Police 'convinced' Tasered boy, 11, was dangerous

Apparently it is okay for our police to use a legally-defined LETHAL WEAPON against a child carrying a pen, even if it did look like a knife. And no sanctions on this rookie officer? What if the child had died? Thank God he wasn't wielding a stapler! Another justification comes from the fact that the boy gave the police the finger! That showed 'disrespect for police' apparently, so that is the rationale for using the taser. Oh-- the boy HAD been seen with a knife earlier. Truth be told, after a 40-minute stand-off, the boy was lured out on the porch and the Taser was fired. We have no indication on placement of darts, duration of stun, etc. We just have police investigating police. Again. WVPD Chief Lepine is a former Mountie. This all leans heavily towards the need for the Independent Investigation Office (IIO). When will this civilian-led body be formed?

October 18, 2011
The Canadian Press

WEST VANCOUVER, B.C. — Police were convinced an armed, deaf, 11-year-old was violent and a danger to himself and others when they used a Taser on him following a confrontation last April, a police report has said.

Chief Pete Lepine of the West Vancouver Police Department said in a news release Monday the RCMP officers involved that day faced a dire situation that had little chance of a publicly acceptable outcome.

He noted officers could have declined to use a Taser and risk the situation escalating to the point where the boy harmed himself or others, possibly forcing officers to use lethal force.

Or officers could take the path they ultimately chose: Use the Taser on the boy and deal with the public relations disaster later.

"I can assure all of you that everyone involved in the original incident, as well as the investigation, was fully aware and sensitive to the fact that the police were dealing with a child," Lepine wrote.

"However, ultimately, the boy's age was secondary to the fact that his apprehension was deemed necessary in order to prevent him from causing further grievous bodily harm or death.

"...If the officers had decided not to take overt action to apprehend the child quickly, they would likely have been subjected to harsh criticism for standing idly by while the child harmed himself or someone else."

Lepine was heavily criticized last month for releasing his investigators' independent findings into RCMP actions that day by simply saying the officers were justified in using the device on a child.

He provided no explanation as to why.

On Monday, he said he was releasing a detailed account after consulting with other agencies conducting a review of the incident and also the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, which has been highly critical of RCMP Taser use in the past.

Lepine said police were called to the Prince George residential group home at about 5:30 p.m. April 7 after a report that an adult had been stabbed by an 11-year-old boy.

Officers were told the boy was hearing impaired but that his hearing aids had been damaged in a previous incident.

Before police arrived at the scene, the boy had holed himself up in the large, main residence with a bottle of wine and a knife. He also had access to other weapons, Lepine's report said.

Police were told he was "prone to extremely violent outbursts, during which he exhibited extraordinary strength for his age and size and presented a viable threat to his own safety as well as the safety of adults attempting to manage his outburst," the report said.

Investigators were also told he would not back down from a physical confrontation and could attack officers.

The police who arrived on the scene positioned themselves to watch the boy and quickly determined that a forced entry of the residence wasn't reasonable.

Instead, officers attempted to negotiate with him.

Lepine's report said when the boy appeared at a small second-story window, one of the officers tried to talk to him. The boy opened the window and used a knife to cut out the screen and hung his upper body outside, prompting concern he might fall.

Discussions stopped.

Lepine's report said officers also saw the boy slashing at his sweatshirt and running a knife blade over the palm of his hand and up his arms.

Eventually, the boy asked for some belongings, the report said.

Police left them on the front porch and the boy came to retrieve them -- armed with a knife at all times. He made the sign of a cross, which police had been told was "an indication that things were going to get bad."

The boy came out of the house again to post a note, which officers couldn't read.

At this point, Lepine's report said, investigators concluded that their efforts to de-escalate the situation weren't working and that the boy was increasingly a danger to himself.

"His willingness to engage in violence and use weapons against adults indicated that physical confrontation with the boy would present an extremely high risk to all involved," the report said.

The officers decided to use a Taser if the boy came out again.

The boy was asked to come out and clarify the contents of the note. When he did, he was holding a knife and a Taser was deployed once.

Officers gained physical control of the boy and found he had a pen, not a knife, in his hand.

During the independent investigation of the RCMP's actions, Lepine said West Vancouver investigators sought the opinion of a "recognized subject matter expert" in policing that concluded the officers' decisions were "sound, appropriate to the situation and in keeping with their training and existing policy."

"It was clear to me that the officers involved responded to a dynamic and potentially deadly incident in a measured, appropriate and professional manner," Lepine concluded.

After the boy received the jolt, the boy was taken to hospital for observation and released the next day.

The Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP and B.C.'s children's watchdog have launched their own investigations. The RCMP is also conducting an internal review.

Two RCMP officers were placed on administrative leave after the incident, but they returned to their full duties in late June.

No charges to be laid against RCMP after 11-year-old Tasered

September 16, 2011
Neal Hall, Vancouver Sun

No criminal charges should be laid against the RCMP officers who shot an 11-year-old boy with a Taser in Prince George last April, the West Vancouver police department announced Thursday.

