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.

Thursday, July 21, 2011

Random thoughts - Hubris comes home to Taser International

A federal jury awarded $10 million against TASER International Inc. for the wrongful death of a teenager who died after being shocked in the chest by a TASER. The jury found that the company failed to warn that discharging the device near the heart could cause cardiac arrest. The model in question was the X26 ECD. [all over the news]

The long-term impact of this finding is huge.

As critics of Taser International have been stating (the obvious) for years, tasers are perfectly capable of causing or contributing to death. Taser International has systematically (and deceptively) denied these risks for many years.

The case of Darryl Turner is one of the clearest examples. He was tasered directly in the chest, which killed him.

The scum at Taser International, and they are the worst type of scum, will continue to deny these risks, while simultaneously adding legal warnings to the fine print.

They will file appeals, primarily as a stalling tactic. They're madly trying to enter other markets (over-priced phone apps, and VASTLY over-priced ear-cams). I suspect that the timing isn't going to work out for them. Their total potential liability exceeds the market valuation of their company by several times.

Their liability insurance payments are probably going to increase. $6M for ONE case? Do the math. Hundreds and hundreds of taser associated deaths.

Their most-recent legal record isn't anything to be proud of. They've lost several significant cases.

Plaintiff lawyers should consider getting some subpoenas on the "private" information held by the insurance carriers. I don't believe that there is any priviledge in the insurance client-provider relationship.

No comments: