt can be lethal. The question for the officer on the beat is, which people?

Thankfully, some police have implemented restrictions based on research that stun guns can be harmful. Of the 500 police departments surveyed by NIJ, 31 percent forbid stun gun use on pregnant women, 26 percent against drivers of moving vehicles, 23 percent against handcuffed suspects, 23 percent against people in elevated areas (to prevent fall injuries) and 10 percent against the elderly.

Another concern I expressed was that law enforcement officers may reach for their stun guns because it's easy and not because the situation warrants it. NIJ has the same worry. During interviews with officers and trainers, researchers heard comments that hinted at "lazy cop" syndrome, meaning some law enforcement officials found it easier to zap a citizen than to use conflict resolution skills or physically intervene. In its police use study, NIJ found stun guns can be used "too much and too often."

Both reports recommend more study, training and guidelines. Factoring in increased exposure to lawsuits, I call on police chiefs to consider this simple question - are stun guns more trouble than they're worth?

Taser use increases, questions arise

November 10, 2011
CBS News

A National Institute of Justice study concludes some police are going to their tasers to subdue suspects "way too fast," causing unnecessary pain and, in some cases, death. Correspondent David Martin takes a look at the hottest new tool in the police officer's belt that is now being used by 16,000 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. Martin's report will be broadcast on "60 Minutes" Sunday, Nov. 13 at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

Geoffrey Alpert, professor at the University South Carolina's Criminology and Criminal Justice Department, wrote the study. He says the infamous incident of the "Don't tase me bro" Florida college student is the perfect example of a taser-happy police officer. "If those officers couldn't control him without using a taser, they need to be retrained...to be disciplined," he tells Martin. "Some are using them way too fast."

In another incident, also caught on videotape like the Florida student's, a disgruntled employee of a supermarket died after being hit with a taser - an extremely rare occurrence. In this case, however, the police officer can be seen on the videotape with his taser drawn before he even encounters the suspect. A jury awarded the man's family $10 million in a case TASER International is appealing.

The Las Vegas Police Department was among the first to employ the taser. Officers there used the weapon twice as much in 2004 as they do now. Marcus Martin, the department's taser trainer, agrees that officers may have used their taser too quickly early on. "But that's the same with any tool that comes along...we have to go back and train that out of those officers," says Marcus, who has full faith in the taser. "It's changed the face of police work forever."

Approximately 500,000 officers in the U.S. carry a taser. Nearly one and a half million suspects have been tased by authorities and of that amount, 485 have died afterwards. But TASER International claims that only 20 of those could be argued to have been caused directly by the weapon; the rest were linked to other causes, like cocaine intoxication, the company says.

Since tasers came into use, the number of suspects brought to the hospital after their arrest has been down each year. Fewer officers are injured making arrests also. Says Marcus, "The truth...this person is alive today and that person is alive today or this police officer is not harmed today, because of this less-than-lethal device."

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.

As Taser use rises, so do questions about risks of fatalities

September 4, 2011
James Halpin, FayObserver

The prongs from the Taser latched onto Martin Mitchell Sr.'s side, feeling like a knife had stabbed into his torso. Mitchell says he instantly went limp and started convulsing, nearly swallowing his tongue.

"My whole left side went numb," said Mitchell, 45, who was zapped Tuesday by a Cumberland County sheriff's deputy after allegedly assaulting his 16-year-old son outside Westover Middle School. "I couldn't even remember too much that happened, you understand. That's how bad that thing messed me up. I kept blinking in and out."

Mitchell, who disputes deputies' account that he was punching his son and that he ran at one of the intervening deputies, says he believes officers are increasingly likely to use Tasers because they are less lethal than firearms.

Industry watchdogs say Mitchell is not too far off the mark.

Katy Parker, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, said the group has seen an increase in Taser use throughout the state and the country, partly because Tasers have become ubiquitous in law enforcement. As a result, Tasers are increasingly being used in situations where officers would not have pulled a firearm - situations that in some cases don't require much force at all, she said.

"Tasers are weapons that can be very effective if you have a suspect who is putting the officer in danger or someone else at risk of harm," Parker said. "But they're often used in situations where an officer issues an order and the suspect doesn't comply in some way. It's kind of used as pain compliance. ... That's very dangerous."

Fayetteville police have been using Tasers since 1996, and numbers released last week show that their use has been on the rise in recent years. Officers deployed Tasers 20 times in 2007 and only 16 times in 2008. But they stunned suspects 31 times in 2009 and 60 times last year, according to police numbers. Police had used their Tasers 25 times so far through August of this year.

Fayetteville police spokesman Gavin MacRoberts said Taser usage has been on the rise for several reasons. There are more officers in the field than before because the department has been nearly fully staffed in recent years, and those officers are equipped with newer, smaller Tasers that they keep on their belts, rather than in their patrol cars, he said.

Police also have been encountering more incidents each year that meet the department's requirements for using Tasers, MacRoberts said. That has to do in part with police encountering an increasing number of suspects under the influence of drugs or alcohol or with mental-health problems, he said.

Last week, the department pulled all of its Taser M26 units off the streets for testing following the death of 56-year-old Michael Wade Evans, a political activist who died after he was stunned by police on Aug. 24. Police say he was acting erratically and trying to jump on vehicles on Eastern Boulevard.

Evans was pronounced dead at Cape Fear Valley Medical Center. His cause of death remains under investigation.

Cumberland deaths

Evans is the third person to die in Cumberland County after being hit with a stun gun.