"We have concluded that the actions of the officers involved did not violate the Criminal Code of Canada and we are not recommending charges," West Vancouver Police Chief Peter Lepine said in a statement. "Our investigation is only one of many that will ultimately examine the circumstances surrounding this incident."

The West Vancouver force was asked by the RCMP to investigate the incident last April to avoid the public perception that the RCMP was investigating its own officers.

The incident occurred in Prince George about 5: 30 p.m. on April 7, when Mounties responded to a 911 call that a youth had stabbed a 37-year-old man at a home.

Investigation into B.C. Taser incident continues

May 26, 2011
CBC News

It could be another six weeks before the West Vancouver police complete their investigation into why a Mountie stunned an 11-year-old boy with a Taser near Prince George, B.C., last month.

The boy was shocked April 7 after he allegedly stabbed a caregiver at his government run group home, the RCMP has said.

West Vancouver Police Chief Pete Lepine says officers conducting the investigation have interviewed the Mounties involved and witnesses, and are now consulting with legal counsel and experts on police use of force.

Lepine said he understands the sense of urgency around the case, but he wants to ensure a fair, thorough and transparent investigation and the probe might not be finished until early July.

B.C.'s Representative for Children and Youth Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond has also said she will launch a special investigation into the incident, including reports that some group home staff members are using police to help discipline children.

Statement of defence filed in case of girl tasered while in police custody

February 25, 2009
By Garett Williams
Miner and News (Kenora, Ontario)

OPP lawyers submitted a statement of defence in Kenora Tuesday requesting a $500,000 lawsuit be dismissed after a 14-year-old girl was shocked with a Taser while in custody in Sioux Lookout last summer.

The girl, who cannot be identified under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, was being held in custody in July 2008, awaiting a court appearance, when a Taser was used to bring her to compliance with officers’ orders to stop scratching paint off holding cell walls.

According to the initial claim, the girl has mental disabilities and was passing time, when officers warned her she would be charged with mischief if she didn’t stop picking at paint on the wall.

The youth was told she would be restrained in a prisoner’s belt to prevent further damage to the cell if she continued to pick at the wall.

Two officers entered the cell, one “lightly” taking hold of her arm to stand her up, when she began to fight back, the OPP defence said.

“The officers subsequently placed Jane Doe on the cell floor with minimal force in order to get physical control of her,” the defence said. “When Jane Doe continued to struggle and kick at the officers, the (officer) deployed a Taser drive for two to three seconds to her right thigh in order to gain compliance and have her cease the assault against the officers.”

The statement of claim alleges the youth was traumatized by the unlawful assault and battery, stating her leg “felt numb for a month.”

“The assault and battery on Jane Doe has led to considerable and ongoing mental distress,” the claim reads. “She does not understand why she was attacked by the police officers in such a manner or why a deadly weapon was used upon her without provocation. The assault and battery has left her anxious and distrustful of police and other authority figures.”

In August, the youth pled guilty to assaulting an officer and the provincial police deny she sustained the injuries, damages or losses alleged in the statement of claim and called the damages sought “excessive and remote.”

The case garnered attention from both the Office of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth and Ontario NDP Leader Howard Hampton, who called for a moratorium on the use of Tasers on minors. A spokesperson for Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Rick Bartolucci said the government has no plans to restrict officers’ use of the device and front-line officers should have all law enforcement tools at their disposal.

The defence statement was submitted the same day the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and the Canadian Police Association argued in Ottawa that Tasers save lives.

EDITORIAL: Should tasers be used on children?

February 20, 2009
Caledon Enterprise

Whether or not police should have the authority to zap a young person with a weapon that can produce 50,000 electrical volts would seem to be quite obvious, wouldn’t it?
But controversy about the electrical weapons, which cause an uncontrollable contraction of muscle tissue after discharge, being holstered on the hips of officers is a debate that is far reaching.

Numerous cases have made headlines, sparking concerns from advocates about their safety, and has raised questions about police forces’ use of the devices.
The debate was recently fired up again after Irwin Elman, Ontario’s child advocate, called for a moratorium on using stun guns on minors except in rare circumstances. A request which has been refused by the province.

Instead, Minister of Community Safety Rick Bartolucci says the decision of whether or not to use stun guns will be left up to officers and the specific circumstance.
This comes after a 14-year-old girl from a remote Ontario First Nation was reportedly stunned by Ontario Provincial Police officers as she picked paint off a jail cell wall in Sioux Lookout. Her family is suing the OPP for $500,000 in damages. The girl’s father has alleged that two officers entered her cell last July (she had been arrested for drinking under age) and took out a black weapon, shocking his daughter’s leg. The allegations have not yet been proven in court, and OPP won’t discuss the matter because of the ongoing lawsuit.

After reviewing a police video of the incident, Elman began pressing the province about whether police should have the authority to use the weapons on young people.
If this case is in fact true, then it’s a no brainer that officers clearly had no right to use a taser on a young girl for scratching away paint. However, in other extreme instances where a violent person is threatening an officer’s life, or that of a member of the public, taser use may be an alternative defence if all others fail, including their negotiating skills to diffuse a volatile situation. But there would seem to be something clearly wrong with our front line officers if they are unable to restrain a young child without the assistance of an electrical current.

