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.

Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Taser wins one - but not for the Gipper

Associated Press - The Arizona Supreme Court won't hear an appeal by a former Maricopa County Sheriff's Deputy trying to revive a product liability lawsuit against Taser International Inc. The Supreme Court's order Tuesday lets stand a Court of Appeal ruling that upholds a Maricopa County Superior Court jury's verdict for Taser in the lawsuit filed by Samuel Powers. The former deputy suffered a career-ending back injury when shocked by a taser stun gun during training. The Court of Appeals had ruled that a trial judge was correct to rule that Powers wasn't entitled to have jurors instructed they could hold Taser liable for dangers that the company didn't learn of until Powers' injury. [LINK]

Do you think that Taser is proud of this "win"?

Police forces of the world - take note of Taser's treatment of one of your own.

In my opinion, an ethical company would open their checkbook, and then amend their training scheme.

Are police training injuries common? Some claim that they are: [LINK] [NOTE: I have no idea if these claims are true or not.]


Kate said...

Look up TASER Intenational's 10-K annual report, Dec 31 2007.

As a footnote to its long list of legal battles, the 10K says:
"In December 2005, the Company received a defense verdict in the Samuel Powers v. TASER International personal injury case. As part of its legal strategy to aggressively defend these cases, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with its own insurance provider in order to prevent its insurance provider from settling the case with the plaintiff. Under the terms of the settlement, the Company received $575,000 from its liability insurance provider associated with a settlement and release agreement and the Company assumed all future potential liability and costs from and after the date the settlement and release agreement was signed. After offsetting approximately $170,000 through December 31, 2007 in legal expenses to defend and win the trial and cover the subsequent costs of appeal, the Company has a remaining balance of approximately $405,000 which is recorded as deferred insurance settlement proceeds on the accompanying balance sheets. This deferred income will be used to cover any costs through all appeals/reviews and the remaining balance if any will be recorded as “other income” when final resolution is completed."
If I understand this, their insurer might have settled, so T.I. took the money to use for legal fees, and what was left over they count as income? I wonder what their profit was on Powers.
Looks as though the more people they hurt the more money they make...

Anonymous said...

Yes, I've noticed that legal strategy before. I don't recall if I posted about it here, or elsewhere. Their strategy will eventually backfire. They're basically bypassing their insurance.

Their stock has lost more than half its value in the past six months or so. I don't see any reason for the trend not to continue. Sucks to be Taser (or a shareholder).

Beta_Test_Victim said...

Well, why does this not surprise me. Regardless of that fact this is just heartless unaccountability. Just so wrong. Yet I've not seen any example of ethics or integrity in the business practices of Taser International. Heartless bastards!!