In 2005, a Cumberland County deputy hit 52-year-old Richard McKinnon with a Taser. McKinnon, who had crashed his van after trying to elude deputies, was soaked in gasoline and burst into flames.

Otis C. Anderson, 36, died after Fayetteville police used a Taser to subdue him in January 2008. An autopsy found he had a lethal amount of cocaine in his system.

Earlier this year, Brandon Jolvon "Red" Bethea, a 24-year-old schizophrenic inmate at the Harnett County Jail, died after being shocked with a stun gun multiple times, according to an autopsy report. Deputies left the Fayetteville man lying unchecked on the floor for about 20 minutes before discovering that he was unconscious.

The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner concluded following the autopsy that his death was caused by "complications of conducted energy device application."

Eddie Caldwell Jr., executive vice president and general counsel of the North Carolina Sheriffs' Association, noted that many deaths associated with Tasers are not caused by the shock but rather by other causes, such as drug overdoses. He said his understanding is that Tasers are safe when used on healthy people and that many law enforcement agencies require officers who carry them to be shocked as part of the certification process so they understand the consequences.

Tasers can help reduce the likelihood of a struggle - and the risk of injury to officers and suspects - during an arrest of an aggressive person, he said.

"If you've got a suspect with a butcher knife coming at you, as an officer, you have the legal right to kill him. But if you've got a Taser, you can tase him and that's more humane and a much better outcome for the suspect," Caldwell said. "The Taser is a device that, as much as anything, helps the citizen who is at that point belligerent and uncooperative."

Taser International says it has sold more than a 500,000 stun guns to more than 16,000 law enforcement and military agencies around the world. The company maintains that its weapons protect life.

Tasers reduce excessive use-of-force complaints and save lives while reducing the risk of injuries to suspects and police, Taser spokesman Steve Tuttle said.

"Although no use-of-force device is risk free - including Taser technology - when used properly, medical and law enforcement experts have concluded that Taser technology is among the most effective response to resistance tools available," Tuttle said. "We continue to stand by the independent peer-reviewed medical studies that have shown that the Taser electronic-control devices are generally safe and effective."

Study

In May, the National Institute of Justice published a study of nearly 300 people who died after being shot with stun guns. In the vast majority of those cases, the devices "played no role in the death," according to the study, which reviewed 22 cases in which a stun gun was listed as a cause of death.

The study found that the risk of death when police deploy stun guns is less than 0.25 percent and says that "there is no conclusive medical evidence" that short-term electric shocks cause a high risk of serious injury or death in healthy, non-stressed and non-intoxicated people.

"However, there are groups who may be at risk for sudden death and those who are more vulnerable to physical insult," the report says. "These disparate but occasionally overlapping groups include small children, those with diseased hearts, the elderly and pregnant women."

It advised officers to avoid continuously shocking suspects for longer than 15 seconds but concluded that law enforcement officers do not need to refrain from using the devices to arrest uncooperative or combative subjects so long as the devices are used properly.

Amnesty International, which counts more than 460 deaths following Taser use since June 2001, responded by saying that the report underscores the need for strict limits on the use of shock weapons.

The group expressed concern that many of the study's nearly 300 people who died after being stunned did not appear to present a serious threat at the time they were shocked.

"Amnesty International believes that, apart from safety concerns, electro-shock weapons are particularly open to abuse as they are easy to use and they can inflict severe pain at the push of a button without leaving substantial marks," the group said in a statement.

Lawsuit

The ACLU's Parker pointed to the death of 17-year-old Darryl Wayne Turner - a teen who suffered a fatal arrhythmia in Charlotte in 2008 after being shocked for 37 seconds by a Taser X26 - as an example of how Tasers can be dangerous when police hold the trigger down.

Dr. Douglas Zipes, an electrophysiologist and former director of the Division of Cardiology at the Krannert Institute of Cardiology, filed an expert report in a civil lawsuit against Taser by Turner's family. In the report, Zipes cites studies on animals conducted before Turner's death that showed Tasers have the potential to produce heart arrhythmias and ventricular fibrillation in the hearts of pigs.

"The medical hazard of ECD shocks resulting in cardiac arrest was foreseeable prior to March 2008 and appropriate testing should have been done to investigate this possibility before placing these products on the market," Zipes wrote.

In September 2009, Taser issued new warnings indicating that the risk of ventricular fibrillation following shocks is 1 in 100,000, he wrote. A federal jury in July awarded Turner's family a $10 million judgment against Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Taser because of his death.

The day after that award, a 21-year-old man died after a Taser was used on him, prompting the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department to pull its Tasers from use pending a review.

Guidelines

Pat Norris, president of the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police, said the association recommends that departments have policies in place regarding Taser use, but does not itself issue guidelines.

Law enforcement in Cumberland County do have such policies. The Fayetteville Police Department's policy addresses when it is appropriate for officers to use their stun guns. Those situations include:

When officers need to control violent subjects when deadly force does not appear to be necessary.

When conventional tactics including verbal commands and firm grip control are ineffective.

When officers cannot safely get close to a subject.

To keep a person from committing suicide or hurting himself.

After Evans' death, however, the department said it plans to review its Taser policies and procedures, in addition to inspecting the weapons. Police say they have no reason to believe the Taser that was used in Evans' arrest malfunctioned, but they were pulling the devices for inspection as a precaution.

"In light of recent incidents in not only here, but in other jurisdictions as well, it was decided that it was the prudent and responsible action to ensure all Tasers are in proper working condition," said MacRoberts, the Fayetteville police spokesman.