Truth not tasers weighs in on RCMP admission that tasers cause death

On February 12, 2009, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) announced new rules of engagement for the use of tasers in Canada, in response to a demand by the Canadian House of Commons Public Safety and National Security Committee that they reign in their use of these weapons. These new rules of engagement marked the first time that a Canadian police force has publicly acknowledged that tasers may pose a fatal risk.

We here at Truth not Tasers have been publicly acknowledging that tasers have the potential to be lethal for years. So, I was blown away when the police themselves finally admitted they agree. Even though RCMP Commissioner William Elliott didn't exactly come right out and say that tasers kill people, he did concede that "shortly after a Taser was deployed, individuals died." I'd say that comes pretty close.

Strangely enough, these new and improved rules of engagement are simply those under which tasers were supposed to have been initially approved for use in this country. However, as time passed, and while no one was really looking (save for a very few people like us), “usage creep” entered stage left and things went sideways in a major way. If the RCMP and police across the country have not been operating under these rules – and Canadians are slowly coming to realize that in fact they haven’t been – how the hell have we allowed them to get away with it for so long?? And what justice exists for those families who have lost a loved one who would likely still be alive had it not been deemed “necessary" to taser them?

For example, I am confident that had police been operating under these rules the night my brother Robert Bagnell died in June 2004, they would have had no reason to taser him and he would likely be alive today. His was a classic case of non-combative resistance. He was on his back, on a washroom floor – all 136 pounds of him – and posed no credible threat of death or grievous bodily harm to the 13 Vancouver Police officers in attendance. There were no members of the public present. The police would never have considered shooting Bob with a gun that night, but it was easy and convenient to pull out their trusty “non-lethal” (yes, police and the manufacturer were still calling them non-lethal back then) tasers.

And, in fact, I believe that the majority of Canadian men who have died would in all likelihood still be alive today had they not been tasered. So few of them posed a true, credible threat to anyone, save perhaps to themselves. Which is something that disturbs me about the new “rules”: what will constitute “enough” threat to a person’s own self?

From where I sit, these rules still rely far too much on officer discretion and do not come nearly close enough to making the taser the last resort before lethal force. And all the training in the world isn’t going to address that, one officer’s perception and experience being another officer’s reality. Editorial after editorial – even RCMP Complaints Commissioner Paul Kennedy – has cautioned that the rules are still too broad and vague. I agree wholeheartedly.

In the days since the announcement, police agencies across the country, including the RCMP’s own Sgt. Scott Warren, chairman of the officer safety committee, have come out madly swinging in defence against making any (gasp!) changes to their taser policies. See "What's wrong with this picture? And who's keeping track?" If anyone is awake enough to enforce it, police forces (and transit cops, etc.) across the country, will have no choice but to follow suit.

Otherwise, now that our federal police force has publicly acknowledged that the taser is potentially lethal, if it is used “inappropriately” and where bullets would never be an option and a person dies, what will that be called and how will it be handled?
RCMP Complaints Commissioner Paul Kennedy has undertaken to review the circumstances surrounding the deaths of the 10 men who were tasered by the RCMP and subsequently died. No one has yet identified who, if anyone, will be responsible to do the same for those 17 Canadians whose deaths did not involve the RCMP. Namely, Ronald Perry, Roman Andreichikov, Peter Lamonday, Robert Bagnell, Jerry Knight, Samuel Truscott, James Foldi, Alesandro Fiacco, James Barber, Claudio Castagnetta, Quilem Registre, Howard Hyde, Jeffrey Marreel, Michael Langan, Sean Reilly, Trevor Grimolfson and Gordon Walker Bowe.

Another important next step will be to unravel the incestuous relationship that exists between Canadian law enforcement (and its research arms) and the very rich and powerful - and endlessly litigious - Taser International. This enormously inappropriate alliance reeks of conflict of interest and it has been allowed to fester and flourish for many years beyond its best-by date. The necessity of Taser International’s attendance, in person or representatively, around and at Canadian inquests and inquiries into taser-related deaths must also be microscopically examined.

I hope that the RCMP’s policy changes will give medical examiners everywhere something new to work with. Medical examiners and coroners have been under tremendous pressure from police, “excited delirium” proponents and the weapon's manufacturer, Taser International, to “reverse and prevent medical rulings that Tasers contributed to someone's death.” The President of the National Association of Medical Examiners in the United States has said in more ways than one that “it is dangerously close to intimidation.”

Something also needs to be done about police using tasers on youth and senior citizens. C’mon – get REAL!

I have never been here for credit or accolades. But I do like to think that I and others, including the Canadian media, have played a critical role in getting us to where we are today. There is no doubt in my mind that we have collectively added to the pressure for needed change. I am grateful for my fellow travellers (most notably fellow blogger Excited-Delirium), who have joined me on this journey.

What a long, strange trip it's been. Unfortunately, it’s a trip that isn't over yet. I, for one, won't be riding off into the sunset until I and my family are satisfied that all we could do we have done.

"Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us." (Jerry Garcia, The Grateful Dead)

Truth not tasers weighs in on the RCMP announcement

On February 12, 2009, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) announced new rules of engagement for the use of tasers in Canada, in response to a demand by the Canadian House of Commons Public Safety and National Security Committee that they reign in their use of these weapons. These new rules of engagement marked the first time that a Canadian police force has publicly acknowledged that tasers may pose a fatal risk.

We here at Truth not Tasers have been publicly acknowledging that tasers have the potential to be lethal for years. So, I was blown away when the police themselves finally admitted they agree. Even though RCMP Commissioner William Elliott didn't exactly come right out and say that tasers kill people, he did concede that "shortly after a Taser was deployed, individuals died." I'd say that comes pretty close.

Strangely enough, these new and improved rules of engagement are simply those under which tasers were supposed to have been initially approved for use in this country. However, as time passed, and while no one was really looking (save for a very few people like us), “usage creep” entered stage left and things went sideways in a major way. If the RCMP and police across the country have not been operating under these rules – and Canadians are slowly coming to realize that in fact they haven’t been – how the hell have we allowed them to get away with it for so long?? And what justice exists for those families who have lost a loved one who would likely still be alive had it not been deemed “necessary" to taser them?

For example, I am confident that had police been operating under these rules the night my brother Robert Bagnell died in June 2004, they would have had no reason to taser him and he would likely be alive today. His was a classic case of non-combative resistance. He was on his back, on a washroom floor – all 136 pounds of him – and posed no credible threat of death or grievous bodily harm to the 13 Vancouver Police officers in attendance. There were no members of the public present. The police would never have considered shooting Bob with a gun that night, but it was easy and convenient to pull out their trusty “non-lethal” (yes, police and the manufacturer were still calling them non-lethal back then) tasers.

And, in fact, I believe that the majority of Canadian men who have died would in all likelihood still be alive today had they not been tasered. So few of them posed a true, credible threat to anyone, save perhaps to themselves. Which is something that disturbs me about the new “rules”: what will constitute “enough” threat to a person’s own self?

From where I sit, these rules still rely far too much on officer discretion and do not come nearly close enough to making the taser the last resort before lethal force. And all the training in the world isn’t going to address that, one officer’s perception and experience being another officer’s reality. Editorial after editorial – even RCMP Complaints Commissioner Paul Kennedy – has cautioned that the rules are still too broad and vague. I agree wholeheartedly.

In the days since the announcement, police agencies across the country, including the RCMP’s own Sgt. Scott Warren, chairman of the officer safety committee, have come out madly swinging in defence against making any (gasp!) changes to their taser policies. See "What's wrong with this picture? And who's keeping track?" If anyone is awake enough to enforce it, police forces (and transit cops, etc.) across the country, will have no choice but to follow suit.

Otherwise, now that our federal police force has publicly acknowledged that the taser is potentially lethal, if it is used “inappropriately” and where bullets would never be an option and a person dies, what will that be called and how will it be handled?

RCMP Complaints Commissioner Paul Kennedy has undertaken to review the circumstances surrounding the deaths of the 10 men who were tasered by the RCMP and subsequently died. No one has yet identified who, if anyone, will be responsible to do the same for those 17 Canadians whose deaths did not involve the RCMP. Namely, Ronald Perry, Roman Andreichikov, Peter Lamonday, Robert Bagnell, Jerry Knight, Samuel Truscott, James Foldi, Alesandro Fiacco, James Barber, Claudio Castagnetta, Quilem Registre, Howard Hyde, Jeffrey Marreel, Michael Langan, Sean Reilly, Trevor Grimolfson and Gordon Walker Bowe.

Another important next step will be to unravel the incestuous relationship that exists between Canadian law enforcement (and its research arms) and the very rich and powerful - and endlessly litigious - Taser International. This enormously inappropriate alliance reeks of conflict of interest and it has been allowed to fester and flourish for many years beyond its best-by date. The necessity of Taser International’s attendance, in person or representatively, around and at Canadian inquests and inquiries into taser-related deaths must also be microscopically examined.

I hope that the RCMP’s policy changes will give medical examiners everywhere something new to work with. Medical examiners and coroners have been under tremendous pressure from police, “excited delirium” proponents and the weapon's manufacturer, Taser International, to “reverse and prevent medical rulings that Tasers contributed to someone's death.” The President of the National Association of Medical Examiners in the United States has said in more ways than one that “it is dangerously close to intimidation.”

Something also needs to be done about police using tasers on youth and senior citizens. C’mon – let's get REAL!

I have never been here for credit or accolades. But I do like to think that I and others, including the Canadian media, have played a critical role in getting us to where we are today. There is no doubt in my mind that we have collectively added to the pressure for needed change. I am grateful for my fellow travellers (most notably fellow blogger Excited-Delirium), who have joined me on this journey.

