Man dies after being tasered in Vancouver Airport

[michalek]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Please refer to pages 1 through 28.

Edit: I am guessing in Poland, there is a strong possibility, one might just go missing for pulling that stunt.

Have you ever been in Poland ?

[Sainters7]

I agree Canuck Hater. I mean all he did was walk through an airport security checkpoint(known to be arguably the most rigid place a common citizen can possibly walk through, especially since 9/11), act like a complete lunatic, and resist arrest while throwing things around. If I pulled a stunt like that I'd expect to get maybe a polite tap on the shoulder and be asked to calm down. Anything more and we may as well be in Auschwitz.

It's a completely horrible, unfortunate situation for sure, no question there. But given the way he was behaving, in no way do I find the officers involved criminally responsible. If I walked through an airport checkpoint screaming, throwing around things, and resisting arrest, I'd completely expect my ass to get tasered.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

I agree Canuck Hater. I mean all he did was walk through an airport security checkpoint(known to be arguably the most rigid place a common citizen can possibly walk through, especially since 9/11), act like a complete lunatic, and resist arrest while throwing things around. If I pulled a stunt like that I'd expect to get maybe a polite tap on the shoulder and be asked to calm down. Anything more and we may as well be in Auschwitz.

It's a completely horrible, unfortunate situation for sure, no question there. But given the way he was behaving, in no way do I find the officers involved criminally responsible. If I walked through an airport checkpoint screaming, throwing around things, and resisting arrest, I'd completely expect my ass to get tasered.

That's the crux of it right there I think. I wouldn't expect that unless I started uttering bomb threats or wielding a more conventional weapon than a stapler. For what that guy did, I'd expect to be gang tackled by about three physically fit, highly trained police officers, probably sustaining a few broken rids and some cuts and bruises. I wouldn't expect to get tasered four or five times in rapid succession, or however many times it was. Two good friends of mine who are RCMP officers share that view as well.

[metallicat]

Despite the fact that this argument has been done way too many times in this thread...

I don't think the cops knew what was in his hand other than a blunt object. He was flailing it around, tasers are known to be pretty damn safe and to save the lives of good guys and bad guys alike, and they acted to diffuse a tense situation. It all happened quickly, and it's sure easy to sit back and tell these trained police officers what they should have done differently.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

That's the crux of it right there I think. I wouldn't expect that unless I started uttering bomb threats or wielding a more conventional weapon than a stapler. For what that guy did, I'd expect to be gang tackled by about three physically fit, highly trained police officers, probably sustaining a few broken rids and some cuts and bruises. I wouldn't expect to get tasered four or five times in rapid succession, or however many times it was. Two good friends of mine who are RCMP officers share that view as well.

So some broken ribs is a better option than a tase? Which in the majority of cases has no side effects whats so ever. Not to mention possible injuries to the police officers?

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

So some broken ribs is a better option than a tase? Which in the majority of cases has no side effects whats so ever. Not to mention possible injuries to the police officers?

I think broken ribs are better a better option than a coffin, which does occur with too great a rate of incidence with Tasers, especially when used on a subject who is in a state of excited delirium. In subjects in a state of excited delirium the risk of a fatal outcome with Taser use is much greater, so extra caution must be used.

There really isn't much point in kicking this football around though. It's one of those cases that polarizes the two sides of the debate and the differences in views are pretty much irreconcilable. I think the only common ground between the two sides is that it's a really tragic, messed up incident, made worse by the fact that international politics are woven into the whole schmozzle.

Edit: Here's a couple links about the use of Tasers on subjects who are in a state of excited delirium.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=7622314

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/ta...-delirium.html

I ran a much more in depth article on the subject in a magazine I publish, but I don't want to post that link for privacy reasons.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

I don't think the cops knew what was in his hand other than a blunt object. He was flailing it around,

He was? What part of my post did you fail to read?

