PDA

View Full Version : Judge rules for Taser in cause-of-death decisions


chp7747
05-03-2008, 04:23 AM
http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2008/05/02/20080502taser0503.html


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. http://gcirm.azcentral.gcion.com/RealMedia/.ads/adstream_lx.ads/www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2008/05/02/20080502taser0503.html/1557044275/ArticleFlex_1/OasDefault/dream_palace_zag_apr08_300_art/dp-300.html/31383735326266623438313331333830?_RM_EMPTY_
"We will hold people accountable and responsible (http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2008/05/02/20080502taser0503.html#) 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 (http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2008/05/02/20080502taser0503.html#) 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 (http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2008/05/02/20080502taser0503.html#) 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."

Reach the reporter at robert.anglen@arizonarepublic.com (robert.anglen@arizonarepublic.com) or (602) 444-8694.

Broham
05-03-2008, 05:40 PM
I'm glad to see the courts are making people take responsibility for their actions.

FlyWhiteGuy
06-09-2008, 05:04 PM
Newest Taser Incident doesn't go Taser International's way

Taser held responsible in Salinas death

Jury awards family $6 million, exonerates Salinas police
By JIM JOHNSON
Herald Salinas Bureau
Article Last Updated: 06/07/2008 07:41:49 AM PDT


A federal jury has held Taser International responsible for the death of a Salinas man in U.S. District Court in San Jose on Friday, and awarded his family more than $6 million in punitive and compensatory damages. An attorney for the family called the verdict a "landmark decision," and indicated that it was the first time Taser International had been held responsible for a death or injury linked to its product.
But the jury exonerated Salinas police, including four officers, in the death of 40-year-old Robert Heston Jr. on Feb. 20, 2005. Heston died a day after being shocked repeatedly by officers using Tasers. An autopsy found that Heston died from a combination of methamphetamine intoxication, an enlarged heart due to long-term drug abuse, and Taser shocks.
Heston's parents, Betty Lou and Robert Sr., and their daughter sued Taser International. They alleged the company failed to properly warn users that its product could be dangerous, and even lethal, when used repeatedly in conjunction with chest compressions and on people under the influence of drugs.
The family alleged wrongful death, assault and battery, and negligence in their suit against the Salinas Police Department and officers Juan Ruiz, James Godwin, Lek Livingston and Michael Dominici.
The six-person jury found that Arizona-based stun-gun manufacturer Taser International should have more effectively warned police that Taser shocks were potentially dangerous. Salinas police testified during the trial that they were not warned that the shocks could be dangerous.
A possible precedent

Plaintiffs attorney John Burton said the verdict is precedent setting, noting that this was the first time a jury found Tasers are dangerous when used too often.
"We're overjoyed," Burton said.
According to Burton, the verdict included $5.2 million in punitive damages, and $1.021 million in compensatory damages. The jury found that the victim was 85 percent at fault, resulting in an apportioned final damages award.
Co-counsel Peter Williamson said the Heston family was "absolutely overwhelmed and extremely proud that they stood up for their son and brother."
Williamson said he spoke to three jurors, including the jury foreman, after the decision. He said the jury agreed with the "crux of our case," that Taser International should have made more of an effort to warn people about their product once they realized it was potentially dangerous, perhaps even e-mailing all its customers.
"They should have sent out a warning and they didn't," he said.
Burton said he still believes Salinas police should have been held accountable, but understood the jury's rationale.
"Taser continued to say their product was safe," he said.
City Attorney Vanessa Vallarta said in a statement, "We are pleased and relieved by the verdict. This is a sad and tragic case. The jury affirmed that our officers did exactly what they were trained to do in the course of a very violent episode."
Contacted later by phone, Vallarta said the verdict "certainly raises questions" about the use of Tasers and the city would be evaluating their use.
The decision "does put the state of the law somewhat in flux on this," she said. "In light of current scientific evidence, there may be a need for a change in procedures."

No big changes planned

Salinas Police Chief Daniel Ortega said his department wouldn't make any major changes in its Taser use and training procedures, despite the verdict finding that Tasers can be dangerous. Ortega said he was "elated" that his department was exonerated and called his officers "heroes" in the incident. He expressed doubt about the verdict against Taser International and said he expected the company to appeal the decision.
"I have absolutely no intention of not using Tasers," Ortega said. "It's not going to change a whole lot."
Ortega said he would keep trying to purchase Taser cams, which videotape incidents when Tasers are used, and suggested that if the officers had been equipped with the Taser cams the trial never would have occurred.
Salinas police responded to Heston Sr.'s Rodeo Avenue home in 2005 after a friend called 911 to report that Heston Jr. was behaving violently.
In an attempt to subdue agitated Heston Jr., who was later found to have high levels of methamphetamine in his system, officers shocked him repeatedly with Tasers. Some shocks were administered after Heston Jr. was held down by several officers.
When Heston Jr. began turning blue, the officers started CPR and he was raced to Natividad Medical Center. But he never regained consciousness and died the next day.
Burton contended that Heston Jr. was shocked 30 times.
Taser International representatives did not offer comment on the decision.


Super Lame!!! I guess it was just a matter of time before someone would "articulate" their way around this and blame the Taser.

So, does this mean that once Taser Int'l warns us of the dangers of multiple hits from the taser, we could be held responsible for the person's death? How many hits is too many? Oh boy :doh: Maybe next training day I'll request to be hit 10 times in a row, and if I survive then that'll be my limit for other people too. :lol:

Chippysgt
06-09-2008, 06:55 PM
I am guessing Tazar International is a long way from ponying up that verdict. I am thinking that verdict will be on the way to the appeals court before you can say Joseph Scalia............I hope it gets overturned and they don't get anything.
I get mad when some puke gets dispatched and the media has the family on TV saying was a great guy the loser was.............

Keep on stinging them men!!!

Stargrl
06-09-2008, 07:30 PM
I continue to be amazed. I recall hearing this on the radio, it went something along the lines of the 'victim' being naked and on meth as well as having a pre-existing heart condition. I am incredulous that the jury still thinks Taser International is 15% responsible! As far as Taser putting out a warning on not 'over-shocking' people who are on drugs... is this along the lines of an officer being "tsk-tsk'd" by the news anchor for shooting a 'victim' who is pointing a gun at their head without ascertaining whether that weapon is loaded or not? I have never read of a Taser-involved death that didn't mention as an aside that the 'victim' was on drugs. Maybe we should hunt down the drug-dealer?

iakona
06-10-2008, 06:37 AM
I have never read of a Taser-involved death that didn't mention as an aside that the 'victim' was on drugs. Maybe we should hunt down the drug-dealer?

What a concept! Obviously the defense got the jury they were looking for. Apparently we are to ask the "victim" if he/she is on drugs before we taze. Poor victim :doubt:

quaylie
06-10-2008, 11:37 AM
I was glad to see most of the officers in briefing carrying tasers when I did my ride along yesterday.

Slim
06-10-2008, 11:19 PM
The taser (CEW) is the best tool law enforcement has recived in most of our life times. Less officers hurt, less suspects hurt, less suspects killed, it's an awesome tool.

I've used it 3 times. Each time prevented me from going hands on with someone again. My last hands on experienced resulted in a sprained/cracked right hand, nice cut and later scar on my forehead and a reflection on the incident everytime someone decides to be a jackass.

Tasers rock!

CHPn00b
06-10-2008, 11:57 PM
Unsure if the officers are allowed to answer this question, and if not, please ignore...

have you volunteered to be tased in a controlled environment? I see the LEO videos on Youtube all the time of officers participating in a voluntary taze and as you all know, the results are remarkable on how well these tasers work.

One of the officers I took a ride-along with mentioned he had a "dry taze" which is without the prongs being shot at you.

Just curious.

iakona
06-11-2008, 07:27 AM
Unsure if the officers are allowed to answer this question, and if not, please ignore...

have you volunteered to be tased in a controlled environment? I see the LEO videos on Youtube all the time of officers participating in a voluntary taze and as you all know, the results are remarkable on how well these tasers work.

One of the officers I took a ride-along with mentioned he had a "dry taze" which is without the prongs being shot at you.

Just curious.

Just for info: It's called a "drive stun". At no point are the probes wet, so noone gets a "wet taze". I do agree, there are remarkable results with the taser.

CHPn00b
06-11-2008, 09:11 AM
Just for info: It's called a "drive stun". At no point are the probes wet, so noone gets a "wet taze". I do agree, there are remarkable results with the taser.

thanks for the clarification! I must have misheard the officer :wink:

dw
06-11-2008, 05:26 PM
have you volunteered to be tased in a controlled environment? Yes, many of us have experienced either the "full ride" or a drive stun.

Mac
06-12-2008, 05:50 AM
Yes, many of us have experienced either the "full ride" or a drive stun.
....or both.

Gittinready
06-12-2008, 12:53 PM
and either or sucks

welfern
06-12-2008, 08:26 PM
The longest five seconds of your life.

CHPUSMC
06-13-2008, 10:50 AM
So, does this mean that once Taser Int'l warns us of the dangers of multiple hits from the taser, we could be held responsible for the person's death? How many hits is too many? Oh boy :doh: Maybe next training day I'll request to be hit 10 times in a row, and if I survive then that'll be my limit for other people too. :lol:

I'm sure ASP will give us a warning also that repeatedly striking someone with an ASP can cause death.

I wonder if his Meth dealer told him "This Sh!@ can kill you or force officers to kill you because you will be whacked out of your skull when you use is". If his meth dealer would be held responsible for his death would he be slapped with a $6mil settlement? NO. They only sue people with big pockets and not the real ones responsible.

Why not sue Exxon Mobile next? If they wouldn't have provided the gas to the Salinas Police Department, they couldn't have driven their patrol car over to the suspects house to so they could murder him...now that's where the $$$ is at.