Palo Alto police change Taser policy

September 9, 2010
Gennady Sheyner, Palo Alto Online

Recent incidents in which Palo Alto police officers fired their Tasers at suspects would have violated the city's new policy for deployment of the controversial stun guns, Independent Police Auditor Michael Gennaco concluded in his new report.

The report details five recent incidents of Taser use, including one in which an officer fired a Taser at a "young" burglary suspect who tried to run away from the officer. Some of these Taser deployments would have been appropriate under the previous department policy, which permits Taser use when suspects are "actively resisting," which includes such actions as "tensing" or "bracing" to resist arrest. The new policy creates a stricter standard and requires that the suspect "pose an immediate threat of physical injury before firing a Taser is appropriate."

In the case of the unnamed "young man," the officer who fired the Taser appears to have violated even the original, less strict, policy. The officer fired the weapon after the young man ignored an officer's order that he stop and began to run away. The officer missed, but the unnamed suspect, hearing the sound of the Taser, stopped running, lied down on the ground and allowed police to handcuff him. He had a small knife and a screwdriver in his pocket and was arrested for possession of burglary tools, according to the auditor's report.

Though a police supervisor initially determined that the officer's use of the Taser fell within the Department's policy, Police Chief Dennis Burns had "misgivings" about the incident and ordered a new review, which concluded that the officer failed to comply with the existing policy because the officer had minimal evidence at the time about the suspect's intent to burglarize and because the suspect's flight did not constitute "exigent circumstances" or "active resistance or active aggression." The auditor agreed with the review's findings and the officer was forced to undergo new training and receive counseling.

In other cases, officers appeared to have followed the department's previous Taser policy (which was in effect at the time of the incidents) but would not have been in compliance with the revised policy. In one case, officers tried to handcuff a male suspect who appeared "angry, intoxicated and agitated" and who became "verbally confrontational" with the officer. Two officers grabbed the man's hands and bent him forward; a third officer, under direction from his supervisor, fired a Taser at the man's back.

Though the supervisor said the suspect in this case was "actively resisting" by "tensing" during the arrest, both Gennaco and managers in the department had "significant concerns" about this Taser incident. They concluded that the Taser deployment was "minimally within the original policy" but would have been in violation of the new policy.

Gennaco reached a similar conclusion in another case, in which a suspect hit a police patrol vehicle with his car, ran a red light and hit three parked cars and a light post before stopping his car. He then tried to run away, but other officers soon apprehended him. The officer whose car was hit caught up to the suspect while the other officers were handcuffing him. Though one hand was already in a handcuff, the suspect's "muscles tightened" while officers were trying to secure his left arm. The officer whose car was hit then fired a Taser at the suspect, who was then arrested without further incident.

After reviewing the incident, the department and Gennaco concluded that "had this Taser deployment been undertaken under the new revised policy, the application would have been out of policy."

Gennaco wrote that the police department's revised policy also provides guidance on "multiple cycling" of the Taser. Under the new policy, an officer must reevaluate the circumstances and consider whether the suspect still poses an "immediate threat" before a Taser is fired for a second time.

"The new policy restricts use of Taser to more appropriate situations that are consistent with recent legal opinions," Gennaco wrote. "Now that the revised policy has been issued, the Department has begun to provide the necessary training to familiarize officers with the new requirements."

The report also mentions an incident in which an officer's firing of the Taser appeared to be "timely, appropriate and in compliance with the Department's policy, then and now." This case involved two brothers, one of whom the police knew had a history of mental illness (his mother told the police he was "possibly violent, suicidal and delusional"). After leaving his vehicle, the older brother approached a female officer and "raised his arms over his head." The female officer pulled his hands down and other officers moved in to try to restrain the older brother, who began to wrestle with them.

At this point, the female officer fired a Taser at the older brother's back, but the darts "made insufficient contact and were ineffectual." The younger brother joined the fray but was quickly pulled away by an officer. Other officers arrived and tried to place the older brother into the police vehicle but could not do so. Ultimately, paramedics and firefighters arrived, secured the older brother to a gurney and took him to a hospital in an ambulance.

Gennaco said he reviewed tapes of the entire incident from beginning to end and was "impressed by the officer's calm professionalism during the incident and their patience in dealing with a mentally disturbed individual."

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."

Manatee County sergeant suspended for using taser on inmate

MANATEE COUNTY - A Manatee County Sheriff's sergeant who works in the jail has been suspended for using his taser on an inmate.

Surveillance video released today by the Manatee County Sheriff's Office shows Sergeant Donald McGowan using his taser on inmate Mia Barnes.

According to an internal report, Barnes was in jail for a misdemeanor charge. When she got to the jail she threw her shoes and refused to follow orders, so the deputy used his taser on her. She fought with the deputy and he tasered her two more times.

An investigation found that the first use of the taser was not justified.

The deputy was given a 43-hour suspension without pay, lost vacation time and has to be retrained on the use of a taser.

Aim Tasers lower, police told

October 12, 2009
Petty Fong, Toronto Star

Police forces across Canada, including the RCMP and OPP, are immediately changing their Taser use policy after the manufacturer issued a directive that officers should not aim the weapon at a suspect's chest.

Taser International said in a bulletin that it's no longer advisable to aim the conducted energy weapon, which sends out a jolt of electricity, at a target's chest area to avoid impact to the heart.

"[W]e have lowered the recommended point of aim from centre of mass to lower centre of mass for front shots," the company said in a new training bulletin.

Rather than the chest area, which could lead to electricity affecting the heart, the company said police officers should target the back, legs or abdomen.

The new directive comes as the two-year anniversary approaches of the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski, who died Oct. 14, 2007 at Vancouver International Airport.

Taser International is giving its closing submissions this week at the public inquiry headed by retired B.C. judge Thomas Braidwood, who is looking into the circumstances of Dziekanski's death.

Dziekanski, who was approached by four RCMP officers, died within minutes after he was jolted by an RCMP Taser.

A spokesman for the RCMP headquarters in Ottawa Friday said a directive has been sent out to officers to immediately avoid targeting a suspect's chest and head.

Ontario Provincial Police Sgt. Joe Bosie said Sunday that officers received a memo about the new policies last week.

"It makes sense," said Bosie. "Those probes or needles are very sharp and if you were to discharge a Taser in or above the heart area like the neck or eyes it could cause serious injury."

While the latest Tasers are wireless, most others include barbed darts attached to wires that strike the victim, before delivering an electric jolt.

Toronto police had no comment on the new policy, saying a spokesperson would not be available to discuss the matter until Tuesday.

Spokespersons for York, Peel and Durham regional police were also unavailable to discuss the matter.

Vancouver police spokesman Const. Lindsey Houghton said Sunday the municipal force has also received the new directive from Taser International.

"We immediately began advising and training officers to change where they aim from upper back or upper chest to lower centre of mass per the bulletin," he said.

The Calgary and Winnipeg police forces have also advised their officers to lower their aim when using the Taser.

Taser International has strenuously denied at the public inquiry that the weapon was the direct cause of Dziekanski's death.

The 40-year-old Dziekanski was on his first-ever flight from Poland to join his mother in Kamloops, B.C. when he was left lost and wandering at the airport for nearly 10 hours.

Police were summoned after a 911 call of reports that a distraught man was throwing furniture around the arrivals lounge. Within 30 seconds of the RCMP surrounding Dziekanski, the weapon was deployed and fired five times, leaving Dziekanski writhing in agony on the ground.

In its training bulletin, the company said that by avoiding the chest area, it lessens the controversy about whether the jolts do or do not affect the heart.

The risk of a cardiac arrest after the weapon was deployed was "extremely low," according to the company.

While Taser International noted sudden cardiac arrests can occur on "golf courses, in airports" or anywhere, the involvement of a Taser discharge at around the same time would place police officers and the company in a "difficult situation to ascertain what role, if any," the Taser played, according to the bulletin.

B.C. Civil Liberties executive director David Eby said Sunday the weapon should be banned and that changing the targeted area on where to aim is not enough.

"We are disappointed that police have to wait for the company to issue a directive before making these changes," said Eby. "Admittedly that is a step towards limiting the use, but it's hard to imagine in what situation it makes sense to aim at a suspect's back."

In 2004, Robert Wayne Bagnell, 44, died after Vancouver police used a Taser on him, sending two electrical shocks to his chest. His death was later cited as restraint-associated cardiac arrest due to acute cocaine intoxication.

Bagnell's sister, Patti Gillman of Belleville, Ont., has since become an advocate against the use of Tasers by police.

"Finally this is an acknowledgment from Taser that the weapon isn't as safe as they've been claiming," she said Sunday. "Hopefully this will make police even more skeptical about using Tasers."

Amnesty International says 330 people died in the United States after being jolted by stun guns between June 2001 and late 2008. In Canada, the human rights watchdog says at least 26 such deaths occurred from 2003 to 2008.

Jury makes recommendations in Beamsville man's death

July 16, 2009
KARENA WALTER, ST. CATHARINE'S STANDARD

Training for police in the use of Tasers should include courses with "judgment scenarios," a jury from a coroner's inquest has recommended to the province.

The jury, which heard evidence over seven days about the death of 39-year-old James Foldi of Beamsville, made seven recommendations Wednesday, adopting or modifying six suggestions from lawyers.

They also determined Foldi's death was an accident, caused by acute cocaine toxicity leading to sudden cardiac death, in the setting of excited delirium.

That cause was modified from a pathologist's ruling that Foldi died from excited delirium due to acute cocaine poisoning.

A lawyer for Foldi's family had argued excited delirium in itself was not a cause of death.

Foldi died July 1,2005, around 3:35 a. m. after going through a tear in his Beamsville neighbourhood. Jurors heard he seemed "out of it" and ran into three homes that night, waving his arms, calling for help and leaving a trail of blood.