What a long, strange trip it's been. Unfortunately, it’s a trip that isn't over yet. I, for one, won't be riding off into the sunset until I and my family are satisfied that all we could do we have done.

"Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us." (Jerry Garcia, The Grateful Dead)

RCMP response to Taser report inadequate

February 12, 2009
Liberal.ca

OTTAWA - The RCMP continues to ignore recommendations made by a Parliamentary committee on Tasers even though they now admit that Tasers can cause death, said Liberal Public Safety and National Security Critic MP Mark Holland today.

“The Commissioner admitted that Tasers can cause death, especially in cases where they are fired on ‘acutely agitated’ individuals,” said Mr. Holland. “While the RCMP has revised some of its practices on Taser use, the Commissioner’s remarks signal that there are still serious concerns that have not been addressed.”

Mr. Holland was responding to comments made by RCMP Commissioner William Elliott when he appeared before the House of Commons Public Safety and National Security Committee today. This was the first time the RCMP has publicly responded to the committee’s recommendations published eight months ago.

The June 2008 report on Tasers made a number of recommendations including the reclassification of the Taser as an “impact weapon,” and recognizing the void in the research on conducted energy weapons, called for independent scientific peer-reviewed studies on Taser gun safety to be undertaken immediately.

“The RCMP is relying on a few US studies on Tasers, only one of which is peer-reviewed,” said Mr. Holland. “It is simply not acceptable to use a weapon when its effects are not fully understood.”

Neither the RCMP nor the Conservative government has undertaken a domestic study on Tasers, and only conducted testing on their own Taser supply after the CBC reported that testing they had commissioned showed some Tasers emitted more energy than the manufacturer specified.

Also concerning was the Commissioner’s admission that the RCMP does not have a policy for the use of Tasers on minors.

“This is a very disturbing development, as we don’t know the effects of Taser use on the young,” noted Mr. Holland. “Everyone from Amnesty International to the Ontario Child Advocate has condemned this practice, but the RCMP has said they will continue using Tasers on minors.”

If needs be, cops can use Tasers on kids

February 9, 2009
Posted By MICHAEL PEELING, STANDARD-FREEHOLDER

The Ontario Provincial Police's top local cop says it's unlikely officers will be trained to avoid using their Tasers on children.

SD&G OPP Inspector Dave Springer said the officers under his command do not use age-specific tactics in their use of force, which includes the deployment of Tasers.

"(Our officers) are trained to apply force in a way that eliminates risk as much as possible," Springer said. "You're not likely going to see a policy for use of a Taser based on age because each situation in which they are used is so specific."

The behaviour of an individual confronting a police officer, what type of weapon is involved, the condition of an officer and the perception of an officer are all factors which affect how they react, whether it be to use a Taser, firearm or no weapon at all.

Springer's comments follow the rejection by Community Safety Minister Rick Bartolucci of a request by Irwin Helman, Ontario's advocate for children, to put a moratorium on the use of stun guns on minors.

Helman's appeal followed a report that a 14-year-old girl from a remote northwestern Ontario First Nation, Sioux Lookout, Ont., was zapped with a Taser in a jail cell last July.

In the 18 months since the OPP was issued Tasers, Springer said there have been no injuries sustained during the six incidents reported so far in SD&G involving the weapons.

An individual charge from a Taser applies a consistent 50,000 volts. A shock from a defibrillator is 1,000 times stronger, said Springer.

"If you know the difference between amps and volts, you'll know that volts hurt and amps kill," said Springer. He knows what it's like to be Tasered because he, like 20 other OPP officers in SD&G, have been subject to the devices as part of their training.

"They certainly get your attention," Springer said of his Taser experience. "If you've been given an order to comply with, I wouldn't want to not comply after being Tasered."

The inspector explained that a shot from a Taser causes the affected muscle groups to contract 19 times per second, which induces a large of amount of involuntary physical exertion to tire the subject out.

The young girl's parents have filed a $500,000 lawsuit against the OPP, claiming she was manhandled and Tasered for peeling paint off a wall.

Police officers should be able to use all the tools in their arsenal in a dangerous situation, and age should not be a factor in deciding how to deal with an individual, Bartolucci said.

"That police officer should have all the tools necessary to ensure that he or she chooses a course of action that protects the individual, protects the public and protects the police officer - regardless of age,'' Bartolucci said, adding the government has commissioned a study on the use of Tasers which he will await before taking further action.

Helman said he couldn't believe Bartolucci won't err on the side of caution.

"In a way it's a knee-jerk reaction to be using (Tasers), rather than not be,'' he said.

"I don't understand it, to be honest. I don't understand the logic or where he's coming from.''

Police have not disputed that a Taser was used on the girl, and watching the video of the incident creates concerns of "usage creep'' with Tasers, Elman said.

"It's a child in a cell, doing nothing, that has a Taser used on her in order to gain compliance. That's wrong,'' he said.

A statement of claim filed in court alleges two provincial police officers entered the girl's cell without warning, "violently" pulled her to the floor and applied the Taser to her right upper thigh for three to five seconds.

