PDA

View Full Version : Victory for Taser


katzeyze
05-05-2008, 08:13 AM
I know that many of you men and women are equipped with Tasers, just thought you'd like to know this company stands behind its product.

Judge rules for Taser in cause-of-death decisions
by Robert Anglen - May. 2, 2008 07:28 PM The Arizona Republic

Taser International has fired a warning shot at medical examiners across the country.

The Scottsdale-based stun gun manufacturer increasingly is targeting state and county medical examiners with lawsuits and lobbying efforts to reverse and prevent medical rulings that Tasers contributed to someone's death.

That effort on Friday helped lead an Ohio judge's order to remove Taser's name from three Summit County Medical Examiner autopsies that had ruled the stun gun contributed to three men's deaths.

"We will hold people accountable and responsible for untrue statements," Taser spokesman Steve Tuttle said earlier this week. "If that includes medical examiners, it includes medical examiners."Many medical examiners, who are charged with determining the official causes of death, view the Scottsdale-based company's efforts as disturbing, the spokesman for the National Association of Medical Examiners says.

"It is dangerously close to intimidation," says Jeff Jentzen, president of the National Association of Medical Examiners. "At this point, we adamantly reject the fact that people can be sued for medical opinions that they make."

In the Ohio case, the judge said the county offered no medical, scientific or electrical evidence to justify finding the stun gun was a factor in the deaths of two men in 2005 and another in 2006. Taser and the City of Akron sued the medical examiner, saying examiners in the case lacked the proper training to evaluate Tasers.

Chief Medical Examiner Lisa Kohler said that her examiners rightly concluded Taser contributed to the deaths and said county lawyers will appeal the judge's ruling.

"I would not be going forward with this if I did not believe in the rulings," she said.

The judge's order could have an immediate impact on criminal cases against five Summit County sheriff's deputies who were charged in the 2006 "homicide" of a jail inmate. Instead of homicide, the judge ordered the cause of death changed to "undetermined."

Laying a foundation

Before Friday's verdict, legal experts said Taser's victory could lay the foundation for other cases against dozens of medical examiners who have ruled that shocks from the 50,000-volt stun gun can be fatal.

Medical examiners say they're concerned that Taser's aggressive moves could have a chilling effect on doctors, preventing them from blaming Tasers for deaths even when evidence exists.

Taser still faces lawsuits from family members of victims who claim the stun gun is deadly and the company has not done proper medical research. They allege police officers are using the weapon as a compliance tool against people who do not pose significant threats.

But the company has won an impressive number of legal victories and said it has only paid out settlements in a few cases involving police officer injuries. To date, the company says more than 60 cases have been dismissed.

Taser stun guns are a fixture among police. It is used by more than 12,000 police agencies across the country, and by every major law enforcement agency in the Valley. Many police agencies credit the gun with preventing deaths and injuries to officers and suspects.

Taser maintains they are safe

Taser maintains that its guns have not caused a death or serious injury. Officials say company-funded and independent medical studies show the stun guns are safe.

More than two dozen medical examiners across the country have found the stun gun at least partly responsible in the deaths of suspects.

Since 1999, more than 300 people have died in North America following police Taser shocks. The vast majority of those deaths have not been linked to the stun gun. But medical examiners have cited the gun directly or could not rule it out as a factor in nearly 10 percent of the cases, an The Arizona Republic investigation found.

Medical examiners, who typically work for the county or state, are supposed to provide independent scientific analysis about the cause of someone's death. Their rulings are recognized by courts and the police as the official cause of death.

Taser officials have repeatedly said that medical examiners who rule against the stun gun are not qualified to judge whether a Taser was a factor in someone's death. In court disputes, it often presents opposing testimony from company representatives, doctors and medical examiners paid by the firm.

"The qualifications of a medical examiner depend on their professional and educational background as well as their level of understanding of Taser technology and the underlying effects of electricity upon the human body," Tuttle said.

The company's tactics worry Jentzen, a former medical examiner and current director of autopsy and forensics at the University of Michigan.

"I am concerned any time there is a person who is an advocate who may have a conflict of interest," he says.

Jentzen says there are few cases where companies have taken the position that coroners can't be trusted to evaluate their product's involvement in someone's death, and none so aggressively as Taser.

Taser targets rulings

In addition to Ohio, Taser sued a coroner in Indiana who had ruled that Taser caused the death of a man in 2004.

Several coroners have also reported being challenged by Taser, says Jentzen. Among them was a Cook County, Ill., medical examiner who ruled Taser shocks contributed to the death of a 54-year-old man in 2005. Taser dismissed the autopsy report as not credible and said the medical examiner was unqualified. The company demanded a judicial review.

Taser also has asked coroners to reverse opinions. An Anderson, S.C., deputy coroner said Taser representatives showed up in his office on the same day that he ruled Taser shocks contributed to a man's death in 2004.

Charlie Boseman said Taser wanted him to remove any reference to the stun gun from his report. He refused.

Coroners told to bone up

Taser officials have provided coroners reams of medical research in support of the stun gun following a death.

Tuttle says it is up to medical examiners to do the proper research, read the papers and perform tests before making a ruling on a death involving a Taser.The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported in 2007 that a county medical examiner based half of his testimony at a coroner's inquest on information supplied by Taser. The medical examiner did not disclose to a jury that he met with Taser officials and reviewed the company's literature before testifying that the stun gun's role in a death was debatable.

In Summit County, Kohler said she has received volumes of medical studies and literature from Taser, all suggesting that the rulings in her cases are wrong.

In Maricopa County, at least 10 people have died following police Taser strikes since 2002. In a 2004 case, the medical examiner's office ruled that Taser shocks contributed to a Mesa man's death. Autopsy reports were unavailable for review this week by The Republic.

Neither Chief Medical Examiner Mark Fischione nor Taser would discuss what, if any, involvement the company had with medical examiners performing autopsies in the cases.

Fischione did not respond to repeated interview requests.

Taser for years touted autopsy reports as proof of the stun gun's safety. Company officials told police departments and shareholders that no medical examiner had cited the stun gun in an autopsy report. But The Republic's investigation found that 27 medical examiners concluded that the gun caused, contributed to or could not be ruled out in deaths.

'Excited delirium' blamed in Taser-related deaths

Taser advocates an alternative cause-of-death scenario called excited delirium. The condition, which is not recognized as a diagnosis in official medical manuals, is used to describe deaths of suspects who become so agitated by drugs, psychosis or poor health that their bodies shut down during struggles with police.

Excited delirium has been cited in police custody-death cases for decades. It is now being blamed more and more by medical examiners for deaths that occur following a police Taser strike, including at least one in Maricopa County in recent years.

Taser has funded excited delirium studies and has been involved in promoting its research. The company maintains that excited delirium is a valid syndrome, and some doctors say it will gain acceptance as more research is conducted.

Mark Schlosberg, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California who has worked on several Taser cases, argued that excited delirium has become a convenient way to explain away deaths that occur at the hands of police.

"There are plenty of medical examiners who are very skeptical of excited delirium," he added. "But that is not what Taser is promoting . . . They attribute almost all of the deaths following a Taser strike to excited delirium."

Phreaxer
05-05-2008, 09:00 AM
what's the problem? cops don't go around tazing random people and they try to handle the situation without using force whenever possible. If you want to stand there and argue with the cops, then you might get tazed... when you might get tazed, you could die. it's a risk you take by tango'ing with the cops.

ateamer
05-05-2008, 12:35 PM
Good that Taser is making the courts hold medical examiners accountable for their opinions.

IMachU
05-05-2008, 12:47 PM
Although Taser has conducted (and been involved in) much medical research on the use of the Taser product, I'd like to see independent study conducted. That way it removes all doubt as to who is paying for the results to appear on the subject. Independent review is the best thing that can happen. I truly believe in the Taser and carry one all the time while on duty. I've used it to save an officer from getting stabbed. I have ordered it's use in several instances. It is one of the best non-lethal tools we have. That's why it should be studied without intervention of either side of the argument. To remove all legal and professional doubt.

LA DEP
05-05-2008, 08:23 PM
I wouldn't get that excited this case is heading to the Supreme Court.