The weapons are being sent to the manufacturer to be tested to ensure the Tasers are operating within factory specifications for output and also to verify that their data recording systems are properly functioning, he said.

It was not known how long it would take Taser to complete the inspections, MacRoberts said.

Numbers for the Cumberland County Sheriff's Office use of Tasers were not available as of Friday.

Debbie Tanna, a spokeswoman for the Sheriff's Office, said deputies have no plans to change their policy on using Tasers.

Deputies are sometimes confronted with aggressive people while alone, and Tasers offer them a way to subdue the suspects without bloodshed or causing permanent injury, she said.

Deputies carry batons, pepper spray and Tasers, but not all deputies carry all of those tools, Tanna said. When confronted with a threatening situation, the deputies must make a split-second decision on how best to negate the threat, she said.

"Our deputies don't have the luxury, in most cases, of making a decision by sitting around and mulling about it," Tanna said. "We feel that (Tasers) are safe. We like the fact that it is an option for us when trying to subdue a violent suspect or in a situation that is out of control."

In 2008, the ACLU helped start the N.C. Taser Safety Project, which sought to have law enforcement agencies develop policies to ensure people are safely subdued when Tasers must be used. Parker said that because of a number of recent high-profile cases involving Tasers, the ACLU is planning to send out a new records request to all 100 sheriff's offices in the state and 25 police departments seeking an update on their policies on using Tasers. Law enforcement agencies should have policies limiting Taser use on the old, young and sick, Parker said.

They also should prohibit officers from holding the trigger down or repeatedly pressing the trigger when unnecessary, she said.

"It can be an effective weapon, but there ought to be reasonable limitations and restrictions put on those weapons to keep people safe," Parker said. "I think most of the time law enforcement is trying to do the best job that they can. But Tasers are still relatively new, and I think a lot of times people aren't aware of the risks."

EDITORIAL: Zap happy?

July 2, 2011
HOUSTON CHRONICLE

The Taser stun gun has proven to be an effective police alternative to the use of deadly force. Studies document its ability to reduce injuries to both officers and suspects in dozens of cities and counties where it has been deployed. But its safe use requires extensive training and adherence to guidelines to protect both user and target.

As the Chronicle's James Pinkerton reported last week, the use of stun guns by the Harris County Sheriff's Department has frequently diverged from national safety guidelines formulated by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) and the U.S. Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice. Among 621 incidents where Tasers were used by deputies to subdue people from 2009 through early June, Pinkerton documented numerous cases where the application of the 50,000-volt shocks countered the best practices recommendations.

According to the 2011 guidelines, officers should use a Taser for only one cycle, or five seconds, before evaluating whether more shots are needed. According to the DOJ-PERF document, use of one weapon for more than 15 seconds or multiple Taser stuns "may increase the risk of death or serious injury. Any subsequent applications should be independently justifiable, and the risk should be weighed."

In Harris County, deputies stunned 43 suspects three or more times. In 10 incidents, two or more officers used Tasers on a person at the same time. A DWI suspect was Tasered 24 times. In 2006 deputies stunned a mentally ill African-American man, 31-year-old Herman Barnes, 32 times. He subsequently died, and his survivors are suing the county. The Taser manufacturer was dropped from the suit because its training manual for officers included a warning against multiple stuns.

A 17-year-old auto-theft suspect was shocked six times, including a final jolt applied to his groin. That gets us to federal guideline 28: Personnel should not intentionally target sensitive areas (e.g., head, neck, genitalia).

Although the Taser manufacturer warns agencies to avoid applying shocks to the chest because of widespread, and unproven, claims that they can trigger heart attacks, deputies zapped at least 30 people in that area.

Whereas the guidelines advise the use of Tasers only when suspects are actively aggressive or resisting arrest, deputies stunned 79 suspects who were passive or verbally aggressive, including some who were fleeing. According to the guidelines, fleeing should not be the sole justification for stunning suspects, because of the risk of serious injury.

In spite of all these incidents where the use of Tasers seems questionable, only one county deputy has been disciplined, and in that 2005 case it was because the officer hadn't informed superiors that he had stunned a suspect.

Sheriff Adrian Garcia responded to Pinkerton's story by claiming that the department "gives grave consideration and attention" to the federal guidelines. He cited the acknowledgment in the federal report that guidelines are flexible and subject to modification in particular circumstances. There's a huge difference between Sheriff's Department deputies being flexible in specific circumstances and blatantly ignoring safety rules for Taser use outlined by both the federal government and equipment vendors.

Multiple stuns applied in numerous cases, including shocking a teenager's genital area, don't strike us as flexible law enforcement. Words like "inhumane" and "irresponsible" come to mind. The fact that no officer has even been reprimanded in these incidents is an indication that much tighter supervision of county Taser use is needed.

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.

Tasers no longer 'nonlethal'

October 2, 2010
MATT McKINNEY, Star Tribune

David Smith was buried last week, the seventh person in the past seven years to have died in the metro area after being shot with a Taser.

While the investigation into the mid-September confrontation with police that led to Smith's death continues, a leading police research group and a major manufacturer of the devices are rolling out new safety measures nationally in response to the relatively small but troubling number of deaths linked to them.

And on Friday, Minneapolis police unveiled a new Taser policy that for the first time designates the device a potentially lethal weapon.

The manufacturer, Taser International, sent users a bulletin last year suggesting that they avoid shooting people near the heart.

