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, March 4, 2009

Is that an actual dismissal, or another 'fake'?

Taser has issued a press release trumpeting that they've been dismissed with prejudice from yet another taser-associated death lawsuit [Wells v. Taser et al].

I wonder if this is an actual sorry-to-have-bothered-you and no-money-changed-hands legal-argument based dismissal, or if it was yet another example of an out of court settlement by another name.

See [LINK] and [LINK] for a previous post regarding this subtle Taser trademark misdirection.

(Aren't most companies more open about these sorts of details? I mean, most companies that settle a lawsuit will admit that they've "settled a damn lawsuit." I don't know why these guys would take a less-forthcoming approach. It just makes them appears to be deceptive scuzbags. I'm not saying that they are actually deceptive scuzbags, I just saying that referring to what are actually settlements as 'dimissals' makes them look like deceptive scuzbags.)


In this case [Wells v. Taser et al], I have no idea.

There's no further information available that I can find on-line.


Now - if Taser is concerned about the possibility of confusion, then they can certainly issue a clarifying statement. But if they don't, and no further details are released, then you can read this claim of a dismissal from them which ever way you want.

Perhaps the information will be forthcoming at some point.

1 comment:

Reality Chick said...

Could be related to:
#291. August 15, 2007: James Wells, 43, Waterford, California