home

Another Stun Gun Victim -- Teenage Jesus Follower

By Jeralyn, Section Crime Policy
Posted on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 12:43:24 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

He was yelling "I want Jesus" and carrying a bible. The cops tasered him. He died at the hospital.

Will the cops say they thought the bible was a gun?

In a report released in March, international human rights group Amnesty International said it had logged at least 156 deaths across the country in the previous five years related to police stun guns.

The rise in deaths accompanies a marked increase in the number of U.S. law enforcement agencies employing devices made by Taser International Inc. of Scottsdale, Ariz. ....Police had used Tasers more than 70,000 times as of last year, Congress' Government Accountability Office said.

< Your Liberal Media | Advertisers Blacklist Air America Radio >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Another Stun Gun Victim -- Teenage Jesus Follower | 25 comments (25 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    More of the Same (1.00 / 0) (#7)
    by Patrick on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 02:19:47 PM EST
    Death at the hands of police needs to be investigated and prosecuted by folks who don't work with the police.

    Find me one?  Not that I disagree that all in-custody deaths should be investigated, I'd just like to see a competent investigative unit that doesn't work with the police.  I know, the ACLU, or how about AI...Or perhaps move-on has something...  Can you still use LOL on-line?  

    I know that everyone would like cops to be omnipotent or at least clairvoyant.  Hell, I'd like to have that ability, but it isn't reality.  Any use of force brings with it the potential for injury and death.  Law Enforcement is aware of that and so are the courts.  But to criticize (Prematurely in this case) the actions of people by those without the all the facts smack of elitism.  And there's no shortage of that here.  

    I had a long winded post going, but this whole attack is more of the same.  I'm not going to convince JM or t-chris, and they're not going to convince me.  

    Even if they caused 8 deaths or 108, whatever.  They are an excellent tool and have a place in law enforcement.  The only valid argument in my opinion is at what level they fall in the use of force spectrum, continuum, or wheel...

    In my department, based on the facts presented, this is a valid deployment.  I'm sorry this person died.  

    I challenge JM to come back and post the autopsy findings when they don't bear out the allegations.  Cause you know what?  Thinking back there've been a few posts just like this one and I can't recall ever seeing any follow-up.  I guess that facts aren't important when you have a political axe to grind.  

    Autopsy today (none / 0) (#1)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 12:50:59 PM EST
    It would be interesting to see the results of the autopsy posted here, as the cause of death has not been determined.

    "teenage Jesus follower"? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Gabriel Malor on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 01:03:13 PM EST
    What an odd construction.

    SUO, wikipedia had the following on taser deaths:

    Between September 1999 and October 2004, there were 73 cases of deaths of subjects soon after having been shocked using Tasers. Of these cases:

        * In 8 cases, medical examiners said Tasers were a cause or a contributing factor or could not be ruled out as a cause of death.
        * In 18 cases coroners and other officials stated that Tasers were not a factor.
        * In most of the 73 cases, drugs including cocaine, methamphetamine, and PCP were concluded to be the major factor leading to death.
        * In many cases pre-existing cardiovascular conditions or other medical conditions were stated to be a factor.
        * Several deaths occurred as a result of injuries sustained in struggles. In a few of these cases head injury due to falling after being shocked contributed to later death.
    proximal cause (none / 0) (#3)
    by Sailor on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 01:24:14 PM EST
    It should be noted that coroners are a branch of law enforcement and more often than not support their fellows to the point of twisting the results.

    In Bloomington IN the coroner ruled that a multiple TASER attack by jailers was not the cause of death and then an outside coroner ruled that it was.

    Kinda like that coroner in FL who ruled that the kid was beaten to death but just happen to sufffer from sickle cell and died from that after being beaten.

    Death at the hands of police needs to be investigated and prosecuted by folks who don't work with the police.

    In most of the 73 cases, drugs including cocaine, methamphetamine, and PCP were concluded to be the major factor leading to death.
    Yeah ... except they wouldn't have died w/o being TASERED, so what would an outside observer rule the proximate cause?

    Proximal to an agenda (none / 0) (#8)
    by Patrick on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 02:24:27 PM EST
    It should be noted that coroners are a branch of law enforcement and more often than not support their fellows to the point of twisting the results.

    Got a link?  MOre often than not is a tough burden of proof.  

    In Bloomington IN the coroner ruled that a multiple TASER attack by jailers was not the cause of death and then an outside coroner ruled that it was.

    Wow, really?  Who paid for the "Independant" autopsy?  Got a link?

    Kinda like that coroner in FL who ruled that the kid was beaten to death but just happen to sufffer from sickle cell and died from that after being beaten.

    How is it like this?  Has there even been an autopsy?