RCMP Cpl. Benjamin (Monty) Robinson, the officer in charge at the time and the last of four Mounties to testify at the Braidwood inquiry, admitted he asked to "change" his evidence after viewing a video of the death shot by a bystander.
The inquiry heard that in his initial report, Robinson claimed 12 times that the Polish immigrant swung a stapler at the officers.
This report, along with those of his fellow officers, was proved wrong by a bystander video of Dziekanski's death.
"I was mistaken but I was telling the truth. I sort of blended the whole interaction with him," he told the inquiry Monday.

As I said there are at least 4 inconsistencies/blatant lies with the story.
1. No of times tased.
2. Wasn't swinging the stapler as claimed (thank god for video evidence or he'd probably have had a rocket launcher in his hand).
3. One cop says they discussed the incident at the debriefing. Other cop says it wasn't mentioned at all and they just had a group hug.
4. Time of cardiac arrest.

Cops claim it was just as the firemen turned up. Paramedics turned up after the firemen and report the man was being restrained face down and was blue.
RCMP training suggests you restrain dead men?

As I said, I'm not goint to debate whether or not the force was appropriate or not as it's been done.

It's the lies and attempted cover up that bother me. If you can't see from a combination of his drunk driving incident fairy tale story coupled with his changing his story and contradcting colleagues how this cop will fabricate anything to avoid accountability and responsibility for his actions then I give up.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

I think broken ribs are better a better option than a coffin, which does occur with too great a rate of incidence with Tasers, especially when used on a subject who is in a state of excited delirium. In subjects in a state of excited delirium the risk of a fatal outcome with Taser use is much greater, so extra caution must be used.

There really isn't much point in kicking this football around though. It's one of those cases that polarizes the two sides of the debate and the differences in views are pretty much irreconcilable. I think the only common ground between the two sides is that it's a really tragic, messed up incident, made worse by the fact that international politics are woven into the whole schmozzle.

Edit: Here's a couple links about the use of Tasers on subjects who are in a state of excited delirium.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=7622314

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/ta...-delirium.html

I ran a much more in depth article on the subject in a magazine I publish, but I don't want to post that link for privacy reasons.

Did you read the CBC link? They state that...

"This is not due to a Taser," says Deborah Mash, a neurology professor at the University of Miami who has been studying excited delirium for 20 years. "This is in the brain and they die because the mechanisms that control the heart and the lungs fail."

"Over the years, they've used various forms of restraints. Some have been hog-tied, some have been in hobble restraints, some have had baton strikes, some have had pepper spray, and more recently now the Taser," Mash says. "What I've seen is that there's no difference from pre-Taser times to the present when Tasers are used."

Which kinda contradicts your NPR link....

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by jar_e

Did you read the CBC link? They state that...





Which kinda contradicts your NPR link....

Yup, it does, but I figured I'd post articles on both sides of the debate for balance. From what I've read, which is more than just those two articles, it's not absolutely clear either way, hence why I chose alternate views. However, from what I've read and based on the stats, there is definitely cause to be cautious with excited delirium subjects. One of the problems with this and any research on Tasers is that Taser Inc. themselves are one of the main sources of research, and they are hardly unbiased.

Edit:

The CBC article also states:

All medical staff are trained how to handle patients who are acting agitated and they can usually be talked down from their state, he says.

I think in the Vancouver case it would have been feasible to quarantine the guy in that area of the terminal he was in and bring in someone with medical training (a paramedic) who might have been able to non-violently defuse the situation, which would have produced a better outcome than tasering the guy. Based on the evidence I just don't see where the guy posed a clear and immediate danger, especially over the the course of the multiple hours that this incident took to unfold.

There's also evidence to suggest the airport's emergency response protocol put up political and bureaucratic barriers that blocked the paramedics from responding earlier, so this is another area to assign blame.

Certainly there's enough blame to go around in many directions, and it was the failure of the entire system that lead to the guys' death. But the Tasers were the final link, and depending on your bias, the ultimate cause. It is relatively well known among emergency responders that there may a link between taser use and the increased likelihood of negative outcomes with excited delirium subjects, so I think greater prudence should have been exercised. If the officers involved were not aware of this link, that is a failure in the system itself.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

But the Tasers were the final link, and depending on your bias, the ultimate cause.