Police tried using a Taser in probe mode and pepper spray to control Foldi and eventually tackled him to the ground next to a garage, where he had jumped through a window to get outside.

He was again Tasered on the ground in the stun mode several times and handcuffed, when he suddenly stopped breathing.

Juries are not obligated to make any recommendations at the end of an inquest.

Jurors in the Foldi case made recommendations directed to Niagara Regional Police, Niagara Emergency Medical Services and the ministries of Health and Community Safety and Correctional Services.

They included a suggestion to the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services that Taser qualification and annual re-qualification training courses also include "judgment scenarios."

The recommendation was not suggested by any of the lawyers, but during the inquest, jurors heard that the province is currently coming up with a new training model for police using Tasers.

The ministry was also told it should promptly distribute any updated or new information from an excited delirium study to police services.

It was also recommended the ministry equip police supervisor vehicles with portable automatic external defibrillators and that other appropriate personnel receive training to properly use the defibrillators.

That recommendation, made by the lawyer for Foldi's family, was not supported by the NRP's lawyer, who argued in court that officers are not medical personnel.

The ministry was given a fourth recommendation that product warning and training materials for use of force options and equipment, including Tasers, is promptly distributed to all appropriate police members.

During the inquest, the jury heard that an e-mail bulletin from Taser International on June 28, 2005, sat in a police officer's inbox while he was on holiday and wasn't distributed to other officers until August that year.

Other jury recommendations: The Ministry of Health and Health and Welfare Canada should make sure all reasonable efforts are made to alert the public to the dangerous effects of cocaine.

NRP and EMS should continue to work together in developing communications protocols aimed at prompt ambulance response.

NRP should review its general order dealing with use of force to ensure it reflects any product warnings and training memoranda for use of force options and equipment, including Tasers.

Niagara Regional Police says five officers in Taser incident will be retrained

July 3, 2009
Posted By KARENA WALTER, SUN MEDIA

The Niagara Regional Police Service says it will likely provide remedial training to officers slammed in a civil court decision for illegally arresting and Tasering a St. Catharines man.

But the five officers taken to task by a Superior Court judge won't be disciplined by the police service because too much time has passed since the Dec. 18, 2003 incident.

The NRP issued a statement Thursday, reacting to the $50,000 civil decision won by 30-year-old Michael Parsons against the service.

The service said it had the opportunity to review the decision and accepts the findings of the court.

"This civil proceeding served to provide the community with a public airing of evidence that concluded in a judgement against the officers involved," Chief Wendy Southall said in the media release.

"We respect the findings of the court and plan a comprehensive internal response."

Parsons sued the police service and five officers -- Michael Woodfine, Dino Cirillo, Todd Priddle, James Tallevi and Darren Forbes -- for negligence, false arrest, assault, malicious prosecution and breach of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

He was the passenger in a Jeep pulled over on the outskirts of Niagara Falls and testified he was dragged out of the vehicle by police and assaulted.

During the incident, Parsons said he was choked, pulled into a ditch and Tasered 10 to 15 times, including in his genitals and while handcuffed.

The officers claimed Parsons resisted arrest and was not cooperative.

After a civil trial in Welland in March, Justice Raymond Harris released his decision this week strongly condemning the officers involved.

"The events that unfolded at the side of the road that December evening strike me as epitomizing arbitrary and capricious conduct deserving of strong condemnation from this court," he wrote.

The judge said he believed the police engaged in an act of reprisal against Parsons for yelling, "Hey baby," out of the Jeep window at one of the offi-cers.

"This was not a situation where the officers were confronted by an aggressive and assaultive man requiring them to defend themselves," Harris wrote. "The circumstances suggest that the opposite was true."

He called the officers actions "troubling" and "offensive" and didn't find their testimony credible.

"Each of these officers abused their position of authority in a manner which cannot be condoned."

The police service said in its statement yesterday that a public complaint about the officers was not made at the time of the incident.

As a result, an investigation into potential misconduct of the officers was not conducted at the time.

Disciplinary charges against the officers involved would be problematic now, the NRP said, because of time limitations in the Police Services Act as well as "notions of fairness and natural justice."

The statement was released just after 5 p. m. and media relations officer Const. Ken Bettes said no one in the executive office was available to comment further.

Bettes did explain that a disciplinary charge must be laid within six months from the time of an infraction under the police services act.

The NRP said it will use other measures to address issues raised by the decision. It said that is expected to include remedial training for the offi-cers focusing on powers of arrest, use of force and note taking.

In his decision, Harris said that although officers justified pulling over the Jeep because Parsons was hanging out the window, none of them wrote that observation in their notes.

The NRP's policy on Tasers has changed since the time of the incident. Prior to July 2008, a Taser could be used on a suspect "actively resisting" an offi-cer.

Since that time, a suspect must be exhibiting "assaultive behaviour."