Mission Statement - De-Spinning the Pro-Taser Propaganda

Yeah right, 'Excited Delirium' my ass...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

The primary purpose of this blog is to provide an outlet for my observations and analysis about tasers, taser "associated" deaths, and the behaviour exhibited by the management, employees and minions of Taser International. In general, everything is linked back to external sources, often via previous posts on the same topic, so that readers can fact-check to their heart's content. This blog was started in late-2007 when Canadians were enraged by the taser death of Robert Dziekanski and four others in a short three month period. The cocky attitude exhibited by the Taser International spokespuppet, and his preposterous proposal that Mr. Dziekanski coincidentally died of "excited delirium" at the time of his taser-death, led me to choose the blog name I did and provides my motivation. I have zero financial ties to this issue.

Sunday, June 15, 2008

Grasping for excuses extends to drinking

Frederick, MD (13 June 2008) – The Frederick City Police released an official report on Friday detailing more information regarding a 20-year-old man who died after being tased. The report said there may [?] have been marijuana and drug paraphernalia in Jarrel Gray's car on the night of November 18, 2007. No trace of drugs was found in Gray's system during an autopsy, but there was indication that Gray had been drinking the night he was tased. The Medical Examiner also states that Gray's body had a strong odor of alcohol. Gray's family is suing the Frederick Sheriff's Office for millions of dollars as well as the officer who tased him. [LINK]

I assume that they're not claiming that the victim in this case had a lethal level of alcohol in his system. Is there an issue with measuring the blood alcohol content (BAC) postmortem? If the victim's BAC is at lethal levels, then I fail to see why a taser would be required. Since they haven't mentioned that, we can assume that the victim was - at most - simply drunk.

By mentioning intoxication all they're doing is attempting to do is to subtly shift the blame for the taser-associated death to be somehow related to being drunk. The insinuation is that the victim is somehow to blame for being dead.

Nice try - but stop right there.

The glossed-over necessary logical step would be that drunks are somehow more susceptible to being killed by a taser.

But the taser is intended to be used in daily street-level police work. Police, in the normal course of their duties, will obviously be dealing with people that have been drinking. And if those people that have been drinking are somehow more susceptible to death-by-taser, then the taser is quite simply not safe for its intended market (police work).

That logic would shift the blame to Taser. So either drop the stupid argument, or drag them in as a co-defendant.


The state medical examiner's office ruled the case a sudden death associated with restraint and alcohol intoxication. [LINK]

Is that 'electronic' restraint?

And what is the blood alcohol content? Is it lethal, or just normal drunk?

I don't see this case going well for the defense if this is the sort of logic that they're going to bring to court.


And keep in mind that the officer in question is Corporal Rudy 'Call Me Sparky' Torres. [LINK]

No comments: