Why Taser is paying millions in secret 'suspect injury or death' settlements - when does 'less lethal' actually mean deadly?

December 13, 2013 - Matt Stroud, The Verge

On the day before Thanksgiving this year, international stun gun and cop-cam company Taser International, Inc. announced it had given up its fight in two major legal battles over "suspect injury or death." In a 275-word statement submitted to the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the company's chief financial officer said it would pay a total of $2.3 million in settlements to plaintiffs who had sued the company in product liability cases.

This was rare. Taser prides itself in fighting to the bitter end in any case alleging that its products do anything but save lives. Yet there it was in a financial disclosure — Taser backing down.

Taser brushed it off as a remnant of simpler times. According to the vaguely worded statement, enhanced "risk management procedures" and "revisions to product warnings" in 2009 corrected a legal vulnerability. The $2.3 million payouts would address the last lawsuits tied to that vulnerability; they would amount to housekeeping — cleaning up lingering messes that had remained on the company’s books since before 2009.

WHAT WERE THESE "RISK MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES"?

But what were these "risk management procedures"? What were these "revisions to product warnings"? What was the vulnerability? And what were these cases? Taser’s press liaison told The Verge that its SEC declaration "speaks for itself" — a clear indication that the company has no plans to say anything further about settlements unless it’s forced to.

But a little research helped to pin down procedural changes Taser made in September, 2009. And a public records search helped to narrow the possibilities down to four representative cases that may have been settled. Those cases have a few major factors in common: they involve a Taser shot at someone’s chest; they involve someone going into cardiac arrest; and they involve an accidental death.

For years, Taser has battled in court to show that its electronic control devices — its ECDs such as the X2 and the X26 — cannot kill. But if its recent settlements are any indication, the company may either be slowly backing away from that premise, or at least attempting to draw a line in time after which the company feels it's no longer liable for someone’s death.

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS

As bars were closing at about 2AM on April 19, 2008, 24-year-old Kevin Piskura was at a music venue about a block away from the Miami University campus in Oxford, Ohio. As the bar closed its doors and patrons exited, a fight broke out. Oxford Police were called. According to a civil complaint filed in 2010 by Piskura’s parents, an officer ordered Piskura to "step back or back away" from the fight. It’s not clear whether he did or not, but the officer soon pulled out a Taser ECD and shot Piskura in the chest. Piskura went into cardiac arrest; his heart stopped beating. He was taken to a nearby emergency room and soon life-flighted to a Cincinnati hospital where he died five days later. This past March, Piskura’s parents settled with the City of Oxford and the Oxford Police Department for $750,000. In October, Piskura’s parents suggested they were considering a settlement with Taser.

The Piskuras did not return calls from The Verge, and an attorney representing their case declined to comment. But Kevin Piskura’s death fits a pattern consistent to ongoing product liability cases involving Taser-related incidents in which someone was killed prior to September, 2009. The $2.3 million payouts likely stem from similar cases; these incidents occurred before Taser made its switch from "non-lethal" to "less lethal."

Regarding that: letters to medical journals and plenty of anecdotal evidence have suggested at least since 2005 that even healthy people could suffer cardiac arrest if shot near the heart with Taser’s "non-lethal" ECDs. By September, 2009, Taser changed its product warnings accordingly. Today, Taser’s ECDs are branded as "less lethal" instead of "non lethal," and its training materials warn that "exposure in the chest area near the heart … could lead to cardiac arrest."

Another ongoing cardiac arrest case against Taser involves Ryan Rich. A 33-year-old physician in Las Vegas, Rich went into cardiac arrest and died in January, 2008 after he was shot five times with an ECD, including once in the chest. That case is headed to trial in January.

A third case comes out of the Detroit suburb of Warren, Michigan, and will head to trial in May, 2014. It involves the 2009 death of 16-year-old, 5-feet-2-inch Robert Mitchell, who died in an abandoned house after being shot in the chest by a Warren police officer with a Taser ECD.

"TURNER COLLAPSED 37 SECONDS AFTER THE DEVICE WAS ACTIVATED."

Darryl Turner’s case is a fourth possibility. Turner was 17 years old in March 2008 when he got into an argument with his boss at the North Carolina Food Lion grocery where he worked as a cashier. According to a complaint later filed by Turner’s parents, the argument escalated to shouting and Turner’s boss eventually called 911. A police officer from the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department arrived and asked Turner to "calm down." When the teenager refused, the officer pointed his Taser ECD at Turner’s chest. Turner began to step toward the officer, so the officer "held down the Taser’s trigger, causing the device to continue emitting an electrical current, until Turner eventually collapsed 37 seconds after the device initially was activated." Paramedics soon arrived to find Turner handcuffed and unconscious. He was pronounced dead at the scene.

In an uncommon outcome, Turner’s family was awarded a massive payout in 2011. Taser appealed. In November of this year, an appeals court issued its opinion that Taser should remain liable for Turner’s death, but that the jury’s award needed to be reconsidered. "We have no doubt that Turner had significant value to his parents," the appeals court’s decision read. But the court couldn’t agree with a "reasonable level of certainty" that the boy’s life was worth $6.15 million. The parties are scheduled to head back to court in 2014 to haggle over that figure. Unless, that is, Taser has decided to cut its losses and settle out of court.
ON THE RECORD

Taser International is very good about keeping records. In addition to its Axon Flex on-body police camera that allows officers to record interactions with suspects, the company also collects data every time a Taser ECD is fired. But it’s up to police departments — and up to Taser International — to decide how much of that information is revealed publicly.

The company takes a similar approach in the courtroom.

Taser typically insists on keeping its legal settlements — such as those referenced in its recent $2.3 million payout — secret. Rarely are the terms made public. But it happens occasionally. One Northern California case involved a drunk man off his psychiatric meds who was shot with a Taser ECD after refusing to get off a bus. He went into cardiac arrest. An emergency crew was able to resuscitate him on scene, but after going 18 minutes without a breath, the man suffered a crippling brain injury. He would require a caregiver from that point forward.

After a long legal battle, Taser agreed to settle that case. As per usual, it demanded that the settlement agreement be kept secret. The defendants in the case agreed. But eventually it was revealed that the company had settled for $2.85 million. The settlement figure was only made public after a probate court judge made the unusual decision to disclose the dollar amount in open court.

THERE WAS, THE JUDGE SAID, "THERAPEUTIC VALUE" IN MAKING THE INFORMATION PUBLIC

A report from the San Jose Mercury News later explained the judge’s reasoning. There was, the judge said, "therapeutic value" in making the information public.

Whether or not a judge makes similar decisions about Taser’s recent settlements, it’s clear that the company has decided to settle cardiac arrest cases as quietly as possible because it has maintained for years that its weapons are effective, non-deadly alternatives to firearms. If too much attention focuses on Taser-related deaths, there’s a risk that police departments might choose to sidestep the controversy altogether and opt against Taser's products.

There’s a lot at stake on both sides. For Taser, its NASDAQ-traded stock value is on the line. And for those engaged in open legal battles over Taser-related deaths involving cardiac arrest and factors such as "excited delirium" ("a euphemism for ‘death by Taser’") — as well as those who may literally find themselves facing down a Taser ECD in the future — the value of an open settlement may amount to more than mere therapy. It could amount to life or death.

Court upholds ruling: Tasers kill

March 27, 2012
Julie O'Neill, wcpo.com

A new legal blow to the maker of Tasers as controversy grows over the weapon's safety.

Taser International lost its appeal Tuesday in the most costly case against the company to date.

Last summer, a jury awarded the family of Darryl Turner, who died after being tasered, $10 million, ruling that TASER knew its weapon could kill and did not properly warn police.

On appeal, the U.S. District Court Western District of N. Carolina Charlotte Division ruled in favor of the plaintiff on all objections, but did rule the damage award “excessive" and reduced it in half to $5 million.

"This is a huge victory for safety," said plaintiff attorney John Burton, "…and people concerned that this device is being given to police with false assurances of its safety."

Burton added, "The judge viewed the evidence and said the jury was justified in its conclusion."
Dr. Douglas Zipes, an electrophysiologist who testified for the plaintiff that Tasers could kill, said the reduction of the award was fair, and that the court's ruling "totally vindicates what we said, that Taser causes sudden death and the judge accepts that concept."

There has been no comment yet from Taser International.

WCPO-TV’s I-Team has been investigating the safety of Tasers since the death of 18-year-old Everette Howard of North College Hill after he was Tasered on August 6, 2011.

Nearly eight months after Howard’s death, the Hamilton County Coroner’s office has still not ruled on a cause of death.

A preliminary autopsy report viewed by 9 News showed the Coroner’s office appeared to rule out everything but the Taser.

The late Coroner Dr. Anant Bhati said days before his recent death that his office was waiting for the opinion of a specialist who was viewing slides of Howard’s heart.

Dr. Bhati said he had high respect for Dr. Zipes and that he believed Tasers could kill, though he was not ready yet to rule that a Taser did kill Everette Howard.