None of the allegations have been proven in court.

The girl, who has fetal alcohol syndrome, had been arrested for underage drinking, the family's lawyer said.

The lawsuit also seeks an order that would prohibit the use of stun guns on minors except in cases where a life is clearly at risk.

Bartolucci said the government's study on Taser use should be ready sometime early this year.

Editorial

February 7, 2008
Sault Star

Ontario's advocate for children is calling for a moratorium on using stun guns on minors except in extreme circumstances.

It is a call, of course, that I fully support, not only for minors but all, having detailed my concern about Taser use in a column on Oct. 8.

And I would hope authorities will take the call by Irwin Elman, the head of Ontario's Office of the Provincial Advocate for Children, seriously because its use is creeping downward on youths in custody and in circumstances in which it definitely doesn't seem to be warranted.

In November 2007 a 16-year-old girl was Tasered after being taken to an RCMP detachment in Selkirk, Man., for being intoxicated. Admitting to being drunk and obnoxious and even jumping on the back of an officer in the holding cell, the girl, who weighed 130 pounds, said four male officers -- one for each limb -- held her on the ground and Tasered her.

The girl, who was never formally charged, showed CTV the burns to her body.

And last year, in a case that just became public through a lawsuit and got the attention of Elman, a 14-year-old girl from a remote First Nation was zapped by Ontario Provincial Police while in a holding facility in Sioux Lookout. In a statement of claim, it is alleged that two OPP officers entered the cell without warning and applied the Taser to her upper thigh for three to five seconds.

The girl, who has fetal alcohol syndrome, was arrested for underage drinking, her lawyer said, and was allegedly zapped because she wouldn't stop picking at the paint on the wall of her cell.

None of the allegations has been proved in court but an OPP spokesman confirmed to The Canadian Press that there had been an incident that involved using "a conductive energy device" and Elman said he had viewed the tape. He called the incident an example of "usage creep" with the device.

Last fall a plan to introduce Taser stun guns into Canada's prisons was indefinitely shelved amid intense public scrutiny of the powerful weapons.

"We're constantly evaluating the equipment we use," said Guy Campeau of the Correctional Service of Canada. "The use of that technology is still being considered but is under review."

What he really should have been saying as well was that also being evaluated were the people using the equipment and how they were using it.

Since there have been so many deaths following the use of Tasers, undoubtedly there is worry about the power of the equipment.

But I think there has to be just as much worry about the people using it, that they will abuse it, using it simply because they find it easier than having to apply physical force in close contact.

As I said in my Oct. 8 column, considering we rely on police to keep us safe, it is incumbent on us to provide and allow them the use of the best equipment available.

But on the other hand, even while seeing the merits of the Taser as a police tool, I find myself unable to escape the nagging thought that something has been going wrong, very wrong.

Stun study ready soon: Minister

February 5, 2009
By ANTONELLA ARTUSO, Toronto Sun

Community Safety Minister Rick Bartolucci says he expects a report soon on the use of electronic stun guns in Ontario and he'll decide then whether there should be restrictions involving minors.

The family of a 14-year-old girl has filed a lawsuit against the Ontario Provincial Police alleging she was zapped by officers in a Sioux Lookout jail after ignoring an order to stop peeling paint off the cell wall.

"I'm not going to make a knee jerk reaction," Bartolucci said yesterday. "I'm going to wait for the results of that study to come out."

Bartolucci said officers should have the "tools" necessary to react when individuals, "regardless of age," pose a threat to themselves or others.

Ontario rejects call for banning taser use on minors

February 4, 2009
The Canadian Press/Globe and Mail

TORONTO — The Ontario government is rejecting calls for a ban on the use of tasers on young people.

Irwin Elman, the province's advocate for children, is calling for a moratorium on using stun guns on minors, except in extreme circumstances. His appeal follows reports that a teenage girl from a remote First Nation was apparently zapped with a taser in a jail cell last July. A lawsuit filed by her family alleges the teen, who was 14 at the time, was shocked after being told to stop picking at the paint in the holding facility in Sioux Lookout, Ont.

Community Safety Minister Rick Bartolucci says he's heard from Mr. Elman but isn't prepared to act on his request. Mr. Bartolucci says police officers should be able to use all the tools in their arsenal when dealing with a dangerous situation.

And he says age should not be a factor in deciding how to deal with an individual. “That police officer should have all the tools necessary to ensure that he or she chooses a course of action that protects the individual, protects the public and protects the police officer — regardless of age,” Mr. Bartolucci said.

He also said the province is waiting on the results of a study into the use of tasers. “I'm not going to make a knee-jerk reaction to any individual case,” Mr. Bartolucci said. “I'm going to wait for the results of that study to come out and then we will determine whether or not there should be an expansion of the use of tasers or a reduction.” He said the study should be ready early this year.

A statement of claim filed in court alleges two Ontario Provincial Police officers entered the girl's cell without warning, “violently” pulled her to the floor and applied the taser to her right upper thigh for three to five seconds.

None of the allegations have been proven in court.

