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 31, 2010

Taser International - playing 'Chicken' with the US legal system

Quoting from:

Document 284
Filed 03/29/10 USDC Colorado
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Case No. 07-cv-01844-PAB-KLM

In other words, Taser not only contends that the TASER did not cause a particular death, but also that it is not capable of so causing a cardiac arrest. ... (“[T]here is no proof that the Device could cause Wilson’s death and, thus, that there was a need to warn Officer Harris or Wilson of a purported lethal characteristic with the Device.”). To the contrary, as already discussed, there is at least some evidence that the device caused Mr. Wilson’s death. ...

If the jury is convinced that the TASER did cause Mr. Wilson’s death, that implicates the sufficiency of the warning which accompanied the X26 TASER device, which read:

The X26 is a non-lethal weapon. It is designed to incapacitate a target from a safe distance without causing death or permanent injury. While the extensive medical evidence strongly supports the TASER X26 will not cause lasting aftereffects or fatality, it is important to remember the very nature of physical confrontation involves a degree of risk that someone will get hurt or may even be killed due to unforeseen circumstances and individual susceptibilities. ...

...The warning could be read to capture the events of this case, insofar as it refers to the risks attendant to physical confrontation under “unforeseen circumstances” and in light of “individual susceptibilities.” But these caveats imply that a TASER will not eliminate the risks inherent to the application of force while assuring police officers that the TASER will not cause fatality” independently of preexisting risks.

Geesh. It's almost as if Taser International was being managed by children. (Ah, oh, sorry...) They're running their company the same way that a 19-year-old male would operate a high-performance motorcycle. They're playing 'Chicken' with the American legal system. Dumb. Dumb dumb dumb.

How much ink would it have required to properly warn the users?

No comments: