Tasered Polish Man

[Oleg Bach]

Most likely because you were at the receiving end of it.

You are the fool if you think you can infer the motivations of a man who was clearly not in his right mind from a video. You also conveniently choose to ignore the fact that the only audio from the initial contact captured on the tape was an officer asking politely "How are you sir?". A statement that demonstrates that the RCMP officers approached the man quite civilly. We don't know what was said after that because it was not on the tape. But that does not seem to stop you from concocting a bizarre fantasy that suits your prejudices.

I don't like Polish people - didn't they go Catholic while the Ukraine went orthodox? I don't care if the schism is 700 years old - a grudge is a grudge...personally - I believe we should wire up all the copper pumbing in Warsaw and send in a billion volts at bath time....so - when do the Poles bath...we have to make sure the energy is not wasted - I am pretty conservative when it comes to conservationism....come on - just a jolt...not for to long...

That reminds me of when I was a kid and my older brother would be in the bath tub at the cottage...I would rattle the plumbing and he would say "hey what are you doing?" - I would say "hooking up some wires and going to plug them in" - boy could you hear the water spashing about as he launched himself out of the tub - OK - so I HAD a dark sense of humour - so what?

[Riverwind]

I heard very clearly:"CAN I TASER HIM" as they came in. Second 6?

BS.

Here is the video on Youtube: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=QPCgwCS3viQ

The officer says "How are you sir?" to Dziekanski at 6:22

Your quote "CAN I TASER HIM" does not show up anywhere.

As I said before: your opinion is not based on fact. It is simply a bizarre fantasy that you have created because it suits your prejudices.

[jbg]

...dellusion is the disease that should be addressed - and that mental illness - stretches from the crack addict on the corner right up to the Oval Office.

Wow, how profound.

You're "slur of the day" against Bush?

[Guest American Woman]

BS.

Here is the video on Youtube: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=QPCgwCS3viQ

The officer says "How are you sir?" to Dziekanski at 6:22

Your quote "CAN I TASER HIM" does not show up anywhere.

As I said before: your opinion is not based on fact. It is simply a bizarre fantasy that you have created because it suits your prejudices.

I have to say, I find the responses in this thread both amazing-- and scary. It's unbelievable the conclusions some have come to, stating "facts" that are not facts at all along the way-- while the actual facts seem to mean little. It truly reminds me of the lynch mob mentality that I thought we had left behind. But most amazing of all, these people think that they are the 'reasonable,' enlightened thinkers. Scary indeed.

Edited November 18, 2007 by American Woman

[Oleg Bach]

Wow, how profound.

You're "slur of the day" against Bush?

What are you going to do..beat me up because I point out the fact that the super privledged and rich are not all that smart, just rich? Personally I like Mr. Bush...as far as the orgainization that took over the White House...well they did get a bit dellusional wouldn't you say - and shall I mention lack of vision as far as the outcome of their actions! Don't be such a sensitive sissy my friend. You have this impression that I am some sort of lefty hater nut bar..I am not...what I do disapprove of is treating a nation like it's your latest aquisition and it's just another company of many, just a real big one...Now Ricky Chaney is a bit of a scoundrel...and there is no denying the fact that his aggression and horribly uncontrolable quiet temper led to some poor moves. Please - no more mentions of me slurring the President of the greatest empire on earth.

I like to be creative and reckless at times and yes I do parrot things and yes I do pander - I will try to shake the useless habit...so go easy on me - I'm just a boy.

[jbg]

what the police have done in this case is indefensible. Any who has seen the video (and isn't a blatent political hack) would understand this.

Oh really now. Everyone waves a chair around in an airport?

[luvacuppajoe]

The video does *not* show what he is doing with his hands nor does it show his face or anything the police officers might have said before then. Your claim that 'he was clearly complying' is not supported by the evidence in the video. I am sure this is the position that the officers will take in the inquiry.

As I said, the video does not show everything. The man was large compared to the officers and holding something that could be used a weapon. The officers were also told in training that tasers are safer than other tactics that they might use in situation like this. If you really have to find somebody to blame then you should look to the bureaucrats that told the police officers that tasers were 'safer than other tactics'.

This is another piece of misinformation in the press. These rules were recently put in place by the BC Police Complaints commissioner: http://www.opcc.bc.ca/FAQS/FAQS.htm. This office has *no jurisdiction* over the RCMP who have their own police complaints commissioner. So the statement that the officers did not follow the rules that they were told to follow is *false*. The police commisioner of the RCMP has made the same claim.

Actually the video does show that his hands are down at his sides when he's tased the first time.

As for what position the police will take in the inquiry(ies) remains to be seen but to date they have stated a number of known inacuracies including that there were 3 officers on the scene when we know there were 4, as well as their contention that pepper spray was not appropriate because of innoncent bystanders when we can see for ourselves that they were alone with the man in an enclosed area separated from everyone else by a glass wall.

Yes, those recommendations were from the BC Police Complaints Commission, however that review was conducted at the request of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police to the Canadian Police Research Centre, a partnership which includes the RCMP. It appears that the CPRC tapped the BCPCC to conduct the review but that the RCMP was a stakeholder in that report.

There's a link to the report here.

[luvacuppajoe]

Oh really now. Everyone waves a chair around in an airport?

What I find amazing in the post-9/11 world is that an agitated man could hang around the baggage carrousel for the length of time that he did, throw things around and try to barricade himself with objects and that no one from the airport authority got a translater to talk to him, even though translation services are supposedly available around the clock.

There are so many bizarre aspects to the whole story.

[Oleg Bach]

What I find amazing in the post-9/11 world is that an agitated man could hang around the baggage carrousel for the length of time that he did, throw things around and try to barricade himself with objects and that no one from the airport authority got a translater to talk to him, even though translation services are supposedly available around the clock.

There are so many bizarre aspects to the whole story.

The whole matter is sad. Seems that the man was unhappy...and snapped - the last thing he expected was to be dead moments later. I am sure no matter how weird he acted if he would have known what was to come - he would have gathered his senses and composure...no one expects to die having a tantrum at the airport...actually a heart breaking occurance - for the man - his relatives and for the poor dumb founded police officers...no one came out on top here...all paniced and all payed dearly...it's tragic for everyone involved. It was a mistake.

[Guest American Woman]

The video does *not* show what he is doing with his hands nor does it show his face or anything the police officers might have said before then.

Actually the video does show that his hands are down at his sides when he's tased the first time.

You cannot see his hands. They are behind the counter, or whatever it is. They are not visible. His arms are down at his sides when he is tased, but you cannot see his hands. You cannot see if they are empty, holding something, or what he is doing with them. A lot of that video is obstructed.

[Oleg Bach]

Actually the video does show that his hands are down at his sides when he's tased the first time.

You cannot see his hands. They are behind the counter, or whatever it is. They are not visible. His arms are down at his sides when he is tased, but you cannot see his hands. You cannot see if they are empty, holding something, or what he is doing with them. A lot of that video is obstructed.

You guys work it out .... I don't want to view the video - might find it to disturbing.

[Moxie]

I have to say, I find the responses in this thread both amazing-- and scary. It's unbelievable the conclusions some have come to, stating "facts" that are not facts at all along the way-- while the actual facts seem to mean little. It truly reminds me of the lynch mob mentality that I thought we had left behind. But most amazing of all, these people think that they are the 'reasonable,' enlightened thinkers. Scary indeed.

Well stated American Women, the lynch mob mentality is a scary thing indeed.

First this man was causing a "Public Disturbance" a crime in Canada albeit a Summary Offense. When he started throwing things he committed another Crime, Damaging Public Property. When he refused to stop damaging public property as instructed he was in fact "Resisting Arrest". Three crimes had been commited, yes there were mitigating circumstances but honestly the Cops could not be aware that the poor bloke had been a virtual hostage at the Airport could they. I doubt the 911 call desribed in verbal detail what had transpired over a period of almost 48 hours. We still don't have all the facts and until those facts are public I will not condemn these cops for doing what they are mandated to do. Serve and protect the public, a stapler can be a weapon, ever get a staple shot into your forhead? Dah it hurts, a chair upside the head can kill a person.

Let the lynching commence.

[Riverwind]

Yes, those recommendations were from the BC Police Complaints Commission, however that review was conducted at the request of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police to the Canadian Police Research Centre, a partnership which includes the RCMP. It appears that the CPRC tapped the BCPCC to conduct the review but that the RCMP was a stakeholder in that report.

The report's language is much milder than what was reported in the media:

We can, however, suggest general guidelines, recognizing that they are not iron-clad; rather they are general principles which will be diverse in their application.

That said, it will take an inquiry to determine exactly what these officers were trained to do and it is not reasonable to assume the findings of this report were communicated effectively to rank and file officers.

[shavluk]

BS.

Here is the video on Youtube: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=QPCgwCS3viQ

The officer says "How are you sir?" to Dziekanski at 6:22

Your quote "CAN I TASER HIM" does not show up anywhere.

As I said before: your opinion is not based on fact. It is simply a bizarre fantasy that you have created because it suits your prejudices.

well you must be deaf then as its here at 5.58

http://www.cbc.ca/mrl3/8752/bc/ondemand/vi...VIDEO.wmv\

Stop being a fool

and yours at 5:59 ,, "can i taser him " yes"

Edited November 18, 2007 by shavluk

[Carinthia]

Even though I believe that this incident was completely unnessary by the cops, I do still think that tasers should and can be used by law enforcement. Much more training is required and limitations imposed regarding their use on the general public. Tasers can have a useful place in an increasing violent society. The lack of training for the cops and the negligence of the airport staff are more to blame in this incident than anything else. If serious criminals are tasered and die, then that's the risk they take for breaking the law and resisting arrest. For one thing, cops should be trained not to jump on top of someone who has just been tased. This is overkill and doesn't give the recipient a chance to comply. Writhing around in pain on the floor is quite different than resisting arrest. Tasers should be used as a last resort only. Not charge in, rush up, stun someone, and then everybody jump on top of them to boot. The people who were seriously out of control in this situation, were the cops.

Edited November 18, 2007 by Carinthia

[Guest American Woman]

What I find amazing in the post-9/11 world is that an agitated man could hang around the baggage carrousel for the length of time that he did, throw things around and try to barricade himself with objects and that no one from the airport authority got a translater to talk to him, even though translation services are supposedly available around the clock.

There are so many bizarre aspects to the whole story.

I agree.

It is totally amazing that nobody did anything about him for that length of time. When one considers the amount of time he was flying, add to that his time in the airport, he must have gone for hours on end with no food or sleep-- on top of going through nicotine withdrawl. He does appear to be totally out of it in the video, acting irrationally, breathing hard. I wonder why no one who speaks Polish has come out to tell the media what he was saying. Maybe that would shed some light on his actions.

After watching the video repeatedly, it does appear as if someone says something about tasers before the RCMP enter the room. Maybe they thought they were going to be met by someone who was uncontrollable. We don't know what the call they received said. It does appear as if the tasing was unnecessary. But again, not having heard the other side of the story, it's difficult to say, and more difficult to say if their actions were inappropriate. "Not being necessary," if that was the case, doesn't automatically make their actions "inappropriate."

[Riverwind]

and yours at 5:59 ,, "can i taser him " yes"

Sounds like he is checking on his options. The proper interpretation of that comment would require knowledge of what was discussed before they walked into the range of camera. And that does not change the fact that when they first approached the man they were extremely civil and used a tone a voice intended to calm him down. Nor does it change the fact that he picked up something after the police started talking to him. The act of picking up a possible weapon is a threat even if he was not waving it around in a way the camera could see. Edited November 18, 2007 by Riverwind

[jennie]

I was listening to Cross Country checkup and the issue of the translator came up over and over again. I have heard nothing from the airport authority yet.

It is said none was available "at one in the morning" when the RCMP were there. Well, what about the 10 hours before that? No answer.

One woman described how she had the same problem with students coming from Japan, having to go through immigration, baggage, all that without being able to help them or maybe even find them. She was able to contact them by phone with help from airport security.

Another woman and her husband were planning to have their teenage nieces from Chile come to visit, but now they are afraid to come. They were shocked that officer was not in jail, but still working. Frankly I am surprised if he is still working. One would think a death would warrant some recovery time.

Another said, and I wholeheartedly agree, that the coverup and backpeddalling coming from the RCMP brass is the absolute BIGGEST CONCERN.

"How can we trust them?" ... over and over.

The incident is over, and if the RCMP continues to act guilty, so be it:

It is CLEARLY time to raze the house-of-cards that Zacardelli built, imo.

... in order to be fair to every officer who is on the line everyday

... to be fair to ALL of the RCMP officers who put their lives and those of others on the line everyday.

Clean out the corruption, the pretense of infallibility, the coverup of incompetence.

WHO THE HELL TRAINED THAT OFFICER? HOW?

WHAT WERE THE PROPER PROCEDURES?

WHAT WERE THEIR ORDERS?

WHO GAVE THE ORDERS?

And why do Canadian cops use potentially deadly force on unarmed citizens in distress, seen as barbaric by other countries?

WHO THE HELL MADE THE RULES?

I watched some of the Senate hearings where Zacardelli bold-faced lied, his 2IC threw down his pen and said

"See! That's what he does ALL the time. He is not telling the truth! He does that at the office ... constantly ... and now he's doing it here!"

I heard Zacardelli say "There are no administrative transfers." and all of the many RCMP officers in the room cracked up, hissed, booed, guffawed ... (called him a liar), clearly and publicly in a Senate investigation.

We need to hear more about how this culture is being changed, how the officers morale, respect, etc. is ... all of the things that contribute to competent policing.

It is just so Canadian to sweep things under the rug.

We gotta get over that and look at ourselves squarely.

Edited November 19, 2007 by jennie

[Guest American Woman]

Sounds like he is checking on his options. The proper interpretation of that comment would require knowledge of what was discussed before they walked into the range of camera. And that does not change the fact that when they first approached the man they were extremely civil and used a tone a voice intended to calm him down. Nor does it change the fact that he picked up something after the police started talking to him. The act of picking up a possible weapon is a threat even if he was not waving it around in a way the camera could see.

You're right, of course. The proper interpretation of the comment, which isn't even totally clear, would require knowledge of the conversation leading up to the comment; one would have to know the context of which it was said. "Can I taser him" could very well mean "can I taser him if necessary."

I don't see him picking something up after the police started talking to him though. Do you actually see that?

[Oleg Bach]

Sounds like he is checking on his options. The proper interpretation of that comment would require knowledge of what was discussed before they walked into the range of camera. And that does not change the fact that when they first approached the man they were extremely civil and used a tone a voice intended to calm him down. Nor does it change the fact that he picked up something after the police started talking to him. The act of picking up a possible weapon is a threat even if he was not waving it around in a way the camera could see.

Finally got report on the video. My daughter saw the clip. She reads vison well...and tells a good story. Supposedly this man had never flow before. He was coming from Poland to live with his mum. He was absolutely exhausted and confused. Did not speak the language and could not even order a cab to get out of the place. He was a Polish hick who had never been away from home. When the police arrived there was a look of relief on his face as if "Finally some here to help me thank God".

Instantly they approached him and after the customary politeness taught in training..began to encircle the man like predators. The man at first briefly comforted by their arrival now panics and feel as if he is under attack. From what I have gathered he had not slept in over 40 hours and had been stranded at this airport for some time...as we all know it is doubtful he would have a weapon after going through security and not having left the property.

What took place was rapid..about 30 seconds of action. He was Tasered into oblivion and lay on the floor..then a call went out to tazer again the now prone and totally helpless man. Worst was that one of the officers placed a knee on his throat apply considerable presure.. The discription of the enforcers was that they seemed to be hicks also. Then as the crisis unfolded and they began to realize that something dreadfully serious had just occured - they appeared dumb founded..

So in my over view it is as if some dumb farmer arrives in a big city looking for his mum..and like a fatigued child loses his composure...and some cops arrive who are not intelligent but only the sum of their training - attack the guy like security dogs, they go on auto seeing there is not much else these dullards can do - and they kill a man - out of sheer stupidity. Not even realizing why tasers were implimented to begin with. That they were to be used EXACTLY like guns but with the hope of saving a life. Now I put to you - if they did not have tazers would they have shot the man at that point in time? I would say definitely not!

The problem here is training and attitude. It must be explained to these enforcers that the taser is a gun..and not to be used in the place of physical force eg - over powering the man and wrestling him to the ground. This was a crime of convienence..in the instant culture we live in - it was auto-apprehension..which as we can see is not perfected at present. If you do not have or can not have police officers that can handle themselves in a bar fight - then they should not be cops. Size and physical presense and strenght of character use to be a pre-requisite to being a cop..He just looked at you and you were subdued.

Now with this crazed affirmitive action and the lowering of height and body mass to please the liberally correct fairness committees that are destroying the fabric of the nation - you hire anyone that comes along - weak - stupid and without judgement - men and woman that are there for only two reasons - being a cop pays money and the work is not strenuous - secondly cowards who cowered in the school yard as kids could now have power - this is unexceptable - a man is dead because of political correctness and so-called fair employment practice - what is next - a person dying in a fire because a 100 female could not remove a person of 160 lbs for a burning building?

[Riverwind]

I don't see him picking something up after the police started talking to him though. Do you actually see that?

His hands are empty when he first walks away from the police. After he was tasered he had something in his hand. That means he must of picked up something while he standing behind that counter. The act of picking up a potential weapon could have easily be what triggered the taser but we don't know because the video does not show that. His facial expressions would also be very significant when assessing any threat and we don't see those in the camera either. That I why I think the video evidence does not support the conclusion that the man was passive and not a threat. Edited November 19, 2007 by Riverwind

[Oleg Bach]

His hands are empty when he first walks away from the police. After he was tasered he had something in his hand. That means he must of picked up something while he standing behind that counter. The act of picking up a potential weapon could have easily be what triggered the taser but we don't know because the video does not show that.

All I can say...if there were no tasers available, would the cops have shot the man? Simple question..did it look as if there was no option but to shoot the man dead? That's the only way to judge this thing. I repeat...after seeing the video and I know it is not a full visual but better than none... DID IT APPEAR THAT DEADLY FORCE WAS WARRANTED? or in the alternative - could he have been taken down by hand?

And please no more "he had something in his hand - it glistened in the sun like a chrome plated revolver...he appeared to point something...he was about to shoot - I had no choice" to para phrase the usual parroting that is bantered about when an error or intentional act of cruelty is perpetrated by law enforcement...would like to hear someones real and true judgement from what they saw - and forget cop drama TV stuff - If you were a cop - would you have shot him? Yes or no?

[bush_cheney2004]

... If you were a cop - would you have shot him? Yes or no?

You question has already been answered....the officers chose not to "shoot him" with a firearm, choosing instead to use what they believed (and were trained to believe) was non-lethal force. Perp died....it has happened something like 18 times in Canada.

[Riverwind]

All I can say...if there were no tasers available, would the cops have shot the man?

They might have used pepper spray and the man may have still died. Or they have used clubs and/or head locks and he may have still died. Leaving the guy alone in that state in an airport was simply not an option.

Simple question..did it look as if there was no option but to shoot the man dead?

That is a completely irrelevant question because tasers are not lethal weapons - a statement that is backed up by numerous scientific studies. Trying to equate a taser with a gun is simply dishonest.

DID IT APPEAR THAT DEADLY FORCE WAS WARRANTED? or in the alternative - could he have been taken down by hand?

TASERS ARE NOT DEADLY FORCE NOT MATTER HOW MUCH YOU WISH TO BE SO. In other words, the police did NOT use deadly force but the man died anyways. Most people would call that an accident. Edited November 19, 2007 by Riverwind

[Oleg Bach]

They might have used pepper spray and the man may have still died. Or they have used clubs and/or head locks and he may have still died. Leaving the guy alone in that state in an airport was simply not an option.

That is a completely irrelevant question because tasers are not lethal weapons - a statement that is backed up my numerous scientific studies. Trying to equate a taser with a gun is simply dishonest.

TASERS ARE NOT DEADLY FORCE NOT MATTER HOW MUCH YOU WISH TO BE SO. In other words, the police did not use deadly force but the man died anyways.

You sure want to and seem to need to justify tyranny. Hope that word is not to rough for you? You say they are not a lethal weapon - evidently they are in some cases. Saying you could not leave that man alone in an airport in such a state is dodging the issue. No one suggested abandoning this man who was in distress. You fail to have the humanity to understand this was not an aggressive person running about with a snapped off wine bottle ready to gouge out the throat of a baby in a stroller. All I was suggesting was grabbing the man and holding him if all else failed -

To blugeon the man with clubs was not suggested either but you did suggest it. You seem to not want to absorb the shame in the fact that the liberal idea of hireing inferour cops is a mistake...you have to face reality. Sometimes the road to hell is paved with good intentions - this could be a prime example of pushing a human being into hell needlessly - you may as well fess up my friend..it was how do they say "a boondoogle" do you understand that word?