Tasers are electronic control weapons which send electricity into a subject for the purpose of incapacitating them, so that police officers can get them into custody without hands on contact.
The weapons are used as non-lethal force options by 16,000 police agencies globally, including here in the Tri-State.

Letter from a Concerned Canuck

In response to this November 18th report: "Cop sues taser after riding the lightning" I received the following letter from "Concerned Canuck":

Questions- so many questions. Judging from the news of this lawsuit against Taser International, it would seem some police are finally waking up to the real risks, after dozens have suffered life-altering injuries after 'riding the lightning'? Or worse, the Tucson PD officer last week, who suffered a fatal massive heart attack a day after a Taser training exercise?

More questions- Will it take the Taser-related death of a child, a celebrity or another cop, before someone, anyone in government somewhere, agrees that a federal investigation is warranted to clear the air on how such a now legally defined 'deadly weapon' (defined as such by a recent ninth circuit court decision in North Carolina) could be introduced as a 'non-lethal police tool'. Why was the lethality not recognized by anyone a decade ago when Tasers were foisted on us by eager and in some cases compensated cops?

C'mon now - 700 people are dead after being 'tased'. Taser International's numbers game of comparing the percentage of fatalities to the number of uses, doesn't mean a thing to the families who have lost loved ones. All they know is their loved one, who was alive one minute, was dead the next. Taser's lawyers and the company's allies in the Justice, Science and Medical communities have almost always thrown it back on the victims, blaming them for bringing such unfortunate outcomes upon themselves. They cite quite rightly that many had previous health problems, were drunk, high on drugs, had mental illnesses or ran away too vigorously from their Taser-toting pursuers. Some probably were violent. But did all 700 fall into this category of the truly violent? Robert Dziekanski didn't. He was a confused but compliant traveller, newly arrived in Vancouver, who was felled by an RCMP Taser and then multi-stunned while being held down by four burly officers. Nor did Darryl Turner-- a healthy teenager in Charlotte, NC-- who was shocked twice for having a temper tantrum at his workplace. His family was awarded $10-million dollars last summer. This award came after a jury of average citizens agreed Taser International made fatal mistakes by not warning law enforcement of the real risks, after numerous opportunities to do the right thing and own up to their errors.

The company motto about 'saving life' didn't ring true for the 700.

At the heart of the Turner case is the jaw-dropping revelation that in 2006, company execs were informed by their own research scientist that a fit young volunteer suffered cardiac arrest during a training exercise. Luckily a defribrillator was on-hand and the volunteer was saved. But it proved cardiac capture was indeed possible. But instead of warning its police customers or the public of this shocking occurrence, Taser International kept silent and continued selling its products. A warning to avoid chest shots didn't come until late 2009, buried in a training bulletin. That is nearly FOUR YEARS that Taser knew of the cardiac risks, but they FAILED TO WARN. Canadian media were the first to discover and report this news about the risks of chest shots- although Taser reacted by saying they were just trying to "avoid the controversy" whenever there was an unexplained death during a Taser incident. The company had inside information- that cardiac capture was possible- but they didn't admit this. Not yet.

It was May 2010, when Taser finally released a much longer list of risks and warnings - in the fine print of another training bulletin. However there was no mention to law enforcement that the company had known since 2006 of the potential cardiac dangers. No doubt Taser International issued this list in anticipation of the Turner case coming to trial. Now when citizens are injured or die after being tased by police, the product liability belongs to law enforcement and its employers, and not where it should lie- with the manufacturer.

The Turner family was awarded the $10-million, because of Taser International's FAILURE TO WARN. Police would be well advised to read the publically-avaliable judgement in detail. As a matter of course, Taser is appealing. It is one of dozens of company-crippling wrongful death lawsuits lined up against the company. What other choice does Taser International actually have when facing such steep multi-million dollar losses? They either settle for undisclosed amounts or they appeal. It is the same thing the company is doing by counter-suing this now crippled cop, whose doctors say his back was broken from the force of a Taser shock during training. One can hear Taser's lawyers now -- perhaps the officer had a pre-existing condition of osteoporosis, which is responsible for the injuries - but not the Taser? And for God's sake, why didn't the officer read the latest waiver before he signed it, where the risks of injury and death are plainly but finely printed for all to see?

In Montpelier, Vermont, officials there appear to be aware of the rising liability risks. A prescient City Manager and a sensible Police Chief have decided that arming their officers was NOT worth losing the trust of their citizens. Was it wisened worry of the possiblity of paying out huge damages if there was any proven police misuse? And misuse is bound to happen when many officers are still convinced Tasers are "safe to use on any attacker", as the company's early promotional material stated. Much of this same propaganda made its way into the first police evaluations of the higher 26-watt technology a decade ago- and was treated as truth.

Perhaps some police were knowing collaborators, but I'd like to think most were hapless victims. So many took it: Taser hook-Taser line-and-suspect sinker. The first clue should have been the skimpy science of testing of one pig in 1996, five dogs in 1999 and several hundred young police recruits who were given half-second zaps with taped leads rather than darts with the full five second stun. Sadly law enforcement brass never bothered to verify the manufacturer's safety claims or questioned the electrical theory of operation, when Taser made the drastic leap from 5-watt weapons to 26-watt ones. Now after 700 deaths, Taser International states in the fine print of its manuals and waivers, that police are responsible for their own research! What kind of upside-down Bizarro-World are we living in, where a device that allows dangerously high current to enter the human body and is associated with hundreds of deaths, expects its customers do its own research? The pharmaceutical companies wouldn't dare do that, so why is Taser getting a free pass?

Perhaps Taser International will be brought to its senses, or at least brought back into court when its shareholders launch another class action suit for failure to disclose all known safety risks? A dozen complainants shared a $21-million dollar out-of-court settlement in 2005, to buy the silence of this small group of compassionate shareholders . In the court documents of this case, seven former employees signed affadavits and testified there were so many 'returns' - defective units being sent back - because thousands of Tasers weren't operating properly or not at all, triggers were sticking with some staying on, etc. There were SO many returns they had to rent extra warehouse space to store them all. The witnesses claimed the bodies of these returns were cut open, the defective high-voltage boards were taken out and placed into new bodies with new serial numbers - and sold out the front door as new product.

No one has ever attempted to investigate Taser for any of this, because no one in law enforcement or the Justice department is paying attention or cares to. Taser called the accusations absurd but settled with the shareholders anyway; what is absurd is paying out $21-million dollars to a dozen complainants in what has to be one of the highest nuisance suit payouts in legal history.

Given the number of deaths and injuries, one wonders if any of these defective units being re-sold as 'new' were recycled into other police departments, where some of these 700 "unintended consequences" or dozens of "training injuries" occurred? There is no way of knowing for sure, because police do not measure the output of each Taser upon receipt from the company. SO there is no benchmark for product quality or reliability set from the start. There is no way of charting degradation over time. Which means there is no way of knowing the shelf life of Tasers. How will that be determined without proper measurement?

Since Taser International has shouldered the liability risks onto police- and those who employ them- municipalities, provinces, states, and federal bodies should consider the sense of seeing these untested, unregulated weapons measured regularly. That was one of the recommendations of the Braidwood Inquiry. So far no police agencies anywhere in North America have heeded this sage advice. The RCMP has supposedly tested its fleet of 36-hundred or so BUT many of them performed outside of the safety allowables set by Taser International. But what is the peak output/body current of the Tasers involved in the 700 deaths? Who knows? Again- there are just too many unanswered questions.

A proper Justice Department investigation of how all this occurred without proper checks & balances, is needed. The many questions demand answers. There needs to be accountability for the 700 and their families. Congressional hearings might be the only way to illuminate more of the truth about how Tasers were introduced without proper oversight and substantiated by rigorous, independent research. If we're stuck with the lethal Taser, it really should only be used in the rarest of circumstances, just below the firearm, NOT as a mere compliance tool. Regular measurement using a recognized electrical safety standard would go a long way too, in insuring this Russian Roulette-style of law enforcement is kept to a duller roar.

Concerned Canuck.

Can Tasers kill? I-Team asks Taser CEO tough questions

October 27, 2011
Julie O'Neill, wcpo.com i-team

CINCINNATI - The parents of Everette Howard want to know why their son is dead after being Tasered on UC's campus in August and say they don't want any other parent to have to go through what they're dealing with.

The I-Team went to the heart of the Howard investigation to try to find answers to one key question: Can Tasers kill?

The I-Team traveled to Chicago to speak one-on-one with the CEO of Taser International. We also went to Indianapolis to talk with a prominent cardiologist who's come out swinging against the company concerning its warnings.

At the International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference in Chicago, we caught up with Taser International CEO Rick Smith.

Smith showed us Taser's newest weapon for sale, the X-2. Smith explained to us how the X-2 precisely controls the weapon's electrical current.

"This is measuring the electrical charge of every pulse as it comes out of the device," Smith said.

Smith also says the new Taser includes an option for an automatic shutoff.

"You'll hear it for four seconds, it'll sound an alert then it will shut off, so it alerts the officer then it shuts off and they would have to re-trigger the device at that point in time," said Smith.

The safety advances of the new weapon deal directly with the safety concerns over the one used on UC Upward Bound student Everette Howard before he died in August, and used by police agencies across the Tri-State. It's also the same model weapon involved in the most damaging court ruling against Taser International to date.

This past summer, a jury awarded the family of 17-year-old Darryl Turner $10 million, ruling Taser knew its weapon could kill and didn't tell police.

Dr. Douglas Zipes is an electrophysiologist specializing in heart rhythm. He's published hundreds of articles and won numerous awards for his knowledge of clinical cardiology. The cardioverter he invented is keeping former Vice President Dick Cheney's heart ticking.

Dr. Zipes takes issue with Taser's claims that its weapons cannot cause death.

"Taser has said it can't happen with Taser equipment because the pulses are too short, the energy is insufficient and it can't capture the heart," Dr. Zipes said. "That's absolutely, totally wrong."

In March 2008, court records reveal store clerk Darryl Turner was Tasered for 37 seconds, until he fell, and soon dies. So what caused it??

Dr. Zipes says adrenalin may have already spiked Turner's heart rate, but he says the Taser spiked it beyond what it could handle.

Dr. Zipes explained that where the two Taser darts hit is key.

"So the Taser darts need to in some way span part of the heart or be close enough to the heart so that the electricity traveling between the two darts is able to reach the heart itself and capture the heart."

But that's not the only factor.

"One of the important ingredients as to why somebody dies and somebody else doesn't is the duration of the Taser shock," Dr. Zipes added.

We asked Attorney John Burton, who tried the Turner case, if he thought the officer involved in that Tasering believed Tasers could kill. Burton strongly believes he didn't.

"Oh he absolutely did not know that Tasers could kill," Burton said. "He never would have used the device in such a trivial setting had he understood what the real risks were. That's why the jury did what it did."

Taser International has appealed the Turner decision.

The I-Team asked Rick Smith whether he believes Taser was causal in that death.

"Look, we look at that case and that is one case that certainly is one we're concerned about and that's one of the reasons that we do warn, trying to avoid chest shots," Smith said.

Dr. Zipes says it's tough to prove a Taser-caused a death because a dead body doesn't show the presence of electricity.

"I stumble on why did the sudden death occur exactly when the Taser shocks were going into the body. To say that that's not causily-related I think becomes ridiculous," Zipes said.

Smith questioned Dr. Zipes' motives.

"Maybe we shouldn't talk about a plaintiff's expert that's paid $1,200 an hour to testify against the technology," Smith said.

Dr. Zipes made the following recommendations: "I would argue that Taser number 1 should fess up to the fact that it can produce cardiac arrest, number 2 that law enforcement should be educated to this possibility and that they should not use the Taser weapon in a haphazard freewheeling fashion."

The I-Team asked Smith why Taser doesn't err on the side of caution and say in rare circumstances, in the chest a prolonged shot could increase the risk, and tell departments to make sure officers know this possibility exists and be ready to take medical action.

"We absolutely do that in our training, our warnings you can download them from our website," Smith said.

But when the I-Team checked Taser's website, we found the "Summary Conclusion: Do Taser ECD's affect the heart?" states: "There is no reliable published data that proves Taser ECD's negatively affect the heart."

The I-Team also asked Smith whether he recognizes that in rare circumstances the Taser can affect the heart.

"There's no evidence that supports that it affects the heart in humans," Smith said. "There is evidence that it has happened in pigs."

Yet the I-Team found on Taser's liability release form, under "Known and Potential Side Effects," you'll see listed "heart rate, rhythm capture."

Amnesty International tracks deaths after Taserings. Their latest number: 466 deaths have followed Taserings since 2001. But Amnesty also says a number of these deaths have been attributed to other causes, and what 9 News is hearing from doctors and medical examiners is that it's hard to know definitively in a lot of these cases how much of a role the Taser may have played.

EDITORIAL: Here's key in taser use: police using good rules

September 28, 2011
The Charlotte Observer

We don't argue with the idea that Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officers should be armed with the safest weapons available. So in that sense, the Charlotte City Council's decision to buy new Tasers that prevent officers from firing high voltages of electricity for more than five seconds at a pop makes sense.

But this move does not end concerns over the use of Tasers, associated with the deaths of two suspects in Charlotte in the past three years. These are not truly the "non-lethal" weapons that they are so frequently advertised to be.

Amnesty International says Tasers contributed to about 351 U.S. deaths between 2002 and 2008. The group also says 90 percent of those tasered were unarmed at the time.

Taser International, which provides most such weapons (and the company supplying the guns to the CMPD), points to a different view in a May study by the National Institute of Justice. In a look at Taser use by six police departments nationwide over a two-year period, the institute's researchers found 99.7 percent of those tasered suffered no serious injuries. Their conclusion: "The risk of human death due directly or primarily to the electrical effects of [Tasers] has not been conclusively demonstrated."

It's hard to reconcile those views. Yet even the study provides fodder for concerns. "Risk of human death ... not conclusively demonstrated" is not the same as no risk. And the study says data have shown significant health risks when Tasers are used against small children, people with diseased hearts, the elderly, those who are pregnant and some others. Researchers also acknowledged that many of the deaths after Taser exposure "are associated with continuous or repeated discharge of the CED..., especially when the individual may be under drug intoxication."

These are crucial caveats. In the March 2008 death of 17-year-old Darryl Turner, a CMPD officer tasered the teen for 37 seconds, a violation of police policy. The city paid the family $625,000 as a result, but admitted no wrongdoing. A federal jury ordered Taser International this summer to pay $10 million to the family. The company said it will appeal but in 2009 it released an advisory urging police not to shoot suspects in the chest, where Turner was shot. It also began pushing a version of its gun that allows only five seconds of current before officers can fire again.

The model the council agreed to has that feature and other safety measures including an audible "pre-warning" that the device is about to be used, said CMPD chief Rodney Monroe. Taser officials tout other benefits including the ability to fire a second time quickly without reloading.

Such features are welcome but they remain no substitute for officers having and following good guidelines about the use of these devices. In the past, that has been a problem for CMPD - and a costly one. If the officer in the Turner case had followed policy, the teen might be alive, the city wouldn't have had to shell out $625,000 to a grieving family, and the council might not be approving $1.83 million for new Tasers. That last cost is acknowledgment that officers could not be depended upon to abide by a policy of not tasering suspects past five seconds, the limit on a Taser blast unless the trigger is held down.

This move won't force officers to show good judgment and abide by strong guidelines. The new Taser allows more blasts in the Taser's battery life, and two blasts in quick succession. Studies show multiple Taser shots pose health risks even in healthy adults.

Tasers have been welcome tools to police officers in protecting the public, suspects and themselves. They have helped reduce the numbers of lethal incidents in which an officer is forced to discharge a gun. But Tasers carry dangers that should not be ignored. Training, officers following sound guidelines and vigilance about health risks are crucial to helping ensure tragedy does not result from Taser use.

Council approves $1.8M in new Tasers for CMPD

September 27, 2011
WSOCTV.com

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Charlotte-Mecklenburg police are getting new, and supposedly safer, Tasers. Although the non-lethal tools have been the focus of controversy over the past few months, police are confident Tasers are not a problem. Just to be safe, they asked city council for $1.8 million to buy the new models.

The X2 version has several new safety features. The shock only lasts five seconds no matter how long the officer holds the trigger. The amount of electricity is now more exact.

Police Chief Rodney Monroe said these new Tasers are the top of the line models. "We don't believe that there is a better model out there," he told council members.

Those safety features could have meant the difference between life and death in 2008 when Darryl Turner died after being shocked by a police-issue Taser, and again two months ago when La'Reko Williams died. Williams' family made an appearance at the meeting Monday night, wearing shirts memorializing the 21-year-old man, but did not speak about the new Tasers.

The lawyer Charles Everage said the council should not have voted on the Taser deal until it figured out why WIlliams died from the shock. "We're not here to express any emotion about it," he said.

Police haven’t been allowed to use their Tasers since Williams died. The weapons have been in a state of review and testing and the department have been reviewing their policies for using Tasers. In fact, for the first time, CMPD officials said officers have deployed Tasers 760 times since 2004.

Police said those are time officers may have been forced to draw their guns instead, but they did not say how many of those suspects were seriously injured.

In light of the new X2 model Tasers, only one Charlotte resident spoke out about the weapons being added to officers' arsenal.

"If they're going to use these instruments that do cause devastation and it does cause death, they should be better trained," he said.

Cardiologists at Presbyterian Hospital in uptown Charlotte said any Taser can be dangerous, regardless of the safety mechanisms built into them because all Tasers hit suspects with thousands of volts of electricity.

