Vancouver Airport Taser death

[Specs]

Don't take this to mean I think I was a perfect airport agent because I wasnt'.

Well I'm impressed.

[conehead]

Border agency's Taser report due by week's end: Day

Last Updated: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 | 4:40 PM ET

CBC News

A Canada Border Services Agency report on the circumstances surrounding a fatal Taser incident last month at Vancouver International Airport could be released as soon as Thursday, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day told the House of Commons.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said a Canada Border Services Agency report on the circumstances surrounding the death of Robert Dziekanski will be submitted by the end of the week.

(CBC)

"There'll be a first report from the border service agencies, we think, tomorrow," Day said Wednesday during question period.

The CBSA report is one of four probes, including a provincial public inquiry, into the death of Robert Dziekanski on Oct. 14.

Dziekanski died shortly after being stunned by a Taser and pinned down by four RCMP officers in the arrivals area of the Vancouver International Airport.

Continue Article

The Polish immigrant had been at the airport for about 10 hours and, unable to speak English, became confused and agitated while waiting for his mother to meet him. His mother, who lives in Kamloops, had waited for him for several hours before finally leaving the airport after she was unable to locate her son.

It is unclear where Dziekanski was and what he was doing during his 10 hours at the airport and why no translators or airport staff were on hand to assist him.

On Wednesday, Day rejected an accusation by Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion that the government has taken no action on the Taser incident because of a "vacuum of leadership" at the federal level.

"The federal government was the first to move on this particular incident, long before the tragic video was shown, long before there was one word of concern from the Liberals," Day said.

"We asked for the review related to the Tasers.… We took action."

Taser reviewer had earlier concerns

The RCMP's use of a Taser on Dziekanski, which was captured on a video and broadcast widely, has been criticized in recent weeks.

Day's comments on the CBSA report came hours after the man chosen to review the RCMP's use of Tasers said he had been previously concerned the force was "too casual" in its approach with the stun guns.

Paul Kennedy, who leads the independent body that handles complaints against the RCMP, brought up the issue of Tasers in a report earlier this year.

(CBC)

Paul Kennedy, a former prosecutor who now leads the independent body that handles complaints against the RCMP, brought up the issue of Tasers in the annual report he published in June 2007.

"I expressed concerns that I saw [the Taser] being used in what I thought was too casual a fashion, almost as a come-along device," Kennedy told CBC News on Wednesday.

Kennedy's annual report, which was addressed to Day, reviewed 300 to 400 RCMP complaint files from 2006 and 2007 and picked out several themes, one of them being Taser use.

The report notes that Tasers are beneficial when they are used in situations where RCMP officers might otherwise have to use lethal force, like firing a gun. However, the report said there are questions about Tasers being used on subjects who might be unco-operative, but could still be handled with less intrusive police techniques.

"I think this is inappropriate," Kennedy said. "[The Taser was] being used in cases where I didn't think the behaviour was combative or resistant and required its use."

The report, which is published online, outlines one case that troubled Kennedy in particular.

According to the report, the RCMP were called to a house to subdue an intoxicated woman. An altercation ensued and police used both pepper spray and one application of a Taser gun on the woman, who was then handcuffed and transported to the police detachment.

When the woman refused to go into her cell, police used the Taser on her twice more, even though her hands were still handcuffed behind her back.

"Although she verbally refused to comply with the officer's direction to proceed to a holding cell, she posed no physical threat and offered no physical resistance," the report says.

"A second RCMP member arrived to assist and the woman was eventually put into the cell, but not before being threatened with another application of the Taser."

Names, locations and dates are not used in the report, for privacy reasons.

Kennedy's commission at the time ruled that the first use of the Taser was justified in the case, but the subsequent applications were improper. The commission recommended that officers receive more training on use of Tasers and that the force apologize to the woman.

'He's given me a very broad mandate'

Kennedy said that in the review he is now conducting he will examine the specific use of the Taser in the Vancouver airport incident, looking at whether policy was followed and whether that policy was appropriate.

On Tuesday, Day announced Kennedy would be reviewing the incident and submitting a report by Dec. 12.

Kennedy said Day wants the report to have a wide scope, looking beyond the specific Vancouver incident and examining the Taser policies and protocols the RCMP use across the country.

"He's given me a very broad mandate," Kennedy said.

"One of my goals is not only to improve policing, but it is to restore and maintain the public's confidence in police, because if you do not have the public's confidence, the police will not be as effective as they can be."