Only if they decide to hear it.........

83cane
05-05-2008, 09:09 PM
Although Taser has conducted (and been involved in) much medical research on the use of the Taser product, I'd like to see independent study conducted. That way it removes all doubt as to who is paying for the results to appear on the subject. Independent review is the best thing that can happen. I truly believe in the Taser and carry one all the time while on duty. I've used it to save an officer from getting stabbed. I have ordered it's use in several instances. It is one of the best non-lethal tools we have. That's why it should be studied without intervention of either side of the argument. To remove all legal and professional doubt.

You used it (TASER) to save another officer from being stabbed.? Obviously I was not there, therfore, I am not qualified to judge. However, why in a deadly force situation would you chose to use a TASER instead of a firearm?

IMachU
05-05-2008, 09:21 PM
It was in a mental institution where we had to lock our guns up before we entered. The suspect's weapon was a shiv (sharpened spoon). Otherwise, the outcome would have been a lot different.

ateamer
05-05-2008, 09:41 PM
How will the case wind up in front of the Supreme Court? A case won't wind its way up there just because someone didn't like the verdict. Cases are appealed on Constitutional grounds. There have to be actual grounds to appeal a verdict or ruling, not that the loser wasn't satisfied.

83cane
05-05-2008, 09:41 PM
Although Taser has conducted (and been involved in) much medical research on the use of the Taser product, I'd like to see independent study conducted. That way it removes all doubt as to who is paying for the results to appear on the subject. Independent review is the best thing that can happen. I truly believe in the Taser and carry one all the time while on duty. I've used it to save an officer from getting stabbed. I have ordered it's use in several instances. It is one of the best non-lethal tools we have. That's why it should be studied without intervention of either side of the argument. To remove all legal and professional doubt.

It was in a mental institution where we had to lock our guns up before we entered. The suspect's weapon was a shiv (sharpened spoon). Otherwise, the outcome would have been a lot different.

I gottcha brother, thank you for the response, be safe.

Smurfette_76
05-06-2008, 07:59 AM
You haven't answered Ateamer's question.

DeputySC
05-06-2008, 08:34 AM
I fully support the taser. I mean almost my whole 400 sworn officer department has been tased with no injuries and all of the our wonderful citizens who have been tased are fine. Mine has cut a few foot chases short and given me some good war stories.

However I think the actual product is junk. I am on my first taser and its only worked half the time the year ive had it. Sometimes its worked fine and sometimes it doesnt even come on like the battery is dead. Then the next day it will fire right up. I had just been issued mine a year ago. For the first month I had it, it didnt work. It was awhile before I could get a hold of the guy who issues them to us. When I took it to get another one it worked and I was told to keep it. A week later it did it again and I took it back and got a new battery and it worked for awhile..

Fast foward to a week ago, its doing the same thing. All I have done with my taser is test it by fireing a 5 second burst before every shift or every other shift so I have done nothing to mess the memory or anything up. Another officer on my shift has the same problem with his. I dont know how many others have this issue.

I know my post is off topic, but I saw a taser post and wanted to vent. I cant wait to see what taser does when I have to fill out one of those use of force reports taser wants us to complete and send in and say that it failed to work.

IMachU
05-06-2008, 11:59 AM
No, the USSC hears cases that have prior decisions based on legal flaws (or sometimes it's a politically hot issue).

Smurfette_76
05-06-2008, 12:11 PM
No, the USSC hears cases that have prior decisions based on legal flaws (or sometimes it's a politically hot issue).


Yep yep yep...

J. Slacker
05-06-2008, 12:51 PM
Because it's a stupid question... cases that get heard by the Supreme Court get heard because.... one side doesn't like the original verdict.

IMachU is right...there are 1000s of appellate cases that are petitioned to SCOTUS annually and about 100 (if that) are even heard. With the vast number of certs filed annually, they can only examine cases for "compelling reasons". The Taser ruling can get appealed till the cows come home...it may not necessarily matter to the Justices.

I'm not saying that the case will or will not go before the SCOTUS, I'm just responding to your remark that the question was "stupid". I happen to think it's a perfectly logical question.