There's also the matter of incompetence/negligence when it comes to monitoring his health and well-being post-taser that should be considered. It now appears obvious that no monitoring of the individual was conducted for any detrimental harm.

An ambulance attendant at the inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski testified Thursday that the man was dead before medical help reached him at Vancouver International Airport.
Allan Maciak told the Braidwood inquiry that it was apparent Dziekanski’s condition was critical the moment he and his partner entered the airport.
“It was obvious his facial features — what you could see of his face — was blue and cyanotic,” he said.
Maciak recalled that as he approached Dziekanski, he saw his body — lying chest down — on the floor with his hands cuffed behind him.
Both Dziekanski’s hands and face were blue.
Dziekanski’s appearance, according to Maciak, indicated he had not been getting oxygen for a period of time. The ambulance attendant testified he knelt down and rolled Dziekanski over and realized he had lost control of his bladder.
“What was your impression about his state of being?” asked Art Vertlieb, the inquiry lawyer.
“Mr. Dziekanski was dead,” responded Maciak.

All this despite the cop's claim:

Thursday’s testimony raises questions about what RCMP supervising officer Cpl. Benjamin Monty Robinson told the inquiry earlier. Robinson insisted he put Dziekanski on his side and continually monitored his pulse and breathing.
The officer’s first aid certification expired five years earlier.

So the man was either lying on his side in the recovery position alive being monitored by the cop or face down dead with his hands cuffed behind his back?

How the hell can you be mistaken about something like that?

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...ambulance.html

edit to add this all trusting post from the beginning of the thread in response to the cops' first statement.

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

Ya so he is probably lying..you know those dirty cops

Yup, those dirty cops. Who'd have thought they were capable of lying? Say what now?

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Bagor

There's also the matter of incompetence/negligence when it comes to monitoring his health and well-being post-taser that should be considered. It now appears obvious that no monitoring of the individual was conducted for any detrimental harm.

An ambulance attendant at the inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski testified Thursday that the man was dead before medical help reached him at Vancouver International Airport.
Allan Maciak told the Braidwood inquiry that it was apparent Dziekanski’s condition was critical the moment he and his partner entered the airport.
“It was obvious his facial features — what you could see of his face — was blue and cyanotic,” he said.
Maciak recalled that as he approached Dziekanski, he saw his body — lying chest down — on the floor with his hands cuffed behind him.
Both Dziekanski’s hands and face were blue.
Dziekanski’s appearance, according to Maciak, indicated he had not been getting oxygen for a period of time. The ambulance attendant testified he knelt down and rolled Dziekanski over and realized he had lost control of his bladder.
“What was your impression about his state of being?” asked Art Vertlieb, the inquiry lawyer.
“Mr. Dziekanski was dead,” responded Maciak.

All this despite the cop's claim:

Thursday’s testimony raises questions about what RCMP supervising officer Cpl. Benjamin Monty Robinson told the inquiry earlier. Robinson insisted he put Dziekanski on his side and continually monitored his pulse and breathing.
The officer’s first aid certification expired five years earlier.

So the man was either lying on his side in the recovery position alive being monitored by the cop or face down dead with his hands cuffed behind his back?

How the hell can you be mistaken about something like that?

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...ambulance.html

Certainly the officers' testimony post-Taser are, um, shaky at best. My comments were in the context of the chain of events pre-Taser though, and not meant to apply to anything beyond the Taser/excited delirium issue.

Off topic, the reporter who wrote that article and referred to the paramedic as an "ambulance attendant" is ignorant and unprofessional. Calling a paramedic an ambulance attendant is pejorative, and akin to calling a police officer a pig, or a firefighter a mattress back.
/end rant

[Canuck-Hater]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

I agree Canuck Hater. I mean all he did was walk through an airport security checkpoint(known to be arguably the most rigid place a common citizen can possibly walk through, especially since 9/11), act like a complete lunatic, and resist arrest while throwing things around. If I pulled a stunt like that I'd expect to get maybe a polite tap on the shoulder and be asked to calm down. Anything more and we may as well be in Auschwitz.

It's a completely horrible, unfortunate situation for sure, no question there. But given the way he was behaving, in no way do I find the officers involved criminally responsible. If I walked through an airport checkpoint screaming, throwing around things, and resisting arrest, I'd completely expect my ass to get tasered.

A complete lunatic? I think thats been blown out of proportion... From the video footage I've seen all the man really did was raise his voice and hold a wooden chair at chest height as if he was ready to throw it. There were 4 officers and instead of physically restraining the man they tased him- this is what gets me.

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by michalek

I can bet that you would not be zapped. Lets be serious here , 4 trained officers were not able to arrest one guy with out using tasers ???

thats the whole point..the tazers are used so they don't have to try and physically take someone down.

[metallicat]

I would bet that 99.5% of all taser applications, results in the bad guy crying for his mommy, and NOT dying. They are safe, effective tools to keep people alive.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

I would bet that 99.5% of all taser applications, results in the bad guy crying for his mommy, and NOT dying. They are safe, effective tools to keep people alive.

As long as the police use them correctly which it appears they did not in this case.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

I would bet that 99.5% of all taser applications, results in the bad guy crying for his mommy, and NOT dying. They are safe, effective tools to keep people alive.

I would bet that 99.5% of people would recognise a pulseless, lifeless, nonbreathing, cold, blue individual as being a dead person.

Unfortunately the cops fit the 0.5% bracket.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

thats the whole point..the tazers are used so they don't have to try and physically take someone down.

I thought Tasers were supposed be the last resort short of deadly force, ie, a gun. I wasn't aware they are an alternative to physical force in situations where physical force is what is called for. Is this really the protocol?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

I thought Tasers were supposed be the last resort short of deadly force, ie, a gun. I wasn't aware they are an alternative to physical force in situations where physical force is what is called for. Is this really the protocol?

In Canadian use of force models, intermediate weapons are generally considered appropriate force options once a subject exhibits behaviour that can be interpreted as actively resistant towards an officer. Most Canadian police services have assessed CEWs as intermediate weapons, and viable less-lethal force options. Less-lethal weapons are "those [weapons] whose use is not intended to cause serious injury or death."9 Typically, intermediate weapons bridge the gap between soft physical control and lethal force. All municipal and provincial police forces follow or have a variant of the National Use of Force Model.

http://images.google.ca/imgres?imgur...a%3DN%26um%3D1

Thus, at the time of the of this incident, an active resister could be taserd.

For the record, as Jolinar stated, they are considered intermediate weapons but are generally reserved for assaultive behavior. It certainly fits this case as one could clearly articulate he was assaultive.

Do we know how long it took for the paramedic to arrive on scene? To me, that makes a difference when it comes to monitoring the fella.

Someone brought up excited delerium. People displaying those signs can die from a physical struggle.

I would suggest the mortality rate for a taser is less then regular physical restraint- the ole dog pile as some have suggested. I am sure if he was dogpiled and suffered a broken ribs people wpuld be asking why they didn't use tasers.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

For the record, as Jolinar stated, they are considered intermediate weapons but are generally reserved for assaultive behavior. It certainly fits this case as one could clearly articulate he was assaultive.

Do we know how long it took for the paramedic to arrive on scene? To me, that makes a difference when it comes to monitoring the fella.

Someone brought up excited delerium. People displaying those signs can die from a physical struggle.

I would suggest the mortality rate for a taser is less then regular physical restraint- the ole dog pile as some have suggested. I am sure if he was dogpiled and suffered a broken ribs people wpuld be asking why they didn't use tasers.

Aside from the whole role of the RCMP and the Taser, the paramedic response is something else that needs to be looked at in this case. The paramedics themselves didn't do anything wrong, but from of the testimony I've read it sounds like some of the managers responsible for the airport's response made bad decisions at best. It sounds like the paramedics wanted to respond a lot sooner than they did, but weren't allowed to by their superiors.