[Mitch Cronin]

...Not Day and not Dion and not all the kings horses can bring this man to life again. I see these politico's trying to score points over this as pathetic little scalliwags feeding at a slop trough. ...and it strikes me as being rather inappropriate now.

[UpperDeck]

I think you're right, Mitch. I don't think anyone involved ever thought that their actions on that day would contribute to the death of an individual even as they engaged in the conduct (or neglect) which will now be scrutinized.

I'm certain that the same can be said of many others who engage in a course of conduct which ultimately is identified as a contributing cause to death or injury. Of course, in most of those cases, one would urge that all of the relevant facts and circumstances should be known before judgement is rendered.

[Moon The Loon]

The system will determine whether it was criminal or just tragic.

I can't stop thinking about this fellow's poor, distraught mother...

[Kip Powick]

RCMP revised taser policy to allow multiple jolts

JESSICA LEEDER AND CAROLINE ALPHONSO

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

November 24, 2007 at 12:36 AM EST

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

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

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

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

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

It is not known if Mr. Dziekanski was suffering from a so-called excited delirium episode when he was tasered twice while surrounded by four RCMP officers last month at Vancouver's International Airport. But RCMP familiar with the incident have hinted that the officers who responded believed him to fit that category.

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

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

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

Mr. Dziekanski, 40, was screaming and writhing on the airport floor before he died minutes after a second taser shot.

The events leading up to his death were captured on amateur video and its airing has prompted a national debate on the use of tasers and sparked seven probes into Mr. Dziekanski's death and tasers in general, including an investigation by the House of Commons public safety committee.

Cpl. Gilles said the RCMP's policy could change again once the investigations into Mr. Dziekanski's death are concluded. But he said it's unlikely the force, which was one of the first in the country to adopt tasers, will drop the weapon.

The most current policy was relaxed after the force said it came across new medical information about how to best handle people with symptoms of excited delirium.

Cpl. Gilles said officers are taught to get people suffering from excited delirium under control as quickly as possible in order to get them into a state where they can safely get medical help.

“They can't be treated until they're controlled,” he said. “Taser is the tool that gives us the best option.”

But the term “excited delirium” is not formally recognized by the World Health Organization nor the American Medical Association as an actual psychological or medical condition.

However, the condition is being used increasingly by coroners tasked with attributing causes of death among victims in police custody. David Evans, Ontario's regional supervising coroner for investigations, described it as a “forensic term” not a medical one.

“I think previous to the description of excited delirium, [it] was sometimes called custody death,” he said.

The RCMP, meanwhile, refer to the condition as a syndrome and a seminar on how to recognize the trademark signs of excited delirium features prominently in the force's two-day, 20-hour taser training course.

During that course, officers are told people in a state of excited delirium do not feel pain, meaning officers' traditional methods of restraining them — with bodily force, a steel baton or pepper spray — are rendered less effective.

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

“Clearly you don't want to do multiple exposures if you don't need to, but if the choice was to have to punch the person or hit them, or do another taser, you'd rather do the second taser exposure,” he said.

Still, Cpl. Gilles conceded that the policy on multiple taser shots “may be hazardous. We don't know.”

But until more research is done, he added: “What officers are taught is to press the trigger, release and assess.”

The RCMP have not made any changes to their protocol in the weeks since Mr. Dziekanski's death.

But other police forces have taken a hard look at the use of tasers.

The Yukon Department of Justice has announced an immediate moratorium on use of the weapons.

And the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary has temporarily suspended its purchase of tasers for front-line officers.

“We were in the process of obtaining the equipment so we could begin training our front-line officers,” said Constable Paul Davis, spokesman for the RNC. “The intention was to equip the front-line officers. Things have changed. We decided that we would wait to see the outcome of these reviews before we make those purchases.”

RNC officers began carrying firearms about a decade ago. Only the tactical unit, which responds to the most volatile circumstances, has been armed with tasers. But Constable Davis said no one has received a jolt of electricity from an RNC taser.

[Kip Powick]

The Incident

By Gary Cameron

Like the ancient camp followers who used to come down from the hills after a battle to finish off the wounded and loot the bodies, Canadian media outlets have used the tragic death of Robert Dziekanski to manufacture another Rodney King franchise.

Let me explain. For those who don't remember, Rodney King was an impaired driver on parole for robbery who was involved in a harrowing pursuit through Los Angeles at speeds up to 115 miles per hour. As was the case with the airport incident, some of the arrest was caught on tape. King resisted arrest, attacked the officers and attempted to grab the weapon of one officer at the scene at the start of the altercation, most of which was not recorded. King continued to resist even after being tasered, tackled, and struck with batons. The tape in its entirety tended to support the police version of what occurred but most people never saw it. Instead, only the most damning excerpts from the video of this arrest were played non-stop around the world until everyone believed the media's version of what happened, even before all the evidence was revealed and the investigation was completed. The man who videotaped the incident got rich, King became a multimillionaire, some of the police officers involved had their lives ruined, and the media dined off this event until their reckless handling of the story helped incite the LA race riots of 1992 that resulted in 50-60 deaths, 2000 injuries and about a billion dollars in damages.

The media's rush to judgment on the Dziekanski matter is staggeringly cynical. Excerpts from the tape have now made their way around the world to the delight of "snuff film" aficionados, accompanied by various media-generated descriptions ranging from "disturbing" all the way to "murder" and "execution" that, needless to say, tend to color the public's perception of the tape. The same media outlets who routinely lecture us about the importance of robbers, murderers and terrorists being afforded their civil liberties and their right to a free and impartial trial seem to have decided that it's okay to make vile and disgusting accusations against police officers involved in incidents that end tragically without providing a shred of evidence to back them up. Had one of the officers been killed in the struggle instead, the story would have pretty much died a few days after his or her funeral.

No one in the media has bothered to look at this from a police perspective, as usual, since any attempt to add balance to the "conventional wisdom" of this story would quickly expose its misrepresentations and render it just another tragic in-custody death that requires nothing more than the usual investigation and subsequent inquest. Of course routine police-involved deaths (at least those that weren't taped) don't generate international media coverage, or guarantee the kind of ratings or circulation that generate revenues for the news outlet, or the kind of recognition and awards that media outlets and reporters crave.

Here's an alternative version of events you won't see elsewhere, and while (like the media) I have only seen what's on the tape, I believe it shows something entirely different from the story the media have fabricated. The four airport Mounties who approached Dziekanski would have been told only that a very large man had gone berserk, was acting irrationally, was making threatening gestures to bystanders while holding a chair over his head, and was damaging airport property. They had no way of knowing where he had spent the last few hours, and we now know he wasn't just self-exiled in the secure area of the airport; he could have retrieved a weapon from his baggage or, for all they knew, carried one into the airport with him. They had no way of knowing why he was acting irrationally, but they did have a responsibility to take this person into custody for his own safety, prevent the situation from escalating and make certain that no innocent bystanders are hurt in the process.

It's safe to assume that Dziekanski recognized the Mounties as police officers because he apparently yelled "Policja" at them as he (according to the tape) appeared to pick up a wicked-looking object (a stapler?) and threaten them with it, instead of calming down and cooperating with them, as most of us would have done under the circumstances. Why did he act this way? The explanation may well be found buried in a recent Vancouver Sun news story. The media have portrayed this man as a bumbling, innocent waif who simply got upset because he felt abandoned. However, if we believe the Sun, Dziekanski had "...drinking problems and had a troubled past, which included a five-year jail sentence for robbery..." He had obviously already had extensive dealings with the police in Poland and whether he spoke English or not, he would have known that his behavior was, to put it mildly, unacceptable.

I've watched the tape and I can't see anything out of the ordinary with respect to the actions of those four police officers. They used the Taser on him when he threatened them, something that has been done thousands of times over the years, almost always without resulting in death or injury to the suspect. When Dziekanski continued to resist arrest, they sought to control him by restraining him while they handcuffed him, and this same process has been done millions of times, again almost always without harming the suspect. As far as I can tell, the officers did nothing unusual or wrong during this incident. At the very least we should wait until after all the evidence is entered at the inquest before condemning them for doing nothing more than their duty.

Now that politicians are involved, there's a distinct possibility that the careers of police members at the bottom of the food chain will be sacrificed in order to placate the public's need for closure. This would be a grotesque miscarriage of justice, and must not be allowed to happen.

The Consequences

How does the current media campaign to destroy the reputations of these police officers affect us all? There are serious consequences when the media decide to scapegoat and persecute police officers.

Here's an example. We've all seen dramatic media coverage of incidents where police cars speeding to calls or involved in high speed pursuits have crashed. Sometimes these accidents result in death or injury to police officers, suspects or even innocent citizens in the wrong place at the wrong time. At the very least this kind of thing is extremely traumatic for the officer involved, especially when an innocent citizen is the victim. These days, however, it's becoming more and more common for the officers to face criminal or motor vehicle act charges when things go wrong, and this could potentially result in them losing their jobs, or even going to jail. As a result of all the media attention, there are very few high speed pursuits that aren’t called off within seconds nowadays, which means that criminals are pretty much free to do whatever they want in their stolen cars until they crash or run out of gas.

However, there's an unintended side effect of this trend that most citizens probably don't know about. If you asked people how fast police officers should be allowed to drive during pursuits or while attending calls, most would say they should generally not exceed the posted limits, even with lights and sirens, because obviously any higher speeds would be dangerous, hence the law regulating speed limits. If a police officer does speed on his way to a call, and then kills an innocent person in an accident, most people would probably say that the police officer should be charged with an offence. Some would go so far as to say that they should be fired, or jailed.

On the other hand, confront them with a hypothetical situation where they, or someone they love, is home alone, and has called 911 to report that a maniac with a weapon in his hand is kicking down their door. The nearest police car is five minutes away if it travels a safe, legal speed, but the complainant will probably be dead if help doesn't arrive in half that time. Under these circumstances, ask them how fast they think the police should travel to their call for assistance? It's a little different when the life at stake is yours, or that of a loved one, isn't it?

Here's a dirty little secret for you. When I was a police officer in Vancouver back in the seventies and eighties, we were often faced with manpower shortages, just as today's cops are. Consequently, most of us regularly drove faster than the speed limit, with or without lights and sirens, to get to calls where we thought people were in trouble and needed our help. If we hadn't broken the speed limit, many of these calls would have turned out very differently because we were their only hope. If you've ever been in imminent danger, you'll understand how important it is to get the help you need in a timely fashion. A minute can mean the difference between a cop arriving in time to arrest a suspect before he has a chance to kill or injure an innocent victim, or a cop who gets there after the action is over and ends up taking an assault or a murder report.

Nobody ordered us to speed, and the law offered precious little support when something did go wrong in the process. We did it out of a sense of duty and honor, simply because we believed in the Job and learned to live with the fact that if something did go wrong, we'd probably be in a world of trouble even though we were confident that our actions were justified by the circumstances. Had we traveled at the speed limit instead, no supervisor would have reprimanded us for not getting to the call quicker, and the victims, or their next of kin, would never have known why they didn't get help in time to prevent a tragedy.

Now put yourself in the shoes of the police officer assigned to this kind of call. They've seen how cops who get involved in controversial incidents are pilloried in the press, threatened with legal consequences, and occasionally face the possibility of going to jail or losing their jobs, even though they honestly believe they've done nothing wrong. If you were a police officer with a family to support and a mortgage to pay, knowing the consequences should you decide to break the law and exceed the speed limit in order to help somebody in danger, exactly how fast would you travel to an urgent call for assistance?

[deicer]

Speaking of Rodney King

[Kip Powick]

The Taser is going wireless.

Until now, the electric-shock gun consisted of two barbed darts attached to wires that shoot out and strike the victim, immobilizing the person with 50,000 volts of electricity, causing severe pain and intense muscle contraction.

But the wires could only extend a few metres. With the new "extended range electronic projectile," or XREP, the Taser has been turned into a kind of self-contained shotgun shell and can be fired, wire-free, from a standard shotgun, which police typically have in their arsenal already.

The first electrode hooks on to the target, the second electrode falls and makes contact elsewhere on the body, completing the circuit and activating the shock. It can blast someone as far as 30 metres away, and, unlike the current stun guns, whose shock lasts five seconds, the XREP lasts 20 seconds, enough time to "take the offender into custody without risking injury to officers."

Taser International spokesperson Steve Tuttle says the XREP would be perfect in a standoff. "Here's someone you just don't want to get anywhere near," he says.

The XREP is one of two major new applications the Scottsdale, Ariz., company is preparing to field test, a prospect that makes Taser's critics anxious. They say more study is needed of the old products, let alone the new.

Tasers are sparking all sorts of questions and concerns these days.

Like death after Tasing. Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski died after the RCMP Tased him when he'd become agitated after spending 10 hours inside the secure area at the Vancouver airport.

Or questionable Tasing. University of Florida student Andrew Meyer was Tased even though a handful of officers had already piled on top of him after he refused to stop asking former presidential candidate John Kerry questions at the microphone. (He's the one who uttered that now infamous plea that has spawned bumper stickers and T-shirts: "Don't Tase me, bro!")

Tasers are now used by more than 11,000 law enforcement agencies in 44 countries. There are more than 428,000 Tasers in the field, not to mention the tens of thousands of Tasers that have been sold to civilians.

And the innovations keep coming.

Besides the XREP, the company has developed a device meant to keep someone from approaching a certain area – a tactic called "area denial." "What if you could drop everyone in a given area to the ground with the simple push of a button?" asks a dramatic promotional video for the "Shockwave."

Taser has turned its weapon into a connected series of six darts arranged in an arc. The company says the device can be extended in a chain or stacked "like Lego," depending on the needs of the user.

So an army platoon, for instance, could use it to prevent unwanted people from approaching their camp, and not have to risk getting close to their targets.

Amnesty International, which has raised concerns for years, says the Shockwave poses serious risks of inappropriate use. When you target an entire area, or a crowd, you can't distinguish between the individuals you're trying to restrain, says Hilary Homes, a security and human rights campaigner for Amnesty International Canada.

"It targets everybody to the same intensity or effect," Homes says. "With materials like that, you worry about ...arbitrary and indiscriminate use."

Tuttle says the technology will be used for military applications, "not for a riot in Toronto."

Amnesty says that between 2001 and Sept. 30, 2007, there were more than 290 deaths of individuals struck by police Tasers in North America, including 16 in Canada. It reports that only 25 of those electroshocked were armed, and none with firearms. It's calling for a moratorium on their use by police until a full, independent inquiry is held.

Homes says the new shotgun-style Taser doesn't pose any risks that aren't already there with the older weapon, except that "this allows more things to be done from a greater distance."

Mostly, it's the concern over the expansion of this technology even as there is heated debate over the devices' safety. "We'd prefer there weren't new variations until a study of the central technology was done," she says.

The safety concerns revolve around the growing number of deaths following Tasering and the increasing use of the term "excited delirium" by the company and other experts to explain the deaths, while denying the weapon any culpability.

Excited delirium is a catchall phrase to describe symptoms of extreme stress, such as disorientation, profuse sweating, paranoia, and superhuman strength.

When someone is in such a condition – heart racing, blood pressure bursting, fight-or-flight hormones like adrenalin coursing through their body – wouldn't a giant electrical jolt just make things worse?

"Show me the medical and mechanical reasons why it would make it worse when doctors are telling us, when someone is in that situation you should treat it as a medical emergency and get that person to a medical trauma centre in the quickest way," Tuttle says. "With no Taser, he's impervious to pain, agitated, slippery with sweat – you won't get control in five seconds. Maybe you'll use batons, which won't work, pepper spray, which is much more stressful, a bean-bag round, maybe deadly force because the situation spins out of control?"

Dr. David Evans, the Toronto regional supervising coroner for investigations, says that while there's no proof to say the shock could make things worse, "I agree potentially it could." But, he adds, "why aren't they dropping dead immediately?"

Evans says that it doesn't seem to make sense that the Taser is at fault in the deaths, because the deaths have not been instantaneous. "Normally you'd expect that if someone was going to die from electrocution related to electrical discharge, they'd die right there and then, within a few seconds," he says.

Tasering doesn't cause changes in the heart rhythm, or arrhythmia, which leads to death, he says.

It's a view that Ontario's deputy coroner, Dr. Jim Cairns, has used to help shape the Toronto Police Services Board policy toward allowing Toronto police to use Tasers. Cairns also spoke at a Taser tactical conference in Chicago last July about excited delirium.

Taser points out that the weapon has not been implicated in any of the deaths in Canada. "We're just repeating what the medical examiners are saying," says Tuttle. "The vast majority of those cases have been excited delirium or (drug) overdose."

Even though "excited delirium" isn't an accepted medical diagnosis, it may be listed as a "contributory factor" in police-custody deaths, Evans says, but not as the primary cause.

Taser isn't the only company developing electrical stun weapons. Indiana-based Xtreme Alternative Defense Systems has, in a prototype phase, a futuristic weapon that sends out a streak of lightning, apparently by projecting an ionized gas or ionizing the air itself with a laser, which conducts the electricity forward. The technology could potentially also be used to disable vehicles and, in the future, to help militaries neutralize incoming rocket propelled grenades.

Taser expects its new products to be available by mid-2008.

[handyman]

Is it criminal? I think not! They didn't want the outcome, just didn't know any better.

Is it tragic? Of course!

What is it then? Incompetence!

What caused it? Members (RCMP) are too young without benefit of senior member present for guidance.

How do we fix it? We don't! There are not enough experienced guys around as all industries are seeing the reduction of experience in the work-place.

It's only going to get worse in the RCMP and in our industry too.

When are we going to see a horrible accident in Canada? I'm scared to even think about it!