"There are plenty of average, healthy people that in very unique situations can have weird electrical cardiac events," said Cardiologist Kevin Sharkey. "You've seen people on the basketball court collapse and die from an arythmia they didn't know they had."

Police have not said when officers will get the new Tasers. Even when they do, they may not use them right away because officers may need new training.

Three deaths in one weekend puts Taser use by cops in crosshairs

"The website Truth Not Tasers claims that 39 people have died in relation to "conducted energy devices (CEDs)" this year in the United States, an average of five per month."

August 8, 2011
Patrik Jonsson, Christian Monitor

A naked man on drugs died in Wisconsin this weekend, after police used a Taser stun gun to subdue him. A student died at the University of Cincinnati after balling his fists and getting tasered by police. A man high on drugs in Manassas, Va., also died this weekend after police tasered him as he escaped, partially handcuffed, after punching an officer and a firefighter.

All three deaths are being investigated. One of the departments, the University of Cincinnati Police Department, has suspended the use of Tasers by its officers.

About 15,000 US police departments, including 29 of the nation's 33 largest cities, use a total of 260,000 Tasers. The devices have been the objects of controversy since first being deployed broadly in the 1990s. Some describe them as an alternative to the nightstick that reduces officer injuries and saves lives. Others see the stun guns as instruments of torture whose growing use make them a symbol of reckless policing.

In some cases, the Tasers are only tangentially related or unrelated to the actual cause of death, and that may be the case in the three incidents from this weekend. But recent studies have shown that the weapons can have an outsized impact on people with health problems or who are very high on drugs and in a state of "excited delirium."

Tasers contributed to some 351 US deaths between 2001 and 2008, says Amnesty International, which adds that 90 percent of those tasered were unarmed at the time they were electrocuted. The website Truth Not Tasers claims that 39 people have died in relation to "conducted energy devices (CEDs)" this year in the United States, an average of five per month.

On the other hand, 99.7 percent of people who are tasered suffer no serious injuries, according to a May report from the National Institute of Justice. "The risk of human death due directly or primarily to the electrical effects of CED application has not been conclusively demonstrated," says the report.

A growing number of police departments have begun to limit Taser use, imposing stricter policies for use or even taking the instruments out of officers' hands. Memphis, San Francisco, and Las Vegas police departments have all opted out of Taser use recently, amid growing questions about the level of threat necessary to justify electrocuting someone with 50,000 volts delivered through barbed bolts.

"Because of the criticism and the deaths, there's been a lot of people backing off of Tasers," says Samuel Walker, a professor emeritus at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, who studies police accountability. "The fact is, a lot of departments are taking some very positive, proactive steps to ensure accountability, and controlling Tasers is one of part of doing that," he says. But in other departments, he adds, "they're using it much too broadly and recklessly, where it isn't appropriate."

The current Taser debate hinges on when, not if, the stun guns should be used. Few disagree with the use of Tasers as an alternative to deadly force, but in some departments, officers can employ Tasers when someone is simply refusing to obey an order.

Tasers are often most used when police officers are dealing with unruly people who themselves are unarmed, but whose failure to comply with police instructions make officers to feel threatened. Most departments use the "billy club policy," which holds that Tasers are appropriate in any situation where an officer would otherwise pull and be ready to use a billy club, or night stick, which tends to lead to more serious injuries than a Taser.

Taser opponents point to the public outrage over the tasering of a fan at a Philadelphia Phillies baseball game, and various lawsuits documenting officers using Tasers on subdued, non-aggressive, or even handcuffed people. Tasers "can be used too much and too often," the National Institute of Justice found in its May report.

At the same time, some law enforcement officials have pushed back against setting higher standards for Taser use.

"Police chiefs are saying, don't write the standards so that it's going to take away decision-making ... when I write my own policies," says John Gnagey, executive director of the National Tactical Officers Association, in Doylestown, Pa. "The argument that Tasers should only be used when the use of deadly force is authorized is asinine."

After releasing an advisory in 2009 urging police not to shoot suspects in the chest, Taser International is now marketing the old version of its gun, which allows for only a five second blast of current before officers have to make the decision to hit the suspect again. A newer version of the gun allowed officers to apply continuous current, which the NIJ said in a separate May report has been associated with deaths.

In all three cases from this weekend, the victims were acting erratically and, in at least one, in Manassas, Va., the man had already physically assaulted a police officer. But whether the occasions rose to a level where officers would have used deadly force is far from clear. None of the three men were armed.

In Kaukauna, Wisc., police responded to a report of a naked, out-of-control man running across a city bridge. When police reached him, the man appeared to be in the throes of a drug overdose, claiming he was covered in snakes. When he refused to comply with officers, a Taser was used to knock him down.

At the University of Cincinnati, a recent high school graduate, at the university for college-preparatory summer classes, was approaching the police with an "altered mental status" and balled fists when he was brought down with a Taser. The University of Cincinnati Police Department has suspended the use of Tasers as it investigates the case. One newspaper account said the officer who fired the Taser was "very distraught" by the young man's death.

Some police departments, including Kansas City, Seattle, and Madison, Wisc., have begun publishing their Taser policies on their public websites, in an effort to increase transparency and respond to public concerns. None of the three police departments involved in this weekend's incidents publish their policies on Taser use, with one – Prince William County – citing "tactical concerns." Calls to the other two departments were not returned by the time this story was posted.

"This is a very important point of accountability that goes beyond Tasers, a form of openness and transparency," says Professor Walker.

Some battles over Tasers have played out in the courts.

"Tasers and stun guns fall into the category of non-lethal force; non-lethal, however, is not synonymous with non-excessive force," ruled the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2009. "All force – lethal or non-lethal – must be justified by the need for the specific level of force employed."

In July, a North Carolina jury returned a $10 million verdict against Taser International, the maker of the stun guns, for the 2008 death of a 17-year-old in Charlotte, N.C., ruling that company failed to provide police with adequate warnings or instruction. Taser International plans an appeal.

The day of the North Carolina verdict, another Charlotte man died in a Taser-related incident, prompting that city's police department – considered one of the most professional in the nation – to impose a 45-day suspension on the use of the weapons, to review their polices.

"My personal opinion is that when departments become restrictive and take away a tool, it's generally because they're afraid of some sort of public pressure coming from a certain segment of society," says Mr. Gnagey. When public pressure does succeed in restricting or banning Tasers, he adds, "Later on, when things die down, we'll just quietly introduce it back into the population."

Taser Gets Zapped

Another jury rules that the weapons are lethal and the makers are liable.

August 3, 2011
Peter Gorman, Fort Worth Weekly

The Arizona company that makes Tasers, the allegedly “less-lethal” weapons that have killed hundreds of people around the world, has lost another lawsuit. This time a North Carolina jury found Taser International responsible for the death of a 17-year-old store clerk who was hit with the weapon’s 50,000 volts of electricity because he pushed groceries off a counter and threw an umbrella.

In the July 19 verdict, Taser International was ordered to pay $10 million in damages to the family of Darryl Turner. A company spokesman said the verdict will be appealed.

News of the jury decision drew cheers from locals who have fought for years to stop the overuse of the stun guns by police in Fort Worth, where at least five people died after been tasered since 2005.

“It’s not a question of whether or not Tasers will finally be banned, but how much Taser International is going to have to pay for the funerals those weapons cost,” said Rev. Kyev Tatum, president of the Fort Worth chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

“In truth, it was a tremendous victory, a nail in the coffin of the use of Tasers,” he said. “And eventually, as those awards mount up against the company, against police departments, and against cities, they’ll be forced out of business.”

Marcus Hardin, whose grandson survived a 40-second tasering three years ago, agreed with Tatum’s assessment. “I give them [Taser International] five years,” he said. “Then they’re done.”

Hardin, with Tatum and Pastor Tom Franklin, founded the Taser Memorial at the New Mount Cavalry Baptist Church in Highland Hills. He said the North Carolina verdict “was a long time coming. Unfortunately, the number of people who have died after being shot with a Taser keeps going up. We’re up to 674 crosses at the memorial — and each represents someone who was tortured to death by a Taser.”

Mark Haney, a Fort Worth civil rights attorney who has worked on Taser cases for years, also praised the Turner verdict. “This adverse judgment is simply further evidence that Taser rushed these products to market without fully appreciating the risks associated with them,” he said.

The victory marked only the second loss Taser International has sustained in a courtroom — but most of the cases filed against the company don’t make it to court. Of the almost 130 lawsuits known to have been filed against the company, all but four were settled out of court. In the four that were decided by juries, Taser International has won two and lost two.

Company spokesmen regularly refer to the out-of-court settlements as though they were all wins for Taser.

John Burton, the California attorney who represented plaintiffs in both of the cases in which Taser went to court and lost, scoffed at that idea.

“One of the cases they put in their win column was a case I handled where they settled for $2.8 million before it came to trial,” he said. “So when they say they’ve won 127 cases, that just means they’ve settled out of court most of the time.”