    Yeah ... except they wouldn't have died w/o being TASERED, so what would an outside observer rule the proximate cause?

    Terminal stupidity secondary to criminal behavior.  Just a guess.  


    Parent

    links for Patrick (none / 0) (#9)
    by Sailor on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 03:00:55 PM EST
    it's a bit hard to track down the origins of stories, but here goes (p.s., I've linked to this story for you before)
    Monroe County Coroner Dave Toumey ruled Borden died of a heart attack brought on by an existing heart condition, drug intoxication and electrical shock.

    Then the family hired a pathologist from another county to do the autopsy:
    The coroner, Dr. Roland Kohr, called the Taser shock partly responsible for Borden's death. He found that Borden had heart disease and toxic levels of two drugs, but that the stress from the Taser is what pushed him off edge.

    "The application of the Taser was the trigger factor which stressed an already damaged heart to the point that it went into cardiac arrest," says Kohr. "The Taser is what triggered his heart attack."

    Patrick sez:

    Terminal stupidity secondary to criminal behavior.
    try mental illness:Holyfield would not acknowledge officers who approached him and he continued yelling, "I want Jesus."

    SUO sez this

    And you are sure of this how?
    If you get hit by a car and die, I'm pretty certain that getting hit by the car caused the death.

    Regardless, if they hadn't been tasered they would have injured and/or killed someone else.
    And you're sure of this why?

    The 17 yr old was mentally ill, that shouldn't be a death sentence at the hands of cops.

    In the Bloomington case the guy was in handcuffs and it was caught on tape.

    In other cases people were in wheelchairs, or not a danger to anyone and not 'combative', they just didn't perfectly obey an order.

    TASER deaths are the new version of 'I saw something shiny' whch was the excuse cops always used to use to shoot unarmed people.

    BTW, what's wrong with having an independent ME/review board instead of the cops fellow officers investigate these things?

    Parent

    Proximal (none / 0) (#10)
    by Patrick on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 03:16:02 PM EST
    try mental illness:Holyfield would not acknowledge officers who approached him and he continued yelling, "I want Jesus."

    Classic example of moving the goal posts.  My comment with respect to the facetious cause of death was in response to your comment about the..

    In most of the 73 cases, drugs including cocaine, methamphetamine, and PCP were concluded to be the major factor leading to death
    .
    Yeah ... except they wouldn't have died w/o being TASERED, so what would an outside observer rule the proximate cause?

    Neither comment had anything to do with why this boy died.  In fact we don't know why because there hasn't been an autopsy.  

    BTW,

      You've answered only one of my questions.  Still unable to meet that "more often than not" burden I'm sure.  Particularly because it's not true and I think you should recant.  

      Never the less, you did answer who hired the "Independant" pathologist..The family.  Hardly independant.   How much was the lawsuit for?  I mean people wouldn't pay other people to say things that weren't true just for money would they?  No need to answer, it's rhetorical.  

    Parent

    MIssed one (none / 0) (#11)
    by Patrick on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 03:20:38 PM EST
    BTW, what's wrong with having an independent ME/review board instead of the cops fellow officers investigate these things?

    Absolutely nothing in my book, but based on your parameters they won't do because they do work with the police in many instances.

    Parent

    Sailor (none / 0) (#4)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 01:38:11 PM EST
    Yeah ... except they wouldn't have died w/o being TASERED

    And you are sure of this how?

    Regardless, if they hadn't been tasered they would have injured and/or killed someone else.

    Oh, and I'm sure of my statement the same way you're sure of yours.

    The only known fact is that this thread's headline "Another Stun Gun Victim" is not a known fact.

    Tasers have their place, but... (none / 0) (#5)
    by roy on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 01:46:13 PM EST
    Regardless, if they hadn't been tasered they would have injured and/or killed someone else.

    Some of them, sure, but there are other techniques available.  Crisis Intervention Teams have gotten very good and safer results resolving conflicts with the mentally ill, even those who are violent.  This "Jesus Follower" sounds like just the sort of guy those teams are set up to deal with.

    Parent

    RE: (none / 0) (#6)
    by Deconstructionist on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 02:01:12 PM EST
      Tasers are dangerous and their use poses known risks. However, the danger of the Taser per se is not the salient issue. It goes without saying that police sometimes have to employ force that carries the risk of harm.

      The salient issue is whether police are properly trained  in their use. This means not only deploying them in the manner least liklely to cause death or serious injury but also being  trained only to deploy them when the only alternatives are more likely to cause death or serious injury to the suspect, the officers or bystanders.

       Police should be trained to use the least dangerous means prudent in a particular circumstance. Unfortunately, sometimes that might mean a bullet through the head  but others it might mean simply keeping a safe distance from the suspect and trying to talk him into surrendering and if necessary waiting for back-up so he can be apprehended by sheer force of numbers if necessary. Of course, many situations can require the use of methods between those two.

      Using a Taser when there is not an imminent danger is unreasonable. However, that's not necessarily the fault of the Taser.

    Well said. (none / 0) (#12)
    by Gabriel Malor on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 03:28:49 PM EST
    Decon, I very much agree with this. Deaths are regrettable, but not always avoidable. We need procedures in place that insure that deadly force is only used when there is no other choice. And after a death, our primary job is to determine whether those procedures were followed, not start screeching about causes of death.

    Parent
    Departments Need to be Responsible (none / 0) (#13)
    by txpublicdefender on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 04:48:18 PM EST
    You are exactly right.  I have two main problems with the way tasers are being used throughout the country by law enforcement.  The first is that individual police officers are not being trained on the FACTS about the potentially life-threatening consequences of using a taser.  So, when these police officers make the decision to use the taser, they are not considering it as lethal force or an alternative to be used when lethal force might otherwise be justified.  Too often, they are being told that a taser results only in transitory pain, discomfort, or incapacity, but that the chance of any lethal consequence is all but impossible.  If a police officer is going to be held accountable for the force he uses--and he should be--he needs to be given the information so he knows what kind of force he is using.  Second, too many police departments don't have good policies on when using a taser is appropriate.  In the jurisdiction where I used to practice, the only instances I saw tasers being used were situations where the officer would have been justified in using lethal force.  In the jurisdiction I am now, I have seen multiple accounts of tasers being used when a suspect in a minor juvenile offense is fleeing on foot.  Either these officers are all acting out of policy, there is no policy, or the policy is based on bad information.  Police departments need to get some serious research on the dangers of tasers, and consider that information when laying out when taser use is appropriate as part of their use of force policies.

    Parent
    Huey (none / 0) (#15)
    by Patrick on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 06:22:45 PM EST
    In the jurisdiction where I used to practice, the only instances I saw tasers being used were situations where the officer would have been justified in using lethal force.

    The taser is not an alternate to lethal force and if you're suggesting it should be you've got a long row to hoe.  The only proper response in a deadly force situation is deadly force.  That's it.  You don't bring a knife to a gunfight.  I believe you are mistaken about your local jurisdictions use of force policy, but if you are accurate, (Stranger things have happened) than I'm glad I don't work there, and they would be the first department I've ever heard of using less lethal technology in lethal force situation.  So I'm not buying it.  

    Too often, they are being told that a taser results only in transitory pain, discomfort, or incapacity, but that the chance of any lethal consequence is all but impossible.

    Because research and studies bear it out.  Just from the information in this post,(so I won't vouch for it's accuracy)... 70,000 plus deployments resulting in only 73 deaths (If you attribute all of them, a statistic I use only to prove this point)  

    73 deaths/70,000 deployments = .01% Odds of death incurring directly as a result of the taser deployment.   That's all but impossible odds to me.  Not even considering that actual deaths are probably somewhere around 8.  

    That's not the type of technology I'd want to rely on in a lethal force situation as according to you your former local jurisdiction does.  

    Police department across the nation are required to have use of force policies, either as a result of case law or codified law.  I would bet that all policies are substantially similar with respect the use of force, given the federal nature of lawsuits for such use and therefore, most of the officers probably aren't acting out of policy or restrained by a policy based on bad information as you suggest.  Tasers have always been a less-lethal force option in situations where less than lethal force is required.  I take exception to the non-lethal term used by taser because in my experience almost anything can have some lethality to it.  

    Anyway, enough of that.  

    Parent

    But, but TASERS are non-lethal! (none / 0) (#14)
    by Sailor on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 04:52:55 PM EST
    According to TASER they are.

    i kind of have to wonder............... (none / 0) (#16)
    by cpinva on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 06:49:38 PM EST
    if there isn't another, less potentially harmful, non-lethal method of subduing suspects, without putting the police in undue danger in the process. something not involving either chemicals or electricity.

    the problem with both of these is that, though the "average" person will probably suffer no long-term damage, there is a % of the population that will, and the police have no way of knowing who they are, until it happens.

    what happened to nets, rubber packets, etc? i've seen these devices demonstrated on tv, as non-lethal methods for use by law enforcement, but haven't heard whether or not they've gained widespread acceptance. patrick, you know anything about these?

    the positive side: had those 70k all been shot, by regular firearms, many more would probably have suffered permanent damage or death.

    Other cool tools (none / 0) (#18)
    by Patrick on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 09:57:23 PM EST
    cpinva,

        Yes there are many different devices out there, but all trade portability, (A must) and functionality for their design.  Meaning they are not very user friendly and unlikely that they will be readily available for deployment.  The taser is carried right on the duty belt and has no equal that I've seen as far as the above criteria.  