The girl, who has fetal alcohol syndrome, had been arrested for underage drinking, the family's lawyer said. The family says the incident was caught on tape. Mr. Elman said he's viewed the tape and calls the incident an example of “usage creep” with tasers. The girl's family is suing the provincial police force for $500,000.

They are also seeking an order that would prohibit the use of stun guns on minors except in cases where a life is clearly at risk.

***

And, according to the Ottawa Citizen:

Premier Dalton McGuinty was equally non-committal. “As you know, we have a panel that’s out there taking a look at this,” he told reporters. “We await their advice.”

EDITORIAL: YOUTH MORATORIUM

February 4, 2009
Globe and Mail

It may be that the Ontario Provincial Police were acting according to policy when they tasered an unarmed, 14-year-old girl in a holding cell in Sioux Lookout last summer. But what kind of policy allows for such massive use of force on youthful prisoners, or for that matter, on teens as young as 13 at any time? The answer is, most of Canada's.

The RCMP, for instance, have used their tasers on those 16 and under 90 times over the past seven years. In New Brunswick, Children and Youth Advocate Bernard Richard has spoken against the tasering of young people in adult prison facilities. He also documented instances of 14-year-olds with severe mental illness being tasered. In Winnipeg last July, a 17-year-old died after being tasered by police.

Tasers do have beneficial uses. There are some types of standoffs with police, usually involving a mentally ill person threatening to do harm to himself, in which the use of a taser may save a life. But police guidelines across the country allow for far broader use. There does not need to be a risk of severe harm to anyone. (In 32 per cent of RCMP uses, the subject had no weapon.) Depending on the police force, a person who is "resistant," "actively resistant" or "assaultive" may be tasered. This is a weapon of convenience, not one of last resort.

Not all the facts are in on the tasering of the 14-year-old in Sioux Lookout, the subject of a lawsuit by her father. Irwin Elman, Ontario's Advocate for Children and Youth, said yesterday he viewed the police videotape and the girl was merely peeling paint off her cell wall. "There is nothing to suggest she posed any danger to herself or others at the time police chose to enter the cell." He called for a moratorium in the province on the use of tasers on people under 18 until independent research on the safety of the weapons has been done, unless lives are in danger and the only alternative is deadly force.

It makes sense, for Ontario and the rest of Canada. Twenty-two people who have been tasered in the past five years died, and voices are being raised in the Canadian medical community about the risks of the taser. No, the risks are not scientifically proven, but the onus should be on the police to demonstrate safety, especially when dealing with vulnerable groups such as young teenagers.

Even if the taser could be proved not to contribute to deaths, its use on young people would be questionable in most circumstances. This is a heavy weapon that inflicts enormous pain. Surely there are less powerful methods police can use on 14-year-olds in jail cells.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090204.ETASER04/TPStory/National

Ban stun gun use on young people, Ontario's child advocate urges police

A list of recent stun gun uses on young people in Canada (at the end of the following report) is not complete without the following:

In Alberta: Edmonton cop faces hearing

In British Columbia: Tasered neck an accident.

In Manitoba: Mounties taser girl in cell.

In British Columbia: RCMP accused of misusing Taser on Victoria teen

In New Brunswick: Human rights group condemns RCMP use of Taser on teen

In Alberta: Controversial Edmonton cop back in trouble

And I'm sure there are others.


February 3, 2009
11:11 AM
CBC News

Ontario's child advocate has recommended the provincial police force ban the use of stun guns on minors unless lethal force is necessary.

The call comes after a teenager was shocked in the Sioux Lookout OPP detachment cell last summer. The 15-year-old female, who cannot be identified under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, was picked up by Ontario Provincial Police for underage drinking following an altercation at a July 2008 party.

The teen, who was 14 at the time and has fetal alcohol syndrome, was waiting in the jail cell for a court hearing.

Her father, who also cannot be identified, said his daughter was picking paint off the cell walls out of boredom. Police warned her to stop and when she didn't, her father said officers entered her cell, held her down by both arms and shot her with a stun gun.

"They put her down, they took out something black and the next thing you know, there was a scream. Why would they do that? She wasn't doing anything wrong, just scratching on the wall," he said.

According to police documents, officers said they were forced to subdue her with the stun gun after she attacked them.

She was later convicted of assaulting a police officer during the incident.

Inappropriate response: child advocate

Her father says he didn't see any evidence of violence on her part when he watched the police videotape of the incident and launched a complaint against the OPP. He and his daughter are also suing the police force for $500,000.

The OPP will not comment on the case because of the lawsuit, however, an internal investigation by the OPP's professional standards bureau found the complaint was unsubstantiated due to insufficient evidence.

Lawyers for the force are expected to file a statement of defence during the next few days, which could offer more information into the case.

Ontario Child Advocate Irwin Elman said the police response was not appropriate.

"When I saw the tape, we had a young person who was peeling paint off the wall of a police holding cell with her fingernail and she was quiet and on a cot," he said. "And our estimation, the use of a Taser was not proportional to the need to protect, I guess, the paint on the wall."