In the North Carolina case, Turner, known generally as a good worker and excellent student, was working at the Food Lion grocery store in North Charlotte on March 20, 2008, when he was approached by an assistant manager who accused him of eating a microwaved sandwich he hadn’t paid for. Turner admitted the petty theft and was sent home for the day. But he returned after his shift was up, demanding to see the assistant manager, who refused to speak with him.

According to Burton, the young man “then pushed some product” from a counter and “threw an umbrella,” at which point a policeman, who had been called to remove Turner from the store, appeared in the doorway and fired his Taser into Turner’s chest at close range twice, the first time for 37 seconds.

The officer, Jerry Dawson, later said that he held the trigger down so long because Turner did not fall when hit. Dawson, a veteran of 15 years with the Charlotte-Mecklenberg Police Department, then fired at Turner a second time for five seconds. That time, Turner went into shock and died without recovering consciousness.

An autopsy by the Charlotte medical examiner found that Turner died from “acute ventricular dysrhythmia, agitated state, stress, and use of conducted energy weapon device (Taser).” In 2010 the city of Charlotte settled with the Turner family for $625,000, while admitting no culpability.

The $10 million judgment against Taser International came in a separate product-liability suit filed by the family.

Burton said he doesn’t think the company will be able to get off without paying damages the way it did in an earlier case that he and co-counsel Peter Williamson won against the weapon maker in 2008.

After the North Carolina verdict, Taser International released information meant to calm fears of investors in the publicly traded company and of law enforcement agencies that use the electronic weapons. Steve Tuttle, the company’s vice president of communications, said Turner had a condition known as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), which is responsible for 39 percent of sudden cardiac arrest deaths in people under 21.

“That was a fully fabricated lie,” said Burton. “The Charlotte medical examiner, Thomas Owens, did the autopsy, and he said Turner had a great heart, free from all pathologies, in top shape. But Taser brought in someone from Harvard, Dr. James Stone, who examined some tissue and declared that Turner had HCM. We sent his findings to one of the world’s leading specialists on HCM, and he agreed with Owens, the ME: The kid simply didn’t have it. No enlarged heart, no thickening of ventrical walls, nothing.”

Tuttle’s release also noted that the jury was not told about three baggies of marijuana that were alleged to have been found on Turner. “Under North Carolina law, if someone has acted in a negligent manner that contributed to their damages, even a one percent contribution, they are barred from recovering damages. … The company’s legal council believe that Mr. Turner’s crimes, including theft, trespassing, drug possession, assault on fellow employees, resisting arrest, and initiation of an apparent assault on a law enforcement officer constitute negligent behavior that necessitated the use of force by police.”

“I read that press release and almost threw up,” said Burton. “This was a great kid. Never arrested, first in his class in high school, had applied for college, had a job at 17, didn’t smoke or drink … . Heck, I talked with the manager of the store, and he told me that Turner was a great worker, always on time, and that he had great potential with the company.

“And when I talked with other employees, they said the assistant manager was always unpleasant and routinely unfair. I mean, he [Turner] had eaten some food he hadn’t paid for — right, a 17-year-old in a supermarket job. And look what Taser makes him out to be.”

Both of the cases that Taser International lost in court were based on the premise that the company knew the weapons could be lethal in certain circumstances but did not warn the police departments and public of that.

Shortly after the first of those two cases was decided, the company added a number of warnings in its product package. After Turner’s death, the company added more language, warning that the weapons should not be fired into the chest near the heart.

Hardin sees the change as Taser International’s attempt to throw all responsibility onto law enforcement personnel. “Now when someone dies, Taser is going to say, ‘You were warned not to use the weapon in the chest area,’ or whatever, and that might get them off the hook.”

Burton agreed. The new warnings, he said, could mean that, when more people die after being hit with Tasers, their families “will be going directly after the police departments … for liability.

“The products, Tasers, are simply a lot more dangerous than the company says they are,” Burton said. “They talk about excited delirium killing all these people, as if everyone who dies after being tasered would have dropped dead in minutes anyway, and that’s just not the case.”

Federal Jury Awards $10 Million Against TASER International for Teenager's Death

CHARLOTTE, N.C., July 19, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Attorneys John Burton and Peter M. Williamson announce that at 2:30 p.m. EDT today, a federal court jury returned a verdict for wrongful death in the amount of $10,000,000.00 against TASER International Inc., for the wrongful death of 17-year-old Darryl Turner, who collapsed and died in a Charlotte, North Carolina supermarket on March 20, 2008, following shocks to the chest from a TASER Model X26 electronic control device.

The jury found that TASER negligently failed to warn that discharging its X26 model ECD into the chest of a subject near the heart poses a substantial risk of cardiac arrest to persons against whom the device is deployed. The plaintiffs are the parents, Devoid Turner and Tammy Lou Fontenot.

The Mecklenburg County medical examiner, Thomas D. Owens, M.D., found no drugs in Turner's system, and reported his heart to be disease free. Accordingly, Dr. Owens attributed death to "agitated state, stress and use of conducted energy device (TASER)."

After the verdict was announced, John Burton, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, explained the importance of the verdict: "TASER has been irresponsible in representing the safety of its products. Hopefully, this verdict will sound the alarm to police officers around the world that firing these weapons into the chests of people should be avoided. No other family should have to endure the tragedy that the Fontenot family has experienced."

The lawsuit is Fontenot v. TASER International, Inc., United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division, Case No. 3:10-CV-125. The jury consisted of five women and three men. United States District Judge Robert Conrad presided.

Plaintiffs' Counsel:

John Burton, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JOHN BURTON
65 North Raymond Ave, Ste 300
Pasadena, CA 91103
Tel: 626-449-8300/Email: jb@johnburtonlaw.com
Web: http://www.johnburtonlaw.com

Peter M. Williamson, Esq.
WILLIAMSON & KRAUSS
21800 Oxnard Street, Suite 305
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: 818-226-5700/Email: pmw@wandklaw.com
Web: http://www.wandklaw.com

Charles A. Everage, Esq.
EVERAGE LAW FIRM, PLLC
1800 Camden Road, Ste. 104
Charlotte, NC 28216
Tel: 704-377-9157/ Email: cae@everagelaw.com

John F. Baker, Esq.
MAGANA, CATHCART & McCARTHY
1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Tel: 310-553-6630
Email: ptc@mcmc-law.com
Email: jfb@mcmc-law.com

SOURCE John Burton and Peter M. Williamson

RELATED LINKS
http://www.wandklaw.com
http://www.johnburtonlaw.com

Jury Award for Plaintiff in Turner v. TASER International - Company Intends to Appeal Based on Exclusion of Key Evidence and Other Errors

July 19, 2011, 4:05 p.m. EDT

SCOTTSDALE, AZ, Jul 19, 2011 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- TASER International, Inc. /quotes/zigman/85741/quotes/nls/tasr TASR +2.40% , a global provider of safety technologies that prevent conflict, protect life, and resolve disputes, today announced that a jury in Charlotte, North Carolina delivered a verdict against TASER International.

The case involved the death of Mr. Darryl Turner. Mr. Turner was a 17-year-old male involved in an altercation with law enforcement at a grocery store on March 20, 2008.

Key facts:

-- A Harvard cardiovascular pathologist, Dr. James Stone, diagnosed Mr.
Turner as having hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), the leading cause
of sudden cardiac arrest in young adults. Dr. Stone testified as an
expert for the defense and showed autopsy samples supporting his
expert opinion.
-- While most people assume that cardiac arrest only occurs in older
persons, a May 2011 study in the American Journal of Cardiology found
that 25% of all deaths of persons under age 21 are due to cardiac
arrest -- and 39% of those cardiac arrests are due to cardiac problems
(such as the HCM condition present in Mr. Turner).
-- The Court excluded the jury from hearing evidence that Mr. Turner had
three baggies of marijuana in his sock during the incident. TASER
International believes this is critical evidence, as well as the fact
that a screen for marijuana and other key drugs was not performed at
autopsy, or before the lab destroyed Mr. Turner's blood evidence.
Marijuana is known to exacerbate the risk of cardiac arrhythmias in
people with HCM. There was evidence that Mr. Turner's behavior had
drastically changed from earlier in the day when he left the store,
after being confronted with, and admitting to, theft allegations,
prior to his lunch break compared to when he subsequently returned and
a confrontation with store employees and police ensued. These changes
are suggestive of possible drug usage -- and the presence of three
baggies of marijuana in Mr. Turner's sock is particularly key evidence
in light of the failure of the investigation to have tested for
marijuana in his blood or hair samples before they destroyed them.
-- A May 2011 study just released by the United States Department of
Justice found, "current research does not support a substantially
increased risk of cardiac arrhythmia in field situations, even if the
CED (TASER ECD) darts strike the front of the chest." These findings
are consistent with the May 2011 Pasquier, et al. review paper on ECD
related morbidity and mortality, which is consistent with prior
literature, including the 2009 White Paper by the American Medical
Association.
-- The court also excluded jury instructions related to contributory
negligence. Under North Carolina law, if a plaintiff has acted in a
negligent manner that contributed to their damages, even a 1%
contribution, they are barred from recovering damages from a third
party. The Company's legal counsel believe that Mr. Turner's crimes,
including theft, trespassing, drug possession, assault on fellow
employees, resisting arrest and initiation of an apparent assault on a
law enforcement officer constitute negligent behavior that
necessitated the use of force by police. The Company believes this is
an appealable error and will pursue appropriate remedies in the
appellate courts.
-- The verdict amount will be offset by approximately $730,000 in a
settlement (including interest) from the City of Charlotte, as well as
deducting $40,000 in a settlement from worker's compensation so the
net award will be $9,230,000. Approximately $6 million of this award
will be covered by TASER International's insurance if the verdict
stands up through the appeals process.
-- Judgment has not yet been entered. TASER International has moved for
judgment in its favor not withstanding the verdict.