         For what it's worth, rubber bullets and bean bag rounds (Drag stabilized less-lethal projectiles) produce far more instances of death and serious injuries from what I've seen.  Any many of these devices have limitations on how and when they can be used effectively.  Not the taser.  

         It is an excellent choice and proof that the technology saves live.  

         As an aside, I highly doubt many of those 70K deployments rose to the level of lethal force situations.  The trick is many may have but for the taser, but we'll never know for sure.  

    Parent

    Some context (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ted on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 07:54:04 PM EST
    Here are a few statistics that help put the stun gun deaths in perspective.

    Number of law enforcement officers in US:  870,000
    Officers killed while on duty in 2004: 154
    Killed by firearms in 2004:  57

    For what it's worth...

    What is it worth (none / 0) (#19)
    by Patrick on Tue Oct 31, 2006 at 09:58:39 PM EST
    I don't see what your point is ted?   Care to clarify?  

    Parent
    Excited delirium? (none / 0) (#20)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 12:49:44 PM EST
    What the heck is that?!

    preliminary autopsy Tuesday, deputy chief medical examiner Dr. Phillip Burch told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch the teen might have died of "excited delirium" and "he could have dropped dead without being Tased." He said he didn't see overt signs of injury or foul play.

    Excited delirium can be brought on by mental illness or drugs, Burch said. Complete results will not be available for at least six weeks, when toxicology tests are returned.

    Where did the theory of excited delirium come from?

    "These are individuals that are acting wildly incoherently, completely out of control. Exhibiting super-strength. Babbling incoherently. Some individuals jumping on top of police cars. Breaking through plate glass windows. Jumping off of second story buildings," says Mash. "Many of them exhibit behavior -- behavior and unexpected strength that would be Hulk-like."

    Dr. Mash has examined dozens of brains from so-called excited delirium victims, and found that nearly all of them were drug abusers, usually of cocaine or methamphetamine. The drug abuse can flood the brain with the natural chemical dopamine, the theory goes. Then the struggle with the police produces high levels of adrenaline. Together, she says, they make a deadly cocktail.

    "What exactly kills the person when they have excited delirium? I think it's not completely understood," says Mash. "I think when your temperature's shooting up to 107, 108, you're in essence, cooking your brain."

    Will TL post the results of the complete autopsy in 6 weeks?

    Excited delirium? (none / 0) (#21)
    by txpublicdefender on Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 04:15:58 PM EST
    That sounds like, "The cops killed him, but I don't want to say that in my autopsy report."  I'd be interested in knowing if any non-custody or police involved death has ever been ruled "excited delirium."  

    It must have been the "excited delirium," and not the multiple jolts of electricity applied to his body that killed him.  Right.  If I were that boy's parents, I'd be lining up the private autopsy right now.

    Parent

    Excited delirium? (none / 0) (#23)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 05:06:38 PM EST
    I'd be interested in knowing if any non-custody or police involved death has ever been ruled "excited delirium."  

    Good question, I've found nothing by google that indicates any finding that these types of deaths have occurred when the deceased was not under physical restraint. Medication and/or drug use/abuse is also very common among these deaths.

    I've also found that while all of these deaths involved restraint, they mostly did not involve taser.

    If I were that boy's parents, I'd be lining up the private autopsy right now.

    I don't doubt that's the case, regardless of merit.

    Parent

    Excited delirium? (none / 0) (#24)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 05:16:27 PM EST
    Sorry, my reading comprehension is not up to par today. Trying to do several things at once. Anyway...

    I'd be interested in knowing if any non-custody or police involved death has ever been ruled "excited delirium."

    Yes, in detox-type centers and hospitals. iow, situations where non-LE physically restrain people who are flipping out.

    If I were that boy's parents, I'd be lining up the private autopsy right now.

    I would be too.

    Parent

    Well go look (none / 0) (#25)
    by Patrick on Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 05:31:28 PM EST
    I'd be interested in knowing if any non-custody or police involved death has ever been ruled "excited delirium."  

    There's plenty of information out there, don't just say it, go look.  

    Parent

    that's a new one on me too (none / 0) (#22)
    by Deconstructionist on Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 04:53:33 PM EST
       I'd have to suspect that the deputy ME  was confronted with findings obviously consistent with the effect large doses of electricity have on the heart and conveniently decided that being really excited can similarly "amp up"  the heart rate and cause arhythmia to the point of cardiac arrest,  and amazingly enough the symptoms are  just like someone was electrocuted.

     

    Another Stun Gun Victim -- Teenage Jesus Follower | 25 comments (25 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment