Inexplicable recommendation

#63: July 17, 2004, Jerry Knight, 29, Mississauga, Ontario [LINK]

Canwest News Service (13 June 2008) Brampton, Ont. - Jurors at an Ontario coroner's inquest into the death of a 29-year-old man in police custody recommended Friday the provincial government consider authorizing all front-line officers either to carry or have access to a taser. Jerry Knight, a former amateur boxer, died in the summer of 2004 less than 30 minutes after police were called to a Mississauga motel lobby by a clerk reporting an unruly guest. High on cocaine and acting erratically, officers used pepper spray and eventually a taser to try and subdue Knight who died after loosing consciousness while lying on his stomach, hog-tied in handcuffs. ... [LINK]

Note - the police in this case did have and did use a taser. Then they hog-tied the subject. And the subject then died (from something or other).

So therefore [the coroner's jury concludes], 'tasers are good.'

Huh?

There's more to the article, but none of it really satisfactorily explains the recommendation. The only thread-bare whisker of attempted logic is:

"Ron Ellis, a lawyer for Knight's family, said using a taser to immediately subdue the 29-year-old may have prevented the ensuing melee that involved more than 20 officers."

What? Based on some sort of assumption that, in spite of reportedly being high on cocaine, the subject would have reacted politely to being shocked with 50,000 volts, and thus the hog-tying would have been avoided, and thus the death (which, by the way, was attributed to everything except the taser) would have been avoided.

That's quite the series of assumptions. Almost a trifecta.

And based on this apparent nonsense, they're basically recommending a taser-quicker policy?

This recommendation is inexplicable.