"This was a sad and tragic incident, and our hearts go out to Mr. Turner's family," said Doug Klint, President and General Counsel of TASER International. "We can certainly understand how the jury felt deep compassion for Mr. Turner's family, and how this compassion may have overwhelmed the scientific evidence presented in this case. However, given the important nature of this case and the exclusion of key evidence that occurred, TASER International intends to appeal this verdict."

TASER International has only received one other adverse jury verdict in the 2008 case of Betty Lou Heston v. TASER International, Inc. In that matter, on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, TASER International prevailed on the majority of legal matters and the final amount awarded to plaintiffs was reduced from more than $7 million to approximately $200,000. While the company believes it has a strong case for appeal in the Turner matter, there are no assurances that the company will again be successful on appeal.

In other legal matters:

-- On July 18, 2011, The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit upheld the summary judgment granted in TASER International's
favor in the matter of Bud Lee, et al v. Metro Govt. of Nashville, et
al. in which the trial court in granting TASER International's motion
for summary judgment found that the electronic control devices were
not defective (in design, manufacturing, or warning) or unreasonably
dangerous.
-- TASER has won judgment or been dismissed in 127 product liability
cases.

About TASER International, Inc.

TASER International, Inc. /quotes/zigman/85741/quotes/nls/tasr TASR +2.40% is a global provider of safety technologies that prevent conflict and protect life. More than 16,200 public safety agencies in 107 countries rely on TASER(R) electronic control devices (ECDs) and AXON on-officer camera systems to help protect and serve. TASER innovations benefit individuals and families too, providing personal protection and accountability while maintaining regard for life. Since 1994, more than 236,000 individuals have relied on TASER technology as a means for effective personal safety. Learn more about TASER International and its solutions at www.TASER.com and www.Evidence.com or by calling (800) 978-2737. Be a part of the TASER community by joining us on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

Note to Investors

To review the TASER International Safe Harbor Statement, please visit our Investor Relations Safe Harbor Statement at http://investor.taser.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=129937&p=irol-safeharbor .

For investor relations information please contact Katie Pyra by phone at 480-515-6330 or via email at IR@TASER.com, or Dan Behrendt, Chief Financial Officer of TASER International, Inc., 480-905-2002.

CONTACT:
Steve Tuttle
Vice President of Communications
TASER International, Inc.
(480) 444-4000

Federal Jury Awards $10 Million Against TASER International for Teenager's Death

Federal Jury Awards $10 Million Against TASER International for Teenager's Death

CHARLOTTE, N.C., July 19, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Attorneys John Burton and Peter M. Williamson announce that at 2:30 p.m. EDT today, a federal court jury returned a verdict for wrongful death in the amount of $10,000,000.00 against TASER International Inc., for the wrongful death of 17-year-old Darryl Turner, who collapsed and died in a Charlotte, North Carolina supermarket on March 20, 2008, following shocks to the chest from a TASER Model X26 electronic control device.

The jury found that TASER negligently failed to warn that discharging its X26 model ECD into the chest of a subject near the heart poses a substantial risk of cardiac arrest to persons against whom the device is deployed. The plaintiffs are the parents, Devoid Turner and Tammy Lou Fontenot.

The Mecklenburg County medical examiner, Thomas D. Owens, M.D., found no drugs in Turner's system, and reported his heart to be disease free. Accordingly, Dr. Owens attributed death to "agitated state, stress and use of conducted energy device (TASER)."

After the verdict was announced, John Burton, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, explained the importance of the verdict: "TASER has been irresponsible in representing the safety of its products. Hopefully, this verdict will sound the alarm to police officers around the world that firing these weapons into the chests of people should be avoided. No other family should have to endure the tragedy that the Fontenot family has experienced."

The lawsuit is Fontenot v. TASER International, Inc., United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division, Case No. 3:10-CV-125. The jury consisted of five women and three men. United States District Judge Robert Conrad presided.

Plaintiffs' Counsel:

John Burton, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JOHN BURTON
65 North Raymond Ave, Ste 300
Pasadena, CA 91103
Tel: 626-449-8300/Email: jb@johnburtonlaw.com
Web: http://www.johnburtonlaw.com

Peter M. Williamson, Esq.
WILLIAMSON & KRAUSS
21800 Oxnard Street, Suite 305
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: 818-226-5700/Email: pmw@wandklaw.com
Web: http://www.wandklaw.com

Charles A. Everage, Esq.
EVERAGE LAW FIRM, PLLC
1800 Camden Road, Ste. 104
Charlotte, NC 28216
Tel: 704-377-9157/ Email: cae@everagelaw.com

John F. Baker, Esq.
MAGANA, CATHCART & McCARTHY
1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Tel: 310-553-6630
Email: ptc@mcmc-law.com
Email: jfb@mcmc-law.com



SOURCE John Burton and Peter M. Williamson

RELATED LINKS
http://www.wandklaw.com
http://www.johnburtonlaw.com

Family of teen killed by Taser shock sues gun maker - Suit accuses Taser of failing to tell officers about danger of using device near chests

March 17, 2010
By Cleve R. Wootson Jr., Charlotte Observer

The family of a teenager killed after he was shocked with a Taser by a police officer in 2008 is suing the company that makes the electronic stun gun.

The civil suit, filed in federal court on Tuesday, says Taser International didn't warn its customers that the weapon could be lethal if deployed near the chest, which happened in Darryl Wayne Turner's case.

The suit, which does not list a specific monetary amount, says Turner's death could have been prevented if Taser International had also instructed police departments using the device to keep defibrillators nearby.

Turner, 17, died March 20, 2008, after a confrontation with police at a Food Lion store on Prosperity Church Road where Turner had worked.

After mediation, Officer Jerry Dawson was suspended for five days without pay and required to undergo additional training. The city of Charlotte paid $625,000 to Turner's family in August 2009, though the city didn't admit wrongdoing.

It was the largest police-related claim the city had paid out in nearly a decade, and the family's attorney, Ron Harris, indicated then that there could be additional litigation.

Tuesday's suit against Taser points to a 2006 study funded by the company that concluded that users should avoid discharging the Taser in the chest area. The suit alleges that company didn't warn its users to avoid shocking people in the chest.

"There was a wealth of information, from our perspective, available to Taser that indicated that there was an inherent problem related to deploying the Taser to the chest area," Harris said. "Despite the wealth of information available, they failed to warn their customers and those using the Tasers of the dangers."

Taser International could not be reached for comment Tuesday night.

Tasers use compressed nitrogen to shoot two tethered needlelike probes that penetrate skin and deliver an electric shock. The weapon is designed to subdue a person temporarily. CMPD has used the devices since 2004, including in the March 2008 incident involving Turner.

According to court documents, police were called after the store manager asked Turner to leave and he refused. Store surveillance video showed Turner at the customer service desk, knocking over a display and throwing an umbrella. He then moved closer to a store manager and employee, at one point raising his arm and pointing at the manager.

Later, the soundless video shows Officer Dawson entering the store with a Taser in his hand. Dawson approached Turner with the Taser pointed at him. Turner took a step toward the officer, and police say that's when Dawson fired the Taser. Turner continued to walk past the officer with the Taser probes in his chest.

Police later determined that Dawson violated department policy by holding the Taser's trigger for about 37 seconds, until Turner fell to the ground. Turner died from cardiac arrest.

An autopsy showed the teenager's heart was pumping so fast and chaotically from the stress of the confrontation and the Taser shot that it stopped pumping blood properly.

According to the CMPD report on the incident, a review board "determined that the initial decision to discharge the Taser was within our procedures, but the prolonged use of the Taser was not."

Settlement reached in teen's Taser death

August 4, 2009
By Steve Lyttle, Charlotte Observer

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/597/story/869619.html?storylink=omni_popular

The City of Charlotte settled with the family of a 17-year-old who died in March 2008after being shot by a Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer with a Taser, according to an attorney representing the family.

The out-of-court agreement was announced Tuesday by attorney Ken Harris, who represented the family of Darryl Turner in a suit against the city.

Harris said he expects other litigation in the case, however.

Turner died March 20, 2008, after a confrontation with police at a north Charlotte grocery store where Turner had worked.

The officer who fired the Taser was not charged, but he was disciplined by police.

Police later determined that Officer Jerry Dawson Jr. violated department policy with the way he shocked Turner with the Taser gun. An autopsy showed the teenager's heart was pumping so fast and chaotically from the stress of the confrontation and the Taser shot that it stopped pumping blood properly.

Dawson was suspended for five days without pay in July 2008.

In a statement issued Tuesday morning, Harris did not disclose the amount of the settlement but described it as “very substantial.”

City legal officials could not be reached.

While saying the settlement closes the case against the city, Harris said the matter probably is not closed.

“This is a tragedy that Darryl's relatives hope will never be visited upon another family,” he said. “In light of that perspective, I must note that there will likely be litigation in this matter concerning other parties.”

Harris did not specify who else might be a subject of litigation by Turner's family.

The Taser is a weapon that typically uses compressed nitrogen to shoot two tethered needle-like probes that penetrate skin and deliver an electric shock. It is designed to subdue a person temporarily.

The incident which led to Turner's death happened at a Food Lion store on Properity Church Road. According to court documents, police were called after the store manager asked Turner to leave and he refused. Store surveillance video showed Turner at the customer service desk, knocking over a display and throwing an umbrella. He then moved closer to a store manager and employee, at one point raising his arm and pointing at the manager.

The video then showed Dawson walking through the front door, carrying what appears to be his Taser. Dawson approached Turner with the Taser pointed at him. Turner took a step toward the officer, then continued to walk past him.

It was unclear from the video when Turner was shocked, but police said it happened as Turner stepped toward the officer.

In an investigation which followed the incident, police determined that Dawson held the trigger of the Taser for 37 seconds, until Turner fell. The officer later shocked Turner a second time, for five seconds. According to the CMPD report on the incident, a review board “determined that rthe initial decision to discharge the Taser was within our procedures, but the prlonged use of the Taser was not.”

In addition to the suspension, Dawson also was given additional training on proper use of the Taser.

In the statement announcing the settlement, Harris praised city officials for “their thorough investigation of this matter” and for the city's “openness throughout the process.”

Tasers: Death of 15-year-old in USA reinforces need for caution in wider rollout of weapon

March 24, 2009
Amnesty International UK

The death of a 15-year-old boy in Michigan, USA after he was shocked with a Taser gun reinforces the need for greater caution to be applied in the roll out of Tasers to frontline police officers in the UK, said Amnesty International.

The organisation also called for further tests into the safety of the electro-shock weapon.

While few details are available, a police news release stated that the 15-year-old boy - who has not been named - was shocked when he 'attempted to fight' Bay City officers responding to reports of an argument between two males in an apartment. The boy is reported to have been unarmed.

The boy reportedly went into medical distress immediately after being shocked and was pronounced dead in hospital.

Amnesty International UK's Arms Programme Director, Oliver Sprague said:

'Tasers should only be used in life-threatening situations and this doesn't appear to be such an instance. Surely another form of restraint could have been applied in this case.

'The tragic death of this teenager is a grave reminder that extreme caution has to be applied when Tasers are being used. Only a limited number of officers who undergo intensive, ongoing and rigorous training should be given these weapons.'

According to information gathered by Amnesty International, this is the second minor to have died in the USA this year after being shocked with a Taser. In January, an unarmed 17-year-old boy in Virginia died after police, responding to a minor street incident, shocked him in his apartment.

Since June 2001, the total number of deaths after the use of Taser guns in the US has risen to 351.

Amnesty is urging the Home Office to limit the number of police officers who are armed with Tasers.

Oliver Sprague continued:

'Here in the UK, we cannot ignore the history of the Taser in other countries such as the USA and Canada. This is the second minor in the USA who has died after being shocked by a Taser. We do not want to see a repeat of that here in the UK.'

Notes to the Editor

1. Last December, Amnesty International issued a report about the problems attached to the use of stun weapons in law enforcement. The study cited medical data suggesting that their use may trigger a fatal reaction in individuals already compromised by drugs, exertion or ill-health. The report also cited cases in which apparently healthy individuals died after being shocked.

2. In March last year, 17-year-old Darryl Turner died when police used a Taser on him after an argument in the store where he worked in North Carolina. A video-tape showed an officer fire Taser darts into Turner's chest as the unarmed teenager stood with his arms by his side. The coroner ruled his cause of death to be a fatal disturbance of the heart rhythm due to stress and the Taser shocks. His death is one of at least 50 nationwide where coroners have ruled that Tasers were a cause or contributory factor.

When tasers go wrong

July 26, 2008
By: James Turner, Winnipeg Free Press

Are police too quick to turn to the supposedly non-lethal weapon?

IT'S abundantly clear that 17-year-old Darryl Turner's last day on Earth was a bad one. Watching the last moments of his life unfold on silent surveillance-camera footage is stark evidence. On the publicly available footage, Turner, a dreadlocked youth from Charlotte, North Carolina, storms about the small grocery store where he works as a cashier. He pushes over a merchandise display in anger.

It's believed he's in trouble with the store's management for not paying for something he had for lunch that day.

It's the afternoon of March 20, and the boy is fuming. He's seen confronting the store's manager, even throwing something at his boss in a rage. Police are called, and an officer arrives. Jerry Dawson, a 15-year veteran of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, briskly enters the store, his hand already reaching for his Taser. Police said the officer issued commands for the youth to stop.

Turner continues to move around, walking past the officer, which is when the stun gun is fired, striking the boy directly in the chest. The teen is unarmed. At first, he shows no sign of being incapacitated. He continues walking away from Dawson. Then the teen collapses on the store's carpet. Attempts to revive him are unsuccessful.

A medical examiner's autopsy and toxicology report on the boy's death released to the Free Press shows he had no intoxicants in his system.

Download the medical examiner's report from North Carolina

The official cause of death is a heart attack precipitated by his agitated state and the use of the Taser. A recent review of the officer's conduct determined that although the use of the weapon was justified, he had jolted the boy for too long.

Dawson was recently handed a five-day suspension without pay by a police review board that determined his Tasering of the teen twice -- once continuously for 37 seconds, and another for five seconds -- went beyond what was necessary or proper under police policy.

He will not face criminal charges.

The police department told reporters in Charlotte that "the initial use of the Taser is not in question," and the weapons have been effective in reducing injuries to suspects and officers. Police also said if Turner had complied with officer demands, the weapon would not have been needed.

In an interview with the Free Press Thursday, the family's lawyer, Ken Harris, said it's not yet decided if a civil suit will be launched against police or Taser International, the company that manufactured the stun gun used on Turner.

What's really striking about Turner's death is how little time the veteran officer seems to spend assessing the situation or talking to Turner to try calming him.

Fast-forward to last Tuesday, when 17-year-old Michael Langan died after being Tasered by police behind 871 William Ave. after they found him brandishing a knife, and the same issue arises.

Did police do enough to de-escalate the situation before shocking him?

The boy's father, Brian Minchin, said Winnipeg homicide detectives told him the boy was "zapped" once, fell to the ground and his heart stopped. "They asked him several times" to put down the knife, which had a blade about eight centimetres long, Minchin said.

"He just started carrying a knife," Minchin said.

Not every police agency is an unabashed fan of the stun guns, and controversy surrounds what Amnesty International has called "a slippery slope" towards the Taser's increased use, and sometimes abuse, by police.

In the U.S., 11,500 law-enforcement agencies use conducted-energy devices such as the Taser. More than 250,000 of the stun guns are in active use, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. In Canada, 73 police agencies use the weapons.

The American Justice Department warned in a June report on Taser use that "there may be circumstances in which repeated or continuous exposure is required, but law enforcement should be aware that the associated risks are unknown.

"Therefore, caution is urged in using multiple applications," the report said.

In England, where police have undertaken an extensive campaign to reduce the "epidemic" of stabbings in recent months, the Metropolitan Police Authority has moved to combat the problem as its top priority.

However, the vast majority of beat constables don't carry guns or Tasers, instead relying on their batons and pepper spray when dealing with a threat. Officers are required to radio for a special-response unit if an armed response is required.

However, 10 police forces in England -- including the 31,000-officer Metropolitan force -- began a year-long pilot project late last year after the British Home Office approved the increased use of the weapons by officers not in specialty firearms units.

Halfway through the test project, the weapons are being used more often.

The Home Office said in May that Tasers were used 252 times between September 2007 and the end of February. The weapons were discharged in only 31 situations, meaning they were most often used to coerce suspects into standing down when threatening officer or public safety.

Last year, Winnipeg police used or unholstered their Tasers 173 times. They were discharged or touched to a suspect to cause "pain compliance" 103 times.