And after lobbying by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), Taser International has agreed to offer by early next year a weapon that shocks for a maximum of five seconds with one trigger pull. Current models deliver voltage as long as the trigger is depressed.

"We think there's a time and a place for them," said Chuck Wexler, PERF's executive director. "They shouldn't be a substitute for talking through an issue with someone. And there's a limitation. There's a point at which we are convinced we have to go through another option."

Perhaps like no other device available to police, Tasers spark an extreme range of opinion.

When things go right, they put a quick end to standoffs that could have led to serious injuries to a suspect or officer. They save lives by preventing bad situations from spiraling out of control, and they save public money by preventing officer injuries, Minneapolis police spokesman Sgt. Bill Palmer said. "They're an effective tool," he said.

Yet in the rare cases when someone dies, the victim's family often wonders what role the device played.

Waiting for autopsy

Results of Smith's autopsy have not been made public by the Hennepin County medical examiner's office. The doctor overseeing the case was unavailable to comment.

A police search warrant seeking Smith's medical records includes a more thorough account of what happened when Smith was shot with a Taser at the downtown YMCA on Sept. 9. The police account says two officers were called to the Y at 30 S. 9th St. about 4 p.m. They had responded to a complaint that Smith had harassed a 13-year-old boy, the warrant says.

The officers noticed that he appeared unwell. They suspected he was either under the influence of something or having a mental health issue. Smith did not speak to the officers or even acknowledge their presence, the officers reported. When they tried to take him into custody, he fought, the warrant said.

He punched one officer in the face; the other officer's back was injured in the scuffle. The officers shot Smith with a Taser and handcuffed him, according to the warrant. Smith then lost consciousness. The officers called for an ambulance and began CPR. Smith, 28, died Sept. 17.

Smith's family said it wasn't like him to harass a 13-year-old. "That's not David's personality," said Larry Smith, an uncle. David had struggled with mental illness, according to his uncle, and after learning from the search warrant that police initially suspected David might be having a mental issue, Larry wondered if a different approach could have been taken.

"Let's call out a crisis team or counselors who could deal with it," he said.

New rules

On Friday, the Minneapolis Police Department unveiled a new Taser policy that characterizes the device as "less lethal," a change from "nonlethal." The change had been in the works for some time as the department sought to bring its policy in closer alignment with PERF guidelines.

The new policy also advises officers to use the stun gun for one five-second cycle and then reassess whether more stuns are needed, saying "... exposure to multiple applications of the [Taser] for longer than 15 seconds may increase the risk of serious injury or death."

Someone actively resisting arrest or exhibiting active aggression becomes a fair target for an officer's Taser, Palmer said. It can also be used to save lives -- to prevent people from killing themselves, for example. The new policy also tells officers to call out that they're about to use a Taser before firing one, the threat sometimes being enough to make people compliant.

"We want the least amount of force that can be used to be used," Palmer said.

Some 250 of the department's 850 officers carry stun guns, said Palmer. They were first introduced there in 2001.

Palmer was a patrol officer in 2000 when he and his partner shot and killed a mentally ill woman in her Uptown apartment after she stepped toward them with a knife. The incident led the department to equip officers with Tasers and to give officers additional training in handling mentally ill people, Palmer said.

Minneapolis police used stun guns 399 times in 2008, the most recent year for which statistics were available. In 59 of those cases the officer performed a "drive stun," meaning they held the device against someone's body; in the rest of the cases, the officer either shot the device's wired darts at the person or used darts and a drive stun together.

Federal study

A 2008 study by the federal government's National Institute of Justice found that stun guns can inflict serious and "potentially lethal" injury, though the study said such cases were rare.

The study examined two years' worth of records from six police departments, covering 962 uses of a Taser. In 99.7 percent of the cases, people were either not hurt or had only minor injuries, mostly skin punctures from the Taser's darts. Three people were seriously hurt: one had bruising on the brain, another had an epidural hematoma (blood between the skull and brain), and a third developed a condition in which muscle tissue was destroyed; the condition, rhabdomyolysis, has been linked to electrical injury, among other causes.

None of the three died, but the injuries in two cases were indirectly tied to being shot with a stun gun. The data in the third case were uncertain, according to the researchers.

Mark Anderson, head of the Barbara Schneider Foundation, a nonprofit group that works with police and others on mental health issues, said stun guns, used properly, can be a good way for police to end conflicts with the mentally ill.

"As an alternative to deadly force, it's wonderful," he said. "My concern is that if the Taser is used too early when in particular verbal deescalation can be used, that's really a problem."

NIJ Solicitation: Alternatives to Conducted Energy Less-Lethal Devices

With this solicitation, NIJ seeks applications to develop, demonstrate, and test less-lethal devices that provide the same capability but do not use conducted energy, and which do not pose an undue risk (ideally no risk) of injury to the subject, bystanders, or the officer involved. The attributes of such a device would include:

• The device would be safe across a broad range of populations with predictable physiological effects.

• The effects of the device would be immediate.

• The device could be employed at a safe distance.

• The device would be discriminatory, e.g., a specific individual, or individuals can be targeted, with minimal to no risk of effect on bystanders.

• The device could be reused, or would be so inexpensive that it could be discarded after the first use.

• The device could fire multiple shots before reloading is necessary.

• The device would be portable and could be used by one person.

• The device would be compatible with the equipment used and worn by law enforcement and corrections officers.

• The device could be easily employed by the average officer with minimal training.

• The device would be easy to maintain.

• Use of the device would have minimal (ideally no) environmental impact.

• The device would be cost effective for the majority of State and local law enforcement and corrections agencies.

DO YOU HEAR WHAT I HEAR?

I feel guilty. While I've been busy trolling the mall for dumb stuff no one really needs, my comrade (that's a good one!) over at Excited-Delirium (don't forget the dash) has been busy decking the halls with shiny baubles of another kind. For us, it's Christmas every day over at www.excited-delirium.com.

Are stun guns too deadly? Louisiana case adds to debate

Even The Christian Science Monitor wonders how all these people are being promoted to heaven!

August 11, 2008
Patrik Jonsson, The Christian Science Monitor

ATLANTA - A grand jury in rural Louisiana considers Tuesday whether to bring murder charges against a Taser-wielding police officer in what may become a seminal case in the hotly debated history of stun guns.

No US jury has ever convicted a police officer in connection with a death related to use of an electroshock weapon. But the number of deaths in which the guns have played a role has been growing, along with their use in law enforcement agencies.

Now, the coroner in Winnfield, La., has found the death of one Baron "Scooter" Pikes to be homicide by Taser, intensifying a simmering controversy over the devices and exposing the tense tug of war between police and young black men in rural Louisiana.

After Winnfield Parish police took Mr. Pikes, who is black, into custody one January morning, a white police officer fired a Taser, jolting Pikes nine times in the span of 14 minutes. Pikes never woke up.

Police said the 21-year-old Pikes was on drugs and uncooperative, but coroner Randolph Williams took a different view. In a report last month, he said he found no signs of a physical struggle, of drugs, or of any medical condition that could have exacerbated the jolts' effect.

As police departments across the US look for nonlethal ways to subdue out-of-control people, a big question is whether such devices reduce violence or, in effect, can increase the likelihood of violence, even torture. The Pikes death is just one case, but it appears to show that the combination of simmering racial tensions and insufficient police training can be lethal when injected with a 50,000-volt jolt.

"If the Taser was indeed the cause of death, this could be an interesting case," says Andrew Scott, former police chief of Boca Raton, Fla., who has testified on the behalf of officers in stun-gun cases. "Given the historical corruption of law enforcement in the area, and the fact that the young man was tased nine times, something is definitely wrong with this picture."

Two-thirds of all police departments in the US own at least one electroshock weapon. The guns have played a role in nearly 300 deaths in the US and Canada since their introduction in 1998, Amnesty International reported in June. Yet most wrongful-death lawsuits have gone the Taser's way, with juries finding that factors ranging from hard drugs in a person's system to existing medical conditions were responsible for or contributed to their deaths.

The weapons, also called electronic control devices, are part of a transformation in policing, away from bullets and guns and toward "Star Trek"-like devices that can, from a law-enforcement standpoint, safely and quickly defuse volatile situations.

"We didn't get this [negative] reaction when nightsticks were used to split heads open, but because of the technology and what it does, the media have really exacerbated the issue of the Taser," says Mr. Scott. "The upside of the Taser far outweighs the unfortunate abuse or downside."

But with some 260,000 units in the hands of law enforcement officials, and with no major federal regulation governing their use, stun-gun use in cases like the one in Louisiana is revealing unintended drawbacks of this particular tool of policing, says Thomas Luka, a defense attorney in Orlando, Fla. Used most often before officers are physically threatened, the devices are changing the relationship between police and the populace, especially on the streets.

"We're seeing injuries that wouldn't normally happen on a routine traffic stop, and all of a sudden they're happening," says Mr. Luka.

The American Civil Liberties Union has not called for a ban on devices such as Tasers. But in the light of studies that show potential health effects of getting jolted and a general lack of training, national standards, and federal oversight, the ACLU says the devices have created a troubling gray area for US civil rights.

"The Taser in many cases is going to be safe, but it's those other cases, which actually are prevalent in the population that police interact with, that we have a lot of concerns about," says Mark Schlosberg, an electroshock-weapons expert with the ACLU in San Francisco.

A federal National Institute of Justice study released in June drew this conclusion on devices such as Tasers: "Although exposure ... is not risk free, there is no conclusive medical evidence within the state of current medical research that indicates a high risk of serious injury or death from the direct effects of CED [conducted-energy device] exposure."

Still, the public shows signs of souring on the devices. Seven states have banned their use, and some police departments are reevaluating their stun-gun policies, specifically to wait for an imminent threat of physical violence before resorting to their use and to restrict officers to fewer than three jolts before moving on to hand-to-hand restraint. But for many police departments, critics say, electroshock weapons are routinely and increasingly deployed in a variety of situations, with plenty of room for questionable improvisation.

"Police sometimes do things they're not supposed to do, and if you put the temptation in front of them, if you tell 100 police officers that, 'Here's your Tasers, and you're not supposed to use them to punish,' someone is going to use them to punish. It's predictable," says Michael Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the New York State Police.

The Winnfield Parish case is likely to test all those aspects, highlighting racial tensions between blacks and police evident in many parts of the US. Roughly corresponding to overall crime data, 46 percent of the people who died in stun-gun-related incidents were black and 36 percent were white.

Winnfield Parish, birthplace of famed Louisiana Gov. Huey Long, has a long history of police corruption. The officer who administered the Taser to Pikes, Scott Nugent, was a rookie cop hired by a police chief who served time on a drug charge but was pardoned by former Gov. Edwin Edwards, who himself is now in federal prison.