So why do you think it will make it the Supreme Court?

J. Slacker
05-06-2008, 01:15 PM
...................

mdrdep
05-07-2008, 04:30 AM
And the taser company is a medical expert... let's see how will this case get in front of the Supreme Court.... The taser company is making every attempt to keep from having to pay millions in wrongful death suits; The taser company is manipulating and coercing Medical examiners findings. This may be the one and only time I would support Shakedown Jackson or Sharpton efforts.

No they are not medical experts but they hire them to evaluate their product. They have conducted research using these experts and found their device safe. They are not manipulating and coercing medical examiners. They have provided them with their research and asked them to reevaluate their opinions. In some cases they have gone to court and petitioned the court for a correction when they believe the medical examiner has made a finding in error. This is in open court and fully within their legal rights. They have to date been fully succesful in this matter. Why? Because they are right.

equinox137
05-07-2008, 07:22 PM
Duplicate post.

equinox137
05-07-2008, 07:26 PM
And the taser company is a medical expert... let's see how will this case get in front of the Supreme Court.... The taser company is making every attempt to keep from having to pay millions in wrongful death suits; The taser company is manipulating and coercing Medical examiners findings. This may be the one and only time I would support Shakedown Jackson or Sharpton efforts.


That still doesn't answer the question. In order for the Supreme Court to hear this case, there has to be a "federal question." Where's the federal question?


You may be right however should a company pay any "so-called expert" enough money they will say anything...regardless of the truth.


What evidence do you have to support that kind of claim?


The taser company is also asking the medical examiners to reevaluate their opinions or face litigation... I am not to sure but it appears to be manipulation of the truth to me.


No, that's asking them to reevaluate their opinions or "we'll have a judge make you reevaluate your opinions". Since there is a large contrast between fact and opinion, there is no manipulation of the "truth" here.


What is really at stake here is not the taser itself, its who pays the millions in wrongful death suits... the taser company or the officer(s) and city.


Yup.....which is why the company is within its rights to head that crap off at the pass.

itnstalln
05-08-2008, 01:43 PM
No they are not medical experts but they hire them to evaluate their product. They have conducted research using these experts and found their device safe. They are not manipulating and coercing medical examiners. They have provided them with their research and asked them to reevaluate their opinions. In some cases they have gone to court and petitioned the court for a correction when they believe the medical examiner has made a finding in error. This is in open court and fully within their legal rights. They have to date been fully succesful in this matter. Why? Because they are right.

The tobacco industry was able to fund their own "research" for years only to conclude cigarettes pose no health threat?!?

Taser can conduct all the research they want, and I hope they do a lot because that will allow them to make the best possible product. Taser cannot however make and an end all statement about the safety of their products unless a 3rd party can reproduce their findings.

mdrdep
05-08-2008, 08:04 PM
JonesZ no jury decision was overturned just the findings of an individual medical examiner.

Installn you are right about tobacco and yes it could be possible for Taser to do the same thing. That being said however, I believe they are trying to avoid hiring yes men experts like a lot of attorneys do to proove their case. I think Taser actually wants to market a good product that saves lives, as opposed to the tobacco industry that was just trying to protect a profit margin. The problem right now is their is no independent party that has undertaken the task.

Reiland
05-08-2008, 09:40 PM
Taser still faces lawsuits from family members of victims who claim the stun gun is deadly and the company has not done proper medical research.

So, let me get this straight. They're upset their family member died after being tased, instead of after being SHOT? :rolleyes: Would they then be going after the cartridge manufacturers?

They allege police officers are using the weapon as a compliance tool against people who do not pose significant threats.

Isn't that a basic "use of force" question? These same people would probably be suing the department for delivering a well-deserved beatdown if the taser was not available and the officer(s) involved chose not to shoot. And yeah, no conflict of interest there. Honestly, how many people can't see the fact that their family member is a "significant threat" even when they've got the bruises to prove it, or have had money or property stolen from them, or know they're selling drugs, or much worse...but Jimmy still doesn't pose a "significant threat" to the cop threatening to bust him... :rolleyes: I would be interested to read the full reports of what occurred prior to the tasing.

GO, TASER!!!