Compliance with police orders by talking suspects down from their actions and not using force is the mantra of English policing, according to experts and a British Home Office spokesman.

Tim Matthews said this week that historically, English people have shown an aversion to weapons -- a cultural preference that's always influenced how police operate.

"The policy in this country has long been that the police should not generally be armed. That gives a character to our policing that we should not readily give up," Matthews said. "A traditional bobby on the beat, if he needs support, he calls a unit on the radio." The use of weapons by English police is rare, Matthews said. "It must always be a last resort."

A recent paper published by University of Exeter professor Brian Rappert further describes the key difference between North American and British use-of-force policies. "In the U.S., most agencies have in place a use-of-force continuum, (but) in the U.K., the preference is for a less prescriptive 'conflict-resolution model,' " he writes.

What this suggests is that in some places, the belief is that a threat should often be quelled by talking first and shooting later.

Winnipeg police said Thursday that each situation is different and each requires officers to use their own educated judgment. "Ideally, de-escalating is the ideal situation, but they're trained to recognize if a force application is warranted to protect themselves or another person. (If it's warranted), then they're justified in doing so," said Const. Adam Cheadle of the officer safety unit.

It's not known yet what caused Langan, a boy standing 5-foot-6 and weighing 145 pounds, to die. The provincial medical examiner, Dr. Thambirajah Balachandra, said it could take months for additional tests to be completed before an official cause of Langan's death can be determined.

Police Chief Keith McCaskill said that historically, there's been "a number" of cases where officers have used their Tasers when dealing with suspects armed with weapons, including knives, and serious injury didn't occur.

"If the device wasn't there, a firearm would have been the only other option available to officers."

Editorial: tragic lesson on tasers

July 19, 2008
Editorial
News-Record, Greensboro, North Carolina

http://www.news-record.com/content/2008/07/18/article/tragic_lesson_on_tasers

"One young life = one five-day vacation"

That's how one blogger [YOURS TRULY!!] described the punishment meted out to Jerry Dawson, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer involved in the Taser-related death of a teenage grocery store worker on March 20.

Darryl Turner, 17, died after being Tasered twice by Dawson. One Taser discharge Dawson gave Turner lasted 37 seconds. A standard discharge lasts about five. An autopsy determined that Turner died from heart irregularities.

A police department review commission determined that using force to subdue the unruly clerk was appropriate, but the amount of force used wasn't. The CMPD banned lengthy Taser discharges in 2005, after studies pointed out their problems.

Dawson was suspended for five days without pay and has been ordered to receive more Taser training - a punishment that is little more than a wrist slap. Letting police review boards determine disciplinary action for officers is problematic. At the least, it causes the public to question the fairness of such procedures.

The Dawson case also highlights the need for all law-enforcement agencies to ensure that their officers are well-trained in using Tasers before they begin carrying them.

Tasers are a good tool for law enforcement. They enable the police to subdue people without the use of deadly force and, when used correctly, they are a more humane alternative to such things as nightsticks or pepper spray.

A Taser's effects usually end when the discharge ends. When used as intended, in a short, five-second discharge, few, if any, problems result. Complications arise, as a study by the National Institute of Justice says, through the devices' "continuous or repeated discharge."

Research has found that prolonged Taser use can cause heart and respiratory problems. In one study, researchers used Tasers on 11 pigs for 40 seconds each: Two of the pigs died and the survivors were left with heart irregularities.

With High Point officers beginning to use Tasers next month, most Guilford law-enforcement agencies will be using these devices. The agencies' Taser training needs to include information on times when Taser use went bad.

Officers need to learn about the Florida man who died after being Tasered 12 times and the South Carolina man who died after being Tasered for two minutes and 49 seconds. They need to learn about 17-year-old Darryl Turner, killed at his grocery store job after being Tasered twice for 42 seconds. Arming officers with the facts should mean fewer such tragedies.

One young life = one five-day vacation

Darryl Turner - a BOY - UNARMED - only 17 years old forchristssake - TASERED FOR FORTY-TWO (42!!) SECONDS for the CRIME of walking toward a 15 year veteran of the Charlotte, North Carolina police force - drops dead BECAUSE OF THE TASER - officer found to be justified in using the taser - just should-a, would-a, could-a SHORTENED the zapfest a wee bit and maybe needs more training - officer gets a five-day vacation. Darryl Turner remains dead for all time.

July 16, 2008
wsoctv.com

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/16902404/detail.html

CMPD Officer Suspended After Probe Into taser Use That Killed Teen

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- The Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer that used a Taser on a north Charlotte teenager, leading to his death, has been suspended for five days.

Darryl Turner, 16, died in March after Officer Jerry Dawson used the Taser on him in the Food Lion grocery store on Prosperity Church Road. Turner’s autopsy report said the stress of the situation and the Taser caused his heart to stop.

The store manager had called police when Turner became disruptive. Surveillance tape shows Turner knocking over displays and yelling at the manager. Dawson fired the Taser when Turner turned away from the manager and began walking toward him. Dawson reported he told the teen to stop but he did not comply.

In a hearing Tuesday, the police department’s review board found Dawson was justified in his use of the Taser, but his prolonged use of the weapon was not.

Authorities said the officer held the trigger of the Taser continuously for about 37 seconds, during which Turner continued to walk, and grabbed a small rack and threw it across the floor before falling to the floor. Dawson shocked Turner a second time, for about five seconds, when he did not comply with commands to put his hands behind his back.

The district attorney decided earlier this month not to file any criminal charges against Dawson.

The department is now reviewing its policy concerning the use of Tasers. Dawson will also receive additional Taser training.

Dawson, 39, has been on the force for 15 years and is assigned to the University City Division.

Teen hit by Taser died of cardiac arrest - Doctor finds no pre-existing heart problems in youth who was shocked by police officer at grocery store

HERE COMES THE JUDGE:
TASER INTERNATIONAL VS. DR. THOMAS OWENS, Medical Examiner
Don't believe the taser manufacturer would target a medical examiner? See "Judge rules for taser in cause-of-death decisions"

July 4, 2008
By Cleve R. Wootson Jr. and Franco Ordoñez
The Charlotte Observer

A 17-year-old shocked with a Taser by police after an altercation at a northern Charlotte grocery store died from cardiac arrest, according to an autopsy released Friday.

Darryl Wayne Turner's heart was pumping so fast and chaotically from the Taser shot and stress of the confrontation that it stopped pumping blood properly. He died of acute ventricular dysrhythmia and ventricular fibrillation, according to the Mecklenburg medical examiner's office.

Turner was the first Taser-related fatality in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department's history and the youngest in the Carolinas this decade.

Police confronted an “agitated” Turner on March 20 during an argument with his manager of a Prosperity Church Road grocery store. Police said Turner threw something at a manager, ignored commands and advanced toward Officer Jerry Dawson Jr., who deployed a Taser. The energy weapon struck Turner in the chest, and he fell to the carpeted floor.

“This lethal disturbance in the heart rhythm was precipitated by the agitated state and associated stress as well as the use of the conducted energy weapon (Taser) designed for incapacitation through electro-muscular disruption,” Dr. Thomas Owens wrote in the autopsy.

Owens found no pre-existing heart problems.

Turner worked at the Food Lion store, where he was a cashier and bagged groceries. Documents state he was asked by a manager to leave the store but refused. Police said Officer Jerry Dawson Jr., a 15-year veteran, fired his Taser to get Turner under control after the teen advanced toward him. An attorney representing the family says he talked to a witness who refutes the account.

An April study by the Taser Safety Project found that the improper use of Tasers has contributed to the deaths of at least 11 people in North Carolina over the past four years. The autopsy cites a National Institute of Justice study that concludes that while Tasers devices are not risk-free, there is “no conclusive medical evidence” indicating a high risk of serious injury.

Teen shocked by taser died from change in heart rhythm

March 7, 2008
WSOCTV

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/16783664/detail.html

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Autopsy results released this week reveal why a 17-year-old who police shot with a Taser died in March.

Darryl Turner was in an altercation with his boss at the Food Lion on Prosperity Church Road in north Charlotte when someone called police. Police said he was highly agitated when an officer shot him with a Taser. Turner was pronounced dead at the hospital a short time later.

Turner's autopsy says the stress of the situation and the shock from the Taser was too much for his body to handle. It says he died of acute ventricular dysrhythmia and ventricular fibrillation. In other words, his heart was pumping so fast and irregularly that he died.

The report states Turner did not have heart problems and he didn't have drugs in his system except for the medicines emergency workers used trying to save his life.

Turner's grandfather, Donald Fontenot, saw the report and said he's angry.

"Very much so. Why wouldn't I be? You know, you take a 17-year-old child away," he said.

Turner's family has not said whether they plan to sue police. They hired an attorney in March after a witness said Turner was obeying the officer’s commands when he was shocked. Police said Turner had been threatening the officer.

Police are doing their own internal investigation to see if the officer who used the Taser followed the rules. That officer is back on active duty after being put on administrative leave following the incident.