Canada stun gun death 'not justified'

[JRS]

The family of the Polish imigrant Robert Dziekanski, who died in the result of being tasered five times, is finally getting some justice:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10356485.stm

If somebody does not remember what this is about, here is the orginal story from 2007:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7095875.stm

To me, the whole incident still reeks of injustice
The fact that nobody apparently even tried to reason or talk with the victim before the tasering, is just plainly wrong.
They could have found someone who speaks Polish surely(even someone speaking Czech would have been fine since the langues are similar..)
Also, its clear that the use of tasers/stun guns should be tightly regulated, even within law enforcement.

 

[Trekker4747]

Well, the guy wasn't posing any risk but probably needed to be restrained in some manner and if he wasn't going to allow the police to cuff him and restrain him until a translator arrived then he needed to be tazed. Taziing him several times?

And it's interesting the article says his death "wasn't justified" which... No shit? I don't think they tazed him to kill him, they're no lethal weapons. Usually when people die from them they die to complications resulting from the tazer, but not the tazer itself. It's sort of like being shot in a non-lethal area with a through-and-through wound but you die because you're a hemophiliac so you bleed to death.

That said, the police in the video were a little over-the-top in their use of force and over-using the tazer and they should be prosecuted for it. It was an excessive use of force to be sure but to say his "death wasn't justified" is a bit hyperbolic it's not like the cops went after the man to kill him, that's why they used the stungun and not their regular guns!

 

[John200]

I really don't understand this.

The guy comes into Canada ,doesn't speak a word of english ,and starts acting violently.

They had no idea what he was going to do so he got tazed instead of shot.

It's easy to second guess after the fact.

Word to the wise when you come into a country that is predominantly english speak the language.

 

[Danny99]

I really don't understand this.

The guy comes into Canada ,doesn't speak a word of english ,and starts acting violently.

They had no idea what he was going to do so he got tazed instead of shot.

It's easy to second guess after the fact.

Exactly my thought. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

Sure, police have to exercise good judgment, but they should be allowed to take whatever steps they feel at that time, are needed to subdue a subject.

*sits back and waits to get flamed*

 

[John Picard]

I really don't understand this.

The guy comes into Canada ,doesn't speak a word of english ,and starts acting violently.

They had no idea what he was going to do so he got tazed instead of shot.

It's easy to second guess after the fact.

Exactly my thought. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

Sure, police have to exercise good judgment, but they should be allowed to take whatever steps they feel at that time, are needed to subdue a subject.

*sits back and waits to get flamed*

I love reading the expert armchair commentary from people who've never worked as a police officer or don't know anyone who is a police officer. It's especially telling when they're basing their expert opinion on "witness video footage" which only tells a brief chapter of the story and not the entire book.

 

[Goliath]

I think tasers are useful, and should be issued to police officers, the same as firearms.

But there does seem to be a problem with when and how they're being used. From what I've read, at least twenty people have died in Canada after being tasered by police since 2003.

Meanwhile, to the best of my knowledge, nobody has died after being pepper-sprayed or hit with batons.

That suggests to me that tasers are not as harmless as we've been led to believe; that police are using them too freely; and that they should change their training and procedures to reflect these facts.

The Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP, for example, has recommended that tasers should only be issued to experienced officers.

That sounds like it might be a good idea to me. My brother is an RCMP corporal with seven years' experience, and I would trust him to know when to use a taser, and when not to. But I wouldn't say the same about some nervous rookie.

 

[Danny99]

I really don't understand this.

The guy comes into Canada ,doesn't speak a word of english ,and starts acting violently.

They had no idea what he was going to do so he got tazed instead of shot.

It's easy to second guess after the fact.

Exactly my thought. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

Sure, police have to exercise good judgment, but they should be allowed to take whatever steps they feel at that time, are needed to subdue a subject.

*sits back and waits to get flamed*

I love reading the expert armchair commentary from people who've never worked as a police officer or don't know anyone who is a police officer. It's especially telling when they're basing their expert opinion on "witness video footage" which only tells a brief chapter of the story and not the entire book.

Am I wrong in wanted to be protected? I'm not advocating their constant use, they should only be used as a last resort. But I'd rather police officers have this last resort than be toothless when the time comes.

I agree with the thought of giving them only to experienced officers or ones who had done a required training course.

However, they should not be removed from service over one event.

 

[John Picard]

Exactly my thought. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

Sure, police have to exercise good judgment, but they should be allowed to take whatever steps they feel at that time, are needed to subdue a subject.

*sits back and waits to get flamed*

I love reading the expert armchair commentary from people who've never worked as a police officer or don't know anyone who is a police officer. It's especially telling when they're basing their expert opinion on "witness video footage" which only tells a brief chapter of the story and not the entire book.

Am I wrong in wanted to be protected? I'm not advocating their constant use, they should only be used as a last resort. But I'd rather police officers have this last resort than be toothless when the time comes.

I agree with the thought of giving them only to experienced officers or ones who had done a required training course.

However, they should not be removed from service over one event.

Read between the lines. I was agreeing with you.

 

[Goliath]

The problem, I think, is partly one of perception.

Everybody knows what a serious thing it is to shoot someone. Even a police baton can easily cause a fatal skull fracture, if you club someone over the head with it. These are clearly dangerous weapons, and police training reflects this fact.

Pepper spray, by contrast, is much less dangerous. In fact, every RCMP recruit is sprayed in the eyes with pepper spray, as part of their training. I got to watch a video of my brother going through this as part of his training.

But tasers seem to fall into a grey area between the two. They're not obviously deadly, like a pistol. They don't seem as a brutal as a baton. They've been sold to police agencies as "non-lethal" weapons--even though they're classed as prohibited firearms here in Canada.

Psychologically, it must be very easy for police to start thinking of them as if they were equivalent to pepper-sprayers. That's something that only good training and experience can guard against.

 

[Colonel Green]

I really don't understand this.

The guy comes into Canada ,doesn't speak a word of english ,and starts acting violently.

They had no idea what he was going to do so he got tazed instead of shot.

It's easy to second guess after the fact.

Exactly my thought. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

Sure, police have to exercise good judgment, but they should be allowed to take whatever steps they feel at that time, are needed to subdue a subject.

*sits back and waits to get flamed*

I love reading the expert armchair commentary from people who've never worked as a police officer or don't know anyone who is a police officer. It's especially telling when they're basing their expert opinion on "witness video footage" which only tells a brief chapter of the story and not the entire book.

Thomas Braidwood has a great deal of experience working with the police, and made this judgement after studying the video and the testimony of dozens of witnesses for nearly a year. All of those witnesses agreed on a few basic facts:

- The officer deployed his taser within five seconds of arriving on the scene.

- The officers made no effort to communicate with the man before he was tasered. Trekker commented that he wasn't allowing the police to cuff him. Bullshit, they never even tried.

- The victim made no threatening moves towards the officers. He held a stapler in his hand, but it was hanging at his side and he made no threatening gestures with it.

- The victim was turning his back to the officers when he was tazed.

In addition to those facts, all corroborated by multiple witnesses, there are further findings:

- The victim was tazed four times after he was already incapacitated, some of those shocks occurring after an officer was already on top on him.

- The officer's accounts of the incident were demonstrably false and self-serving, all contradicted by the testimony of witnesses and the video record.

The condemnation of these officers is not a knee-jerk reaction. This incident has been analyzed at great length for years by training professionals who have determined that the officers in question acted in a highly unprofessional manner. They walked into the room, saw a large man who appeared agitated and immediately and repeatedly tasered him without making any effort of any kind to diffuse or even understand the situation.

The criminal investigation into the actions of the officers is to be be reopened as a result of the findings of the Braidwood Inquiry and I welcome it. The officers in question are liars and thugs.

I do not believe that the police should be stripped of their tazers, but I do believe that they should be subject to the same oversight as firearms.

 

[Danny99]

I love reading the expert armchair commentary from people who've never worked as a police officer or don't know anyone who is a police officer. It's especially telling when they're basing their expert opinion on "witness video footage" which only tells a brief chapter of the story and not the entire book.

Am I wrong in wanted to be protected? I'm not advocating their constant use, they should only be used as a last resort. But I'd rather police officers have this last resort than be toothless when the time comes.

I agree with the thought of giving them only to experienced officers or ones who had done a required training course.

However, they should not be removed from service over one event.

Read between the lines. I was agreeing with you.

Much appreciated; I fail at reading between the lines.

 

[FordSVT]

Exactly my thought. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

Sure, police have to exercise good judgment, but they should be allowed to take whatever steps they feel at that time, are needed to subdue a subject.

*sits back and waits to get flamed*

I love reading the expert armchair commentary from people who've never worked as a police officer or don't know anyone who is a police officer. It's especially telling when they're basing their expert opinion on "witness video footage" which only tells a brief chapter of the story and not the entire book.

Thomas Braidwood has a great deal of experience working with the police, and made this judgement after studying the video and the testimony of dozens of witnesses for nearly a year. All of those witnesses agreed on a few basic facts:

- The officer deployed his taser within five seconds of arriving on the scene.

- The officers made no effort to communicate with the man before he was tasered. Trekker commented that he wasn't allowing the police to cuff him. Bullshit, they never even tried.

- The victim made no threatening moves towards the officers. He held a stapler in his hand, but it was hanging at his side and he made no threatening gestures with it.

- The victim was turning his back to the officers when he was tazed.

In addition to those facts, all corroborated by multiple witnesses, there are further findings:

- The victim was tazed four times after he was already incapacitated, some of those shocks occurring after an officer was already on top on him.

- The officer's accounts of the incident were demonstrably false and self-serving, all contradicted by the testimony of witnesses and the video record.

The condemnation of these officers is not a knee-jerk reaction. This incident has been analyzed at great length for years by training professionals who have determined that the officers in question acted in a highly unprofessional manner. They walked into the room, saw a large man who appeared agitated and immediately and repeatedly tasered him without making any effort of any kind to diffuse or even understand the situation.

The criminal investigation into the actions of the officers is to be be reopened as a result of the findings of the Braidwood Inquiry and I welcome it. The officers in question are liars and thugs.

I do not believe that the police should be stripped of their tazers, but I do believe that they should be subject to the same oversight as firearms.

John might not be aware that this is a very high profile case in Canada. Everything about how they behaved stinks of unprofessionalism and carelessness, and it's "armchair quarterbacking" to automatically side with the police based on one article.

 

[Danny99]

I side with the police because I know that they don't just pick Joe Dirt off the side of the road and make him a cop.

It was a foul-up, but not one to damn every police officer.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Yeah, exactly. Well said, Ford. Also, here's an article with more detail that doesn't leave any doubt:

http://news.sympatico.cbc.ca/home/rcmp_wrong_to_use_taser_on_dziekanski_report/cf60d5c1

 

[Canadave]

Yeah, I haven't been following this story terribly closely, but I think it does illustrate a need for the RCMP and other police forces to more tightly regulate tasers, and better train officers in their use. I certainly think they can be a valuable tool for law enforcement, but they were almost certainly abused in that situation. And it's sad that someone had to die before we began to realize these things...

 

[Miss Chicken]

Word to the wise when you come into a country that is predominantly english speak the language.

Does this include tourists? Does the same apply to English-speaking people who visit countries where English isn't the main language?

 

[Trekker4747]

I really don't understand this.

The guy comes into Canada ,doesn't speak a word of english ,and starts acting violently.

They had no idea what he was going to do so he got tazed instead of shot.

It's easy to second guess after the fact.

Word to the wise when you come into a country that is predominantly english speak the language.

Yeah, he got tazed for not speaking the local language. No, he got tazed because he was yelling and tossing things around and, seemingly, wouldn't yield to the polices' requests (likely visual) commands to settle down.

 

[Trekker4747]

Exactly my thought. I think it sets a dangerous precedent.

Sure, police have to exercise good judgment, but they should be allowed to take whatever steps they feel at that time, are needed to subdue a subject.

*sits back and waits to get flamed*

I love reading the expert armchair commentary from people who've never worked as a police officer or don't know anyone who is a police officer. It's especially telling when they're basing their expert opinion on "witness video footage" which only tells a brief chapter of the story and not the entire book.

Thomas Braidwood has a great deal of experience working with the police, and made this judgement after studying the video and the testimony of dozens of witnesses for nearly a year. All of those witnesses agreed on a few basic facts:

- The officer deployed his taser within five seconds of arriving on the scene.

- The officers made no effort to communicate with the man before he was tasered. Trekker commented that he wasn't allowing the police to cuff him. Bullshit, they never even tried.

- The victim made no threatening moves towards the officers. He held a stapler in his hand, but it was hanging at his side and he made no threatening gestures with it.

- The victim was turning his back to the officers when he was tazed.

In addition to those facts, all corroborated by multiple witnesses, there are further findings:

- The victim was tazed four times after he was already incapacitated, some of those shocks occurring after an officer was already on top on him.

- The officer's accounts of the incident were demonstrably false and self-serving, all contradicted by the testimony of witnesses and the video record.

The condemnation of these officers is not a knee-jerk reaction. This incident has been analyzed at great length for years by training professionals who have determined that the officers in question acted in a highly unprofessional manner. They walked into the room, saw a large man who appeared agitated and immediately and repeatedly tasered him without making any effort of any kind to diffuse or even understand the situation.

The criminal investigation into the actions of the officers is to be be reopened as a result of the findings of the Braidwood Inquiry and I welcome it. The officers in question are liars and thugs.

I do not believe that the police should be stripped of their tazers, but I do believe that they should be subject to the same oversight as firearms.

Based on this, yeah, the police officers used excessive force and should be whooped.

 

[John Picard]

I love reading the expert armchair commentary from people who've never worked as a police officer or don't know anyone who is a police officer. It's especially telling when they're basing their expert opinion on "witness video footage" which only tells a brief chapter of the story and not the entire book.

Thomas Braidwood has a great deal of experience working with the police, and made this judgement after studying the video and the testimony of dozens of witnesses for nearly a year. All of those witnesses agreed on a few basic facts:

- The officer deployed his taser within five seconds of arriving on the scene.

- The officers made no effort to communicate with the man before he was tasered. Trekker commented that he wasn't allowing the police to cuff him. Bullshit, they never even tried.

- The victim made no threatening moves towards the officers. He held a stapler in his hand, but it was hanging at his side and he made no threatening gestures with it.

- The victim was turning his back to the officers when he was tazed.

In addition to those facts, all corroborated by multiple witnesses, there are further findings:

- The victim was tazed four times after he was already incapacitated, some of those shocks occurring after an officer was already on top on him.

- The officer's accounts of the incident were demonstrably false and self-serving, all contradicted by the testimony of witnesses and the video record.

The condemnation of these officers is not a knee-jerk reaction. This incident has been analyzed at great length for years by training professionals who have determined that the officers in question acted in a highly unprofessional manner. They walked into the room, saw a large man who appeared agitated and immediately and repeatedly tasered him without making any effort of any kind to diffuse or even understand the situation.

The criminal investigation into the actions of the officers is to be be reopened as a result of the findings of the Braidwood Inquiry and I welcome it. The officers in question are liars and thugs.

I do not believe that the police should be stripped of their tazers, but I do believe that they should be subject to the same oversight as firearms.

John might not be aware that this is a very high profile case in Canada. Everything about how they behaved stinks of unprofessionalism and carelessness, and it's "armchair quarterbacking" to automatically side with the police based on one article.

I sided with no one. I always find it humorous that whenever there's "shocking witness video" involving police, the armchair crowd comes out in force demanding the police be held accountable, more training, less lethal weapons, blah blah blah

Society is funny -- people scream and yell if the police have to bust someone's chops (as was recently done in Seattle, and caught on video), yet if lunatic maims or kills then people scream in droves that the police didn't use enough or didn't use force at the right moment.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Thomas Braidwood has a great deal of experience working with the police, and made this judgement after studying the video and the testimony of dozens of witnesses for nearly a year. All of those witnesses agreed on a few basic facts:

- The officer deployed his taser within five seconds of arriving on the scene.

- The officers made no effort to communicate with the man before he was tasered. Trekker commented that he wasn't allowing the police to cuff him. Bullshit, they never even tried.

- The victim made no threatening moves towards the officers. He held a stapler in his hand, but it was hanging at his side and he made no threatening gestures with it.

- The victim was turning his back to the officers when he was tazed.

In addition to those facts, all corroborated by multiple witnesses, there are further findings:

- The victim was tazed four times after he was already incapacitated, some of those shocks occurring after an officer was already on top on him.

- The officer's accounts of the incident were demonstrably false and self-serving, all contradicted by the testimony of witnesses and the video record.

The condemnation of these officers is not a knee-jerk reaction. This incident has been analyzed at great length for years by training professionals who have determined that the officers in question acted in a highly unprofessional manner. They walked into the room, saw a large man who appeared agitated and immediately and repeatedly tasered him without making any effort of any kind to diffuse or even understand the situation.

The criminal investigation into the actions of the officers is to be be reopened as a result of the findings of the Braidwood Inquiry and I welcome it. The officers in question are liars and thugs.

I do not believe that the police should be stripped of their tazers, but I do believe that they should be subject to the same oversight as firearms.

John might not be aware that this is a very high profile case in Canada. Everything about how they behaved stinks of unprofessionalism and carelessness, and it's "armchair quarterbacking" to automatically side with the police based on one article.

I sided with no one. I always find it humorous that whenever there's "shocking witness video" involving police, the armchair crowd comes out in force demanding the police be held accountable, more training, less lethal weapons, blah blah blah

Society is funny -- people scream and yell if the police have to bust someone's chops (as was recently done in Seattle, and caught on video), yet if lunatic maims or kills then people scream in droves that the police didn't use enough or didn't use force at the right moment.

What a load of bull. Society expects police to behave according to the situation at hand. That means not tasing people who aren't actually posing a threat to anyone. Certainly not tasing someone repeatedly after they're already on the ground and incapacitated.

And if you'll take a look around the appropriate threads, hardly anyone was chastising the Seattle cop, just a few lone nuts who hate police on principle.