A first cousin of Mychal Bell – the main defendant in the Jena 6 case that last year sparked the century's largest civil rights march – Pikes at the time of his arrest, on an outstanding warrant, struggled with police and then fell sick, complaining of asthma and the effects of PCP, police said after his death. But bystanders said Pikes, who knew the officers, pleaded with them, "Don't tase me again, please."

The Police Department has admitted no wrongdoing, though the City Council fired Nugent in May. The medical examiner is risking his relationship with the police department by listing the death as a homicide, but his autopsy was sound, according to Mr. Baden, who reviewed the findings.

"This is a major case," says Carol Powell-Lexing, a lawyer representing Pikes's family. "It's significant in the sense it shows how this young officer exceeded his authority and use of force, and it shows how dangerous those Tasers are. The community won't rest until they see appropriate relief in regards to this situation."

Use of stun guns widening

•More than 13,000 law enforcement, correctional, and military agencies in 44 countries deploy Tasers. Of this, some 4,700 agencies deploy Taser ECDs to all of their patrol officers.

•More than 359,000 Taser brand devices have been sold to law enforcement since February 1998.

•More than 176,000 T brand devices have been sold to citizens since 1994 (legal in 43 states).

•At least 276 people have died in the United States since June 2001 after being shocked with stun guns, according to Amnesty International.

Sources: Taser International, Amnesty International

'Lethal' nonetheless - study shows stun safety, but more research needed

July 28, 2008
CHRIS KITCHING, The Winnipeg Sun

A landmark study of police Taser use in the U.S. suggests the device is safe after finding almost 100% of 1,000 suspects zapped suffered either mild injuries or none at all.

Despite the findings, the principal investigator of the two-year study, released last October, doesn't think a stun gun or any other weapon can be considered non-lethal and is calling for more research into its effects.

"Any weapon, all the way from your fist to a metal baton, can cause injuries and even death," said Dr. William Bozeman. "There's no such thing, in my mind, as a non-lethal weapon. I refer to (Tasers) as 'less lethal.' "

Using data from six U.S. police departments, Bozeman's study looked at 1,000 incidents where police stunned a suspect with a Taser. He found a 0.3% likelihood of serious injury.

Three people suffered a significant injury and two died, but not as a result of a Taser, Bozeman said.

"We don't have any particular cases where it's clearly evident the Taser was the cause of death," he said.

Stun guns have been deemed a contributing factor in some deaths.

The study does not argue for or against stun guns, but Bozeman said he supports police use of Tasers.

The Taser debate has reignited after the death of Winnipeg teen Michael Langan.

Langan, 17, died July 22 after he was shocked by a city police officer in a William Avenue alley when, police said, he refused to drop a knife.

The cause of death is unknown. It's the first such death in Manitoba.

Bozeman said the study is the first to explore the likelihood of serious injury and is based on human and animal studies.

Concerns about electrical safety have not been fully addressed, the report found.

Bozeman said there is a need for more research into cardiac safety and whether certain people are at greater risk of injury or death due to their age, medical or psychiatric conditions, or the presence of intoxicants.

So far, no human studies have found any evidence a Taser -- which sends a small amount of energy to the body -- can stop a person's heart but that doesn't mean it's not possible, Bozeman said.

The Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties is among those calling for more research into the effects of Tasers.

"When we see another death we have trouble understanding why this is described as a non-lethal response," said executive director Valerie Price. "We're not drawing any conclusions yet on whether things were done appropriately in this particular case that happened (last week)."

Winnipeg police reviewed its Taser policies and training last winter at the request of a city hall committee and found nothing unusual.

Several governments or agencies are reviewing Taser policies and safety after recent deaths in Canada.

Manitoba's NDP government has not said if it will do its own review.

Bozeman said his study was funded by the National Institute of Justice but was independent from government and stun gun manufacturers, including TASER International.

Taser International refrains from suing the US Government

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

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

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

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

Here is the Taser International PR machine in action today:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NIJ expects to release a final report in 2009.

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

Getting Tased - Part 1

June 13, 2008
By Molly Priesmeyer, The Minnesota Independent

How Taser International expects to make millions from fear mongering, slick marketing and the Republican National Convention

A Taser shock has been called the “longest five seconds of your life.” It incapacitates the nervous system. It causes a loss of bowel and bladder control. It produces a 50,000-volt shock from up to 10 yards away that pulsates through the body and causes every muscle fiber to recoil and stiffen. Yet Taser International and the Minneapolis Police Department stress that the Taser is an extremely safe non pain-compliance tool. “It saves lives,” they insist.

Despite these reassurances, in November a United Nations Committee ruled that Taser use constitutes a “form of torture” that can result in death. And just this week a federal jury in San Jose found the company responsible for the death of a 40-year-old man, awarding his family more than $6 million in punitive and compensatory damages. It was a landmark case, the first of at least 69 wrongful-death lawsuits filed against Taser that the company has lost.

The family's victory caused Taser’s stock to plummet 12 percent on Monday. Taser scrambled to reassure Wall Street with a specious PR campaign emphasizing that the jury found Taser "only" 15 percent responsible for the man’s death. Reassuring Wall Street, after all, is paramount to Taser International's ongoing success: Analysts are banking on Taser’s earnings jumping 50 percent this year.

While Taser is hoping to reach that figure by expanding its reach in the consumer and overseas markets with more “fashionable” Tasers, the company continues to capitalize on the fear of 9/11 and the police departments that have grown increasingly militaristic because of it. Recently, the St. Paul Police Department purchased 230 additional Tasers, so that it will have one each for all of its 370 officers, just in time for the Republican National Convention. And earlier this week it was announced that 3,050 New York Police Department sergeants, or about 10 percent of NYPD officers, are adding the M-26 Taser to their belts.

