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.



Saturday, March 20, 2010

More details on Taser International's $15,000 "fine"

... TASER filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in an attempt to end the litigation, asking the court to find, as a matter of law, that ECDs do not cause cardiac arrest, and that TASER had no duty to warn users of its products about such a risk.

In denying TASER's Motion for Summary Judgment, Judge Almquist found the evidence sufficient for a jury to determine: 1) whether the TASER Model X26 caused Butler's cardiac arrest, 2) whether TASER is strictly liable for failing to warn of cardiac risks associated with its ECDs, 3) whether TASER intentionally deceived police officers concerning the cardiac safety of its ECDs, 4) whether TASER negligently misrepresented the cardiac safety of ECDs, and 5) whether TASER should pay punitive damages based on fraud and malice.

Judge Almquist also found that a portion of TASER's motion was "substantially immaterial and irrelevant to the substance of the motion and created unnecessary time and expense for the parties and the court" and was filed in "bad-faith" (*).  He ordered TASER to pay plaintiffs' counsel the sum of $15,000 in attorneys' fees to compensate them for the time spent responding to TASER's motion.
[LINK]

To repeat, Taser International has to pay the plaintiffs' counsel $15,000.

Excellent.

* Wiki: Bad faith (Latin: mala fides) is a legal concept in which a malicious motive on the part of a party in a lawsuit undermines their case. ...

No comments: