Tasered Polish Man

[jbg]

Bear in mind police are often young men, a group often given to doing stupid things. Also bear in mind that police in previous instances have been known to give orders which were not lawful, to assume a power to direct which did not exist in law.

True, but give a choice, I don't want people making their own determinations on the lawfulness of police conduct.

[jdobbin]

True, but give a choice, I don't want people making their own determinations on the lawfulness of police conduct.

No, we need an independent law enforcement review agency to review the tactics and a coroner's inquest to see if Taser's kill in certain circumstances.

[Fortunata]

No, we need an independent law enforcement review agency to review the tactics and a coroner's inquest to see if Taser's kill in certain circumstances.

A civilian independent law enforcement review agency.

[Wilber]

It's unreasonable to expect people to act like robots and sheep. That will never happen and it's up to the trained cop to use common sense. They are supposed to be trained to defuse a situation, not incite and inflame with unnessary bullying. This guy obviously ran into one of those hard-assed, abusive cops, who don't give a damn, that you speak of, the kind that people are protesting about.

Glad you've got it all figured out. Why do we need all those expensive inquiries, courts, judges, lawyers, coroners and their irritating time consuming procedures. We'll just call you cause it's all so obvious.

[Carinthia]

Glad you've got it all figured out. Why do we need all those expensive inquiries, courts, judges, lawyers, coroners and their irritating time consuming procedures. We'll just call you cause it's all so obvious.

Thanks to the citizen who filmed it and seemingly was the only one in the place who displayed any common sense, it is obvious to me. Whether he died of a broken neck, the taser or some other reason remains to be seen. Without the rush to subdue, he wouldn't have died period. The computer that he threw was his own laptop. Very sad.

[Riverwind]

Thanks to the citizen who filmed it and seemingly was the only one in the place who displayed any common sense, it is obvious to me. Whether he died of a broken neck, the taser or some other reason remains to be seen. Without the rush to subdue, he wouldn't have died period. The computer that he threw was his own laptop. Very sad.

If the guy was so 'harmless' then why did the camera guy keep a safe distance. Why didn't he try to talk to the guy instead of filming him? My guess is he felt the guy was unpredicatable and dangerous. Edited November 25, 2007 by Riverwind

[Wilber]

Thanks to the citizen who filmed it and seemingly was the only one in the place who displayed any common sense, it is obvious to me. Whether he died of a broken neck, the taser or some other reason remains to be seen. Without the rush to subdue, he wouldn't have died period. The computer that he threw was his own laptop. Very sad.

Yes it is sad and you may be correct as to the cause but thankfully you and others who rush to judgment without looking all the evidence and the whole sequence of events from the time the man arrived in Vancouver until his death, won't be making those determinations.

[Oleg Bach]

Yes it is sad and you may be correct as to the cause but thankfully you and others who rush to judgment without looking all the evidence and the whole sequence of events from the time the man arrived in Vancouver until his death, won't be making those determinations.

Anesthesia - is an art - to assist a surgeon during an operation - you have to know exactly how much drug to administer - when to back off - when to increase - monitor blood pressure and make sure the patient does not suddenly die or wake up...To look at dozaged of electricity from a taser as a way to put a person under - is quite reckless - you really don't know if you are going to kill them or not - if the person administrating drugs and keeping a surgury patient asleep thought this way - the morgues under hospitals would be over flowing - electricity is not sodium petothol. You can not put someone under safely with a large electrical jolt and not expect to have a high failure rate as far as the desired results.. That's what this reminds me of ----- and anesthesiologist sqirting a gallon of dope into a patient and saying - "It's ok doc..the patient is out but might die - oh well"

[bush_cheney2004]

....That's what this reminds me of ----- and anesthesiologist sqirting a gallon of dope into a patient and saying - "It's ok doc..the patient is out but might die - oh well"

Except it's not like that at all. Fatalities are associated with cardiac arrest, current densities near the heart, or secondary muscle reaction. These are the same kinds of known risks for defibrillators, including the portable defibs being sold as "life savers".

Even a biased Taser International acknowledges the "electrical" risk:

-The charge carried by the first, also the highest, current peak of the TASER M26, or by the main phase of the TASER X26 device, is, by a wide margin, significantly below charge-based thresholds known to be capable of inducing ventricular fibrillation in humans.

- When applied to various areas of the body, only non-dangerous fractions, if any, of the voltage, current and charge generated by the M26 or the X26 TASER ECDs reach the heart.

- With a reasonable degree of medical probability, the voltage, current or charge developed by the M26 and X26 TASER devices are very unlikely to trigger fatal cardiac arrhythmias.

- With a reasonable degree of medical probability, the voltage, current or charge developed by the M26 and X26 TASER devices are sufficient to activate motor nerves involved in temporary neuromuscular incapacitation, but are not sufficient, by a very wide margin, to produce skeletal muscle damage.

-Theoretical upper limits for critical risk levels associated with use of TASER ECDs are lower than risks estimated for daily or recreational activities such as crossing a street, or swimming, than probabilities of death during car accidents, or than risks accepted by clinical use of United States Federal Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medical devices.

http://www.taser.com/research/Science/Page...strubition.aspx

Edited November 25, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[Carinthia]

Yes it is sad and you may be correct as to the cause but thankfully you and others who rush to judgment without looking all the evidence and the whole sequence of events from the time the man arrived in Vancouver until his death, won't be making those determinations.

Well Wilber, I have no doubt that the outcome to this whole thing will go in your favour.

[guyser]

Anesthesia - is an art - to assist a surgeon during an operation - you have to know exactly how much drug to administer - when to back off - when to increase - monitor blood pressure and make sure the patient does not suddenly die or wake up...To look at dozaged of electricity from a taser as a way to put a person under - is quite reckless - you really don't know if you are going to kill them or not - if the person administrating drugs and keeping a surgury patient asleep thought this way - the morgues under hospitals would be over flowing - electricity is not sodium petothol. You can not put someone under safely with a large electrical jolt and not expect to have a high failure rate as far as the desired results.. That's what this reminds me of ----- and anesthesiologist sqirting a gallon of dope into a patient and saying - "It's ok doc..the patient is out but might die - oh well"

Dont bring Doctors into this, they kill more people a year than than Tazers ever will.

[Oleg Bach]

Except it's not like that at all. Fatalities are associated with cardiac arrest, current densities near the heart, or secondary muscle reaction. These are the same kinds of known risks for defibrillators, including the portable defibs being sold as "life savers".

Even a biased Taser International acknowledges the "electrical" risk:

-The charge carried by the first, also the highest, current peak of the TASER M26, or by the main phase of the TASER X26 device, is, by a wide margin, significantly below charge-based thresholds known to be capable of inducing ventricular fibrillation in humans.

- When applied to various areas of the body, only non-dangerous fractions, if any, of the voltage, current and charge generated by the M26 or the X26 TASER ECDs reach the heart.

- With a reasonable degree of medical probability, the voltage, current or charge developed by the M26 and X26 TASER devices are very unlikely to trigger fatal cardiac arrhythmias.

- With a reasonable degree of medical probability, the voltage, current or charge developed by the M26 and X26 TASER devices are sufficient to activate motor nerves involved in temporary neuromuscular incapacitation, but are not sufficient, by a very wide margin, to produce skeletal muscle damage.

-Theoretical upper limits for critical risk levels associated with use of TASER ECDs are lower than risks estimated for daily or recreational activities such as crossing a street, or swimming, than probabilities of death during car accidents, or than risks accepted by clinical use of United States Federal Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medical devices.

http://www.taser.com/research/Science/Page...strubition.aspx

Will say it again - to shock a person into unconsciousness needs that there be an injury - It is impossible to inflict a black out without compromising the persons well being. Law enforcement looking to please a small segment of society that is fearfull and paranoid and cowardly - who see anything that is remotely abarant behviour are terrified and want the oddness immediately stopped. This social cowardice is the issue that should be addressed - Why are people becoming such chicken shits? Where is the confidence in the individual - an old thing called bravery? Well heeled and privledge people will sit in the comfort of their upscale house and cheer - "shock those unwashed beggars in the streets - they frighten me" - It's just so eletist and pitiful...why don't we supply tazers for judges - have a taser "operator" in every court room who is versed in the charter of rights and freedoms - when a judge blatantly abuses the charter with a bias and corrupt ruling - the "operator" (highly trained in safe taser use) Zapps some common sense and loyality to the public into the judge...now that would be a useful thing - and if the odd judge - expired ...we could have a proper investigation by the other judges.

[luvacuppajoe]

Just came across this article regarding "excited delirium" and taser policy-- RCMP revised taser policy to allow multiple jolts-- Excerpts (emphasis mine):

Three months before Robert Dziekanski was tasered, the RCMP adopted a change in force protocol that allows officers to fire multiple shocks to control people under certain circumstances.

Police say medical evidence shows that, without tasers, prolonged and dangerous struggles occur with people suffering from what they term "excited delirium." It prompted the force to release new rules in August allowing officers to use tasers multiple times to more quickly gain control.

The RCMP define excited delirium as a potentially fatal "state of extreme mental and physiological excitement that is characterized by extreme agitation, hyperthermia, hostility, exceptional strength and endurance without apparent fatigue."

Until August, officers trained to use stun guns were cautioned to avoid using them more than once because of concerns about health effects.

However, the force's belief that excited-delirium symptoms can escalate and cause death outweighed their worries about the impact of multiple shocks.

....RCMP familiar with the incident have hinted that the officers who responded believed him to fit that category.

One of the RCMP's trainers told The Globe and Mail that tasers are the "most humane way" to rein in people believed to be suffering from mental distress.

"Someone in a full-blown excited-delirium event cannot respond to you when you try to negotiate with them," Corporal Gregg Gilles, one of the RCMP's taser trainers based in British Columbia, said.

"We're telling officers if they think they're dealing with an excited-delirium event, if a second [taser] application will allow you to get them under control, use of a taser is best."

Officers are also taught that if they cannot handcuff a person they think is suffering from excited delirium a few seconds after the first taser shot, they should shoot again rather than resort to other methods of force, Cpl. Gilles said.

So it sounds as if the officers were likely simply following established procedure, in which case the procedure should be under question. The officers, if following established procedure, did nothing wrong. Again, the judgement/accusations/conclusions (murderers, executioners, etc) are mind boggling. I don't imagine the man's death was easy for the officers to deal with in the first place. The world judgement, on top of it, must be terrible.

Reminds me of the pre-judgement the lacrosse team accused of rape had to contend with in the U.S. not long ago. They were from Duke University, I believe, but the real tragedy is how completely innocent members of the team were tried and hung by the public before even being brought to trial. In this world of media exposure we have to take responsiblity NOT to judge soley on the snippets we get from the media.

The term "excited delirium" is a controversial one that is used primarily by medical examiners and police forces. It's not a term recognized by either the American or Canadian Medical Associations or their Physciatric counterparts.

"Excited delirium was originally coined by medical researchers to describe the extreme end of a continuum of drug abuse effects such as cocaine-induced excited delirium (Ruttenber, McAnally, & WetH, 1999)."

Source

That's not surprising given the increased number of incidents whereby police find themselves dealing with people high on cocaine, meth, ecstacy and other popular stimulants. This article could be important if it's proven that the RCMP's recent policy change is what prompted them to more quickly (and frequently) use their tasers than what they previuosly would have.

But I do have a problem if the RCMP is suggesting that a "prolonged and dangerous struggle" was an issue at YVR. There was no struggle between police and Dziekanski whatsoever before the taser was used, never mind a prolonged and dangerous one. I have a problem too in that RCMP "believed him to fit into that category" and that "someone in a full-blown excited-delirium event cannot respond to you when you try to negotiate".

In this case, their "belief" may have been insufficient to accurately assess the situation and their negotiations appeared non-existant.

There's a very fine line between educating police in the broader aspects of mental health and making a split-second diagnosis of more complex aspects, one of which may not even be a legitimate psyschiatric condition. They are cops and therefore need to know enough of human nature to handle people but they're not instant shrinks, nor should they be led to believe they are.

An inquiry might find this new policy needs a second look.

[bush_cheney2004]

Will say it again - to shock a person into unconsciousness needs that there be an injury - It is impossible to inflict a black out without compromising the persons well being. Law enforcement looking to please a small segment of society that is fearfull and paranoid and cowardly - who see anything that is remotely abarant behviour are terrified and want the oddness immediately stopped. This social cowardice is the issue that should be addressed - Why are people becoming such chicken shits?

No, law enforcement is looking to survive their shift without being assaulted, infected, or killed outright by the "odd" people.

[Wilber]

Well Wilber, I have no doubt that the outcome to this whole thing will go in your favour.

What do you mean by my favour? I just want to know what actually happened, what lead up to it and what steps can be taken to help prevent it from happening again. Something constructive.

[Carinthia]

What do you mean by my favour? I just want to know what actually happened, what lead up to it and what steps can be taken to help prevent it from happening again. Something constructive.

Me too.

[Hollus]

Bad policing killed Robert Dziekanski but bad policing is not why Mr Dziekanski is dead. The simple fact is that Mr Dziekanski died from bad communication (a very sad thing to die from in the age of pocket-sized electronic translators). This man did not fly into YVR with the intentions of causing public disorder he came to visit his mother. While he may not have been the most knowlegdable world traveller, I would hope an international airport would have the customer service available to deal with an unsure foriegn speaking traveller. What would happen if a foriegn speaking traveller had a sudden medical emergency? Does YVR not have some staff to handle such situations? Where were they? How was Mr Dziekanski allowed to linger in an area smaller than an ice-rink (the most secure area of the airport, crawling with staff and survaillance) for over ten hours without being helped? YVR needs to explain why this situation was allowed to escalate to the point where police had to be called.

As for the Police response, it is clear they had their minds made before they even approached the distraught man: Remove the public disturbance and clear the area for the next incomming flight. Not a bad plan. However the execution of that plan was horrible and tragic. I believe that if the Policemen, the YVR staff or anyone else had been able to communicate with Mr Dziekanski the situation would have easily been resolved.

I am not against the use of tazzers. Although it is quite obvious they are abused in the line of duty, I do believe they are a useful tool for good cops. Rather than contempate the removal of the tazer from the RCMP tool belt I suggest we add to the tool belt an electronic language translator. That way the officer will at least be able to open a line of communication before he zaps the perp to death.

[Oleg Bach]

Bad policing killed Robert Dziekanski but bad policing is not why Mr Dziekanski is dead. The simple fact is that Mr Dziekanski died from bad communication (a very sad thing to die from in the age of pocket-sized electronic translators). This man did not fly into YVR with the intentions of causing public disorder he came to visit his mother. While he may not have been the most knowlegdable world traveller, I would hope an international airport would have the customer service available to deal with an unsure foriegn speaking traveller. What would happen if a foriegn speaking traveller had a sudden medical emergency? Does YVR not have some staff to handle such situations? Where were they? How was Mr Dziekanski allowed to linger in an area smaller than an ice-rink (the most secure area of the airport, crawling with staff and survaillance) for over ten hours without being helped? YVR needs to explain why this situation was allowed to escalate to the point where police had to be called.

As for the Police response, it is clear they had their minds made before they even approached the distraught man: Remove the public disturbance and clear the area for the next incomming flight. Not a bad plan. However the execution of that plan was horrible and tragic. I believe that if the Policemen, the YVR staff or anyone else had been able to communicate with Mr Dziekanski the situation would have easily been resolved.

I am not against the use of tazzers. Although it is quite obvious they are abused in the line of duty, I do believe they are a useful tool for good cops. Rather than contempate the removal of the tazer from the RCMP tool belt I suggest we add to the tool belt an electronic language translator. That way the officer will at least be able to open a line of communication before he zaps the perp to death.

Only time a tazer should be used is if the person is absolutely threatening to harm all in his or her way- If the person is holding a knife or a gun or any other deadly weapon that is a danger to the public or to law enforcement officers. If the person is un-armed - you don't tase - why would you need to - a man can only swing a chair once and at that point he must raise it again - during the moment prior to the chair being in a high position to be used as a weapon - you are to pounce on him ---- are there no men in Canada capable of hand to hand combat anymore- ? Are we a nation of hetro-sissies? Even the arch feminist Germain Greer said in her old age - "we have feminized our males to the point of them not being able to protect us - it was a mistake".

[bush_cheney2004]

during the moment prior to the chair being in a high position to be used as a weapon - you are to pounce on him ---- are there no men in Canada capable of hand to hand combat anymore- ? Are we a nation of hetro-sissies? Even the arch feminist Germain Greer said in her old age - "we have feminized our males to the point of them not being able to protect us - it was a mistake".

Sorry, but we have already established that police officers are not exclusive to macho gladiators, nor are they required to risk death and injury by combatting beserk citizens with hand-to-hand prowess. It is exactly the sort of techniques that you espouse which led to numerous lawsuits and government liability in the past. This is not like hockey where we "send in the goon" to bust some heads.

Tasers are just one of many tools at law enforcement's disposal. Shall we take away their guns too?

[DrGreenthumb]

"Shall we take away their guns too?"-

only if we catch 4 of them on video shooting an unarmed man at point blank range . I think its kind of an insult to all the good cops out there to let these tazer-happy thugs keep their badges.

Like you cons are so fond of saying, "we need to send a message", that we (the public) will not stand for this kind of brutality from our police officers.

Anyone here think a mandatory minimum of say 2 years in a federal prison would be a "strong deterent" to other officers who may wish to abuse their tazers? We could increase that to a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years should the assault contribute to the death of the victim?

Forget a judge's discretion to look at all the facts surrounding the incident, what we need to keep us safe are political one-liners, and cookie cutter justice.

[Hollus]

Sorry, but we have already established that police officers are not exclusive to macho gladiators, nor are they required to risk death and injury by combatting beserk citizens with hand-to-hand prowess. It is exactly the sort of techniques that you espouse which led to numerous lawsuits and government liability in the past. This is not like hockey where we "send in the goon" to bust some heads.

Tasers are just one of many tools at law enforcement's disposal. Shall we take away their guns too?

I agree. Guns dont kill people, people kill people. The onus is on the Police officer to know how much force is needed to defuse the threat. When we give goons the responsibility of using that force it can be abused just the same regardless of what tools hang from their belts.

[Wilber]

Only time a tazer should be used is if the person is absolutely threatening to harm all in his or her way- If the person is holding a knife or a gun or any other deadly weapon that is a danger to the public or to law enforcement officers. If the person is un-armed - you don't tase - why would you need to - a man can only swing a chair once and at that point he must raise it again - during the moment prior to the chair being in a high position to be used as a weapon - you are to pounce on him ---- are there no men in Canada capable of hand to hand combat anymore- ? Are we a nation of hetro-sissies? Even the arch feminist Germain Greer said in her old age - "we have feminized our males to the point of them not being able to protect us - it was a mistake".

No, that is when they would use their gun. I don't believe even you would be stupid enough to go up against someone with a gun or other deadly weapon, using only a Tazer. If you are, you would deserve whatever happened to you. It's not about having a fair fight.

[M.Dancer]

I agree....if they listened to Oleg's advice, the only time they used less lethal force is when they are faced with excessively lethal force....

[no queenslave]

I agree....if they listened to Oleg's advice, the only time they used less lethal force is when they are faced with excessively lethal force....

Something like someone being excessively pregnant.

[Frankie]

I saw the video and heard about the details. Usually I agree with the amount of force police use, but this is just ridiculous. Anyone who agrees with how to cops acted, I think doesn't understand the situation.

Imagine visiting a country where no one speaks your language and you just want to get out of the airport or at least meet a relative who can help you. No staff in the airport help you or seem willing and you don't see anything else you can do. You wait around for a couple hours, maybe still trying to get the message across to staff that you want to move on. You end up standing around for 10 hours and for all you know, everyone here will just let you starve and die here for all they care. At this point you're tired, hungry and extremely nervous, so you try to get attention anyway you can because obviously nobody understands you, or your gestures, so you start rattling some tables and such hoping someone will take notice. Well they take notice, and end of killing you instead of simply letting you move on through the airport system or at least letting your mother come help.

I just don't think they handled it properly.