From a 'deadly-force alternative' to something like a punch in the gut

One reason for Taser’s increasing windfall has been that the company has turned its original weapon-focused marketing initiative upside down by insisting the Taser is a hand-held lifesaver. Retired Minneapolis police officer Michael Quinn was a part of one of the first groups of MPD officers to get trained on stun guns. “It appeared like a useful tool,” Quinn says. “But even then the department as a whole was concerned about abuse of the weapon.” Quinn spent more than 20 years in the MPD and is author of "Walking with the Devil," a book about the police code of silence.

At the time of Quinn's stun-gun training, the leading manufacturer of such devices -- the company that would go public in 2001 as Taser International -- was on the verge of bankruptcy. After failing to tap the consumer market with products like the Auto Taser, an alternative to The Club that locked on steering wheels and came equipped with a motion-sensor alarm, the company began aggressively marketing its new stun gun, the Taser, to law-enforcement agencies. By the end of 1998, more than 100,000 Tasers were sold in the United States. Since then, more than 400,000 Taser devices have been sold to U.S. law-enforcement officials.

“I kept tabs on the Taser and went to a number of demonstrations,” Quinn says. “The Taser first came out as an option to the use of deadly force. In the case where there was extreme risk to yourself or somebody else, Taser was a great option.”

Quinn remembers watching sales and training videos that detailed only uncommonly dangerous scenarios as examples when the Taser should be deployed. “When you saw the original sales videos, they used pretty extreme cases, like ‘Here’s a guy wielding a machete we can’t get close to, or here’s a guy wielding a knife or another weapon.' They were able to Tase him from a distance and not get hurt,” Quinn recalls.

“It used to be put below deadly force, but not a long ways below that, on the use-of-force continuum,” Quinn continues. “Now it’s slid down that force continuum, where at some agencies if someone presents even a verbal resistance and says I am not going to go with you, officers are justified in using the Taser.”

According to an MPD manual revision (pdf) from April 2006: “The use of Tasers is normally considered to be at the 'hard empty hand' level of force [kicks, punches, or other striking techniques] or above on the MPD’s Use of Force Continuum. This level of force is approved for aggressive resistance and above. Tasers shall not be used on passive subjects or as a come-along tool.”

The MPD also says that “Tasers may only be used on children, visibly frail persons, women who are known to be pregnant, and people with known heart problems when other hard empty-hand control methods have failed or deadly force is justified.”

The St. Paul Police Department's requirements regarding Taser use are even less specific. The Taser Usage Procedures (pdf) sent to Minnesota Independent do not outline a use-of-force continuum nor any approved level of force. Instead, the procedures mostly pertain to protocol for filing required paperwork after the device is deployed. Repeated calls to the St. Paul Police Department asking for more specific information on guidelines related to Taser use were not returned.

Taser training videos: Not for public consumption

Taser International would not make its current marketing and training materials available to Minnesota Independent for review. “A lot of our marketing is personalized,” spokesperson Peter Holran says. “We tailor it to the client’s needs.” Holran would also not make available the marketing materials his team provided to the St. Paul Police Department in advance of the RNC.

“There was nothing out of the ordinary with the order,” he says. “They did their due diligence and decided to purchase the 250 Tasers. The info that we would have provided them is all on the Web site and supports the testing of the product,” he says.

However, Holran acknowledges that the police training videos are not actually available for public viewing. “The full eight-hour course is not available,” he says. “It provides tactics and training we do not want out to the general public for safety reasons.”

Holran insists that Taser International and its training videos play no role in determining an agency’s use-of-force guidelines for Tasers. “What we provide in our training courses and in the general instructions is how it is used,” he says. “Whatever the agency’s policies are would determine how you take someone into arrest,” he says. “That is not what Taser dictates.”

Yet Taser does show what the company considers “typical scenarios” in its training materials. Recent police academy graduate Justin Richards has seen the most recent videos during his training last semester at the Criminal Justice Law Enforcement Center in St. Paul. Gone are the machete-wielding psychos, and in their place are people throwing around smart talk and attitude.

“We watched videos where people were getting Tased,” Richards says. “Three-hundred-pound guys being ornery and combative, and once they get Tased they are done. They put their hands behind their back and are ready to go.”

As part of his training, he chose to be Tased. “If you are going to use it on people, I think you should experience it for yourself,” he says. The shock, Richards says, hurt like hell.

“It hurts bad,” he says. “I have a pretty high pain tolerance. I’ve had torn ACLs and broken bones. As soon as it hits you, your muscles lock up. You think 100 percent clearly though everything, which is both good and bad.”

Richards says he hasn’t had to use a Taser at his new job in Anoka County, but he thinks it’s an important tool for officers to carry. “It saves lives,” he says. “In certain situations, basically you are going to be Tased or get shot.”

A company claim of 'thousands of lives' saved

Despite Taser International's loss in court this week and the fact that Amnesty International says the Taser has contributed to more than 350 deaths in the United States and Canada, the company continues to insist its products save lives. The company’s tag line is “Protect Life,” turning the axiom of “self-protection” into a touchy-feely notion of protecting all.

“The way it saves lives,” Holran says, “is that it reduces the escalation of force. If someone takes a fighting stance or someone presents resistance, officers need to take the next step. If you are in that situation where that policy deems it can be used, if it used correctly and with good training, it ends the conflict immediately. And that saves lives.”