Elman said the police force should suspend its use of stun guns on youth until more information is known about their effects. "We're asking for a moratorium on the use of Tasers on children and youth, certainly in our province, until there's established, full research about their use on children and youth," he said.

According to a recent RCMP audit, as many as 90 people under the age of 16 across the country were shocked by stun guns between 2001-2008, said Elman.

"It's hard to tell … how much that happens in Ontario's police holding cells or elsewhere because there's no real transparent oversight on the use of Tasers."

OPP Insp. Dave Ross say the force hasn't seen Elman's recommendations but will review and consider them. "We're always reviewing our policies and procedures with any practices we do in the OPP to ensure we're delivering the best services we can to the communities, but still fulfilling our mandate of public safety," he said.

Debate over stun guns

Jeff Roberts, a lawyer for the father and daughter, said stun guns are no longer weapons of last resort, but are being used by police as a method of pain compliance. Roberts calls that cruel and unusual treatment that is forbidden under international law. "It's unnecessary and extremely cruel. Would you like me to stick your kid's finger in a light socket?" he said.

The use of stun guns on young people has been under debate across the country following a number of incidents:

New Brunswick banned the use of the weapons on youth prisoners last year after an 18-year-old female was stunned twice while jailed in Saint John.

Michael Langan, 17, died last July after Winnipeg police shot him with a stun gun after an altercation with officers.

RCMP in the Northwest Territories are investigating their use of a stun gun on a teenage girl at a youth detention centre in Inuvik in 2007.

A Halifax Youth Court judge criticized three police officers for their arrest of a teenage girl, who was tackled in her own bed and shocked twice with a stun gun in February 2007.

Testimony is also ongoing at an inquiry into the October 2007 death of Robert Dziekanski, a 40-year-old Polish immigrant who died after being stunned several times at Vancouver International Airport.

Alleged Tasering subject of lawsuit

February 3, 2009
By BRYAN MEADOWS, Chronicle Journal

Armed with a lawsuit against the Ontario Provincial Police alleging cruel and unusual punishment, a Lac Seul First Nation father will speak to media in Kenora Tuesday about an incident last summer in Sioux Lookout where his 14-year-old daughter was allegedly Tasered while in police custody.

Barristers Keshen and Major said Monday in a press release that the father is going public with the story in response to an internal OPP investigation which concluded that the police action was justified. His daughter “Jane Doe” is also suing the OPP for negligence and assault and battery.

“We think the police behaviour was cruel and unnecessary,” Jane Doe's father said in a prepared statement. “They don‘t need to use these weapons on kids.”

Jane Doe, who has cognitive impairments, will be present at the press conference but will not be available for photos or interviews.

Lawyer Jeff Roberts said her presence is intended to refute a police characterization of her as being large and “surprisingly strong.” “We find the (internal) report and its conclusions to be bizarre and insulting,” Roberts said, adding that “since the police have so far been unaccountable and the legislature is not acting, we are taking this issue to the courts and the media.”

A statement of claim against the OPP notes that the unnecessary Tasering of a 14-year-old amounts to a violation of her Section 12 Charter Right which protects everybody against cruel and unusual punishment. Such acts also contravene the UNICEF Convention on the Rights of the Child, the lawyers say.

Tasers were initially issued to certain members of the OPP for emergency measure use in tactical and hostage-taking situations. Since then, Taser use has become increasingly common and is described as “usage creep” by the Office of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth.

“There is no doubt in my mind that this would never have occurred had the victim been a 14-year-old from Rosedale or West Vancouver,” Roberts said. “Unfortunately, in remote places where there is a lack of policy and media oversight, it is too easy for these sorts of incidents to occur.”

The incident in question allegedly occurred in July of 2008 when the victim was in custody for a minor offense related to alcohol that had occurred the previous evening. She was sporadically peeling paint from the walls of the jail cell the next day when two OPP officers entered the cell, forced her to the floor and Tasered her.
None of the allegations outlined in the statement of claim have been proven in court.

The OPP has so far refused requests by Keshen and Major to release the videotape of the incident to the plaintiff or her lawyer.

Meanwhile, the Office of the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth has taken an active interest in the case and is calling on Community Safety and Correctional Minister Rick Bartolucci to implement a moratorium on the use of Tasers on children and youth until independent and sufficient research into the safety of these devices has been completed, except for situations in which lives are in danger and the only alternative is the use of deadly force or a gun.

A news release states that the Advocate‘s Office believes the use of Tasers may be appropriate in situations where there is a risk of death or grievous bodily harm but not as a tool to be used in order to gain compliance.

The agency says it is concerned with the safety of Tasers and the “proportionality” of the response by police to a teenager securely contained in a court holding cell.
The Professional Standards Bureau of the police service in question has deemed the father‘s complaint – that his daughter had been “Tasered without justification” – to be unsubstantiated.

There have been several reports of Tasers being used against people under age 18 in Ontario, Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Manitoba.

According to the Final Report of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, there were 90 reports of Taser use by the RCMP on people under the age of 16 between December 2001 and January 2008.