The company’s press kit says that “Taser devices have saved thousands of lives and have greatly reduced the injuries that officers and suspects would typically encounter when using hands-on techniques, fighting, punching, kicking and swing batons to stop suspects from hurting themselves, the public or other officers.

Taser doesn’t cite any study in its press kit that can back up its “thousands of lives” claim. Instead, the company attaches news stories where Tasers were used on people in danger of harming themselves. In one case, the company notes, a Taser was used to subdue a suicidal man who slashed his wrists with a razor and shouted at police to shoot him.

In fact, there is not a single independent study that provides conclusive evidence that Taser saves lives of officers or suspects. A 1999 study on police use of force released by the National Institute of Justice suggests Tasers have had little more than perceived effect in reducing officer and suspect injuries. The study of 26 agencies found that in a period spanning 1995 and 1996, prior to Taser’s widespread use by police departments, that about 10 percent of officers using force suffered injury, with less than 1 percent being serious. About 38 percent of the subjects were injured as the result of police use of force, including approximately 1.5 percent with major injuries.

In a Seattle Police Department study in 2002, one year after implementing the M26 Taser, 32 percent of subjects suffered injuries. Thirteen percent of those injuries occurred subsequent to Taser deployment, often from falling to the ground. And officers suffered injuries 18 percent of the time.

Since the beginning of this year, Taser use has contributed to 34 deaths. Four have occurred in June. And two have occurred in the Twin Cities.

Seven Coloradans have reportedly died as a result of Taser shocks.

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.

Less-lethal technology: research on conducted energy devices

The US National Institute of Justice, an agency of the US Department of Justice, has commissioned a new study to learn more about the effects of conducted energy devices, which are commonly called "stun guns." As the number of law enforcement agencies using stun guns has increased, the number of deaths reported to be associated with this less-lethal technology also has increased. NIJ has commissioned the study, titled "In-custody Deaths due to Conducted Energy Devices," to investigate whether the technology can contribute to or cause death and, if so, in what ways.

Other Current NIJ Research on Conducted Energy DevicesEffects of

TASER on Human Blood

Assessment of HEMI Devices in Trainees

Establishment of Interdisciplinary Working Group

Verifying Reported Effectiveness of Conducted Energy Devices in Reducing Deaths and

Injuries and a Review of Less-lethal Technology Operational Needs

Model Electric Current Through the Human Body From Less-lethal Conducted Energy Devices

Injuries Produced by Law Enforcement Use of Less-lethal Weapons: A Prospective Multicenter Trial

Enhancing Local and State Law Enforcement’s Understanding and Use of Emerging Technology

Human Effects Center of Excellence

Analysis of Airport Security Measures and the Role of Less-Lethal Weapons

Feds Probe Stun Gun Deaths

June 14, 2006
CBS News

With over 180 deaths in recent years among suspects subdued with stun guns, the government is taking a closer look into their use.

The review by the Justice Department, which will initially involve 30 such cases, follows the rapid growth in deployment of stun guns as a nonlethal alternative to bullet-firing weapons. The department's research arm, the National Institute of Justice, said there have been 184 such deaths since 1986, the overwhelming majority since 2000. Amnesty International, which has called for a moratorium on stun gun use, says there have been roughly 160 deaths in the past five years.

The study will not look at whether the use of stun guns was appropriate, John Morgan, the institute's assistant director, said Wednesday. Instead, researchers will make medical assessments of the 30 cases, which include deaths that were attributed to a stun gun and some in which authorities could not determine whether a stun gun caused or contributed to a death, he said.

Two deaths occurred in 1986, one in 1990 and the rest since 2000, Morgan added.

In the remaining 154 cases, stun guns were ruled out as a factor in the deaths, but the study could eventually include those deaths as well, he said, saying the review could take up to two years.

“We hope this will help improve less-lethal technology generally,” Morgan said. “If we find a particular operating characteristic is contributing to a problem, we hope that will be way to improve that technology.”

Taser International of Scottsdale, Ariz., the largest maker of stun guns, said that the devices have saved more than 9,000 lives because police officers have been able to the weapon instead of handguns that fire bullets. Tasers deliver a 50,000-volt jolt through two barbed darts that can penetrate clothing.

“Given that the NIJ conducted a similar study on pepper spray which effectively ended the debate regarding its safety, we are hopeful this study will lead to the same outcome regarding electro-muscular disruption devices,” Taser vice president Steve Tuttle said.

Dalia Hashad, director of Amnesty's USA Program, said the study is a good first step. “We've been asking the federal government for the last six years to take seriously that people are dying after being shot by this weapon,” Hashad said.

A government study last year said more than 7,000 of the nation's 18,000 police agencies used Tasers, up from 1,000 in 2001.

Many of those who died were high on drugs, mentally ill or otherwise agitated, according to an Amnesty International report released in March. Many deaths in the past year occurred after victims were hit by Tasers at least three times and, in some cases, for prolonged periods, the report said.

Some police agencies have tightened their rules on stun-gun use following Taser-related deaths.

One goal of the new study is to get a better understanding of how the body reacts when hit by electricity from the devices.

Researchers will include medical examiners, pathologists, cardiologists and other experts, said Dr. Robert Hunsaker, president of the National Association of Medical Examiners and co-chairman of the group that is designing the study.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police, which has called for careful monitoring of stun gun use, also will be part of the review.

Electro-muscular disruption technology - a nine-step strategy for effective deployment

2005?