Need I say more? Now it’s come down to official scrubbing the use and abuse of Tasers by law enforcement. From Ohio, a look at where the police state is going.
A Summit County Common Pleas judge ordered the county medical examiner to delete any reference that Tasers contributed to the deaths of three Ohio men.Wow. Not only the Taser reference is scrubbed, but all the other kinds of abuses common in police brutality cases! My, my. And yes, someone from Taser International had something to say about the ruling. It’s after the jump.All three men were in an ‘agitated’ state and ‘on drugs’ when police officers shot them with Tasers, and the judge ordered their deaths be ruled ‘accidental’ also that any reference to “homicide or “electrical pulse stimulation” should be deleted from death certificates and autopsy reports.”
Five sheriff’s deputies had been indicted on charges related to the death of one of the men, who also had a history of mental illness. The judge further ordered that man’s death be ruled as “undetermined” and to “delete any references to homicide and the death possibly being caused by asphyxia, beatings or other factors.”
Expect the deaths and misuse to continue - and we’ll hear less about it if they circle the wagons. Soon we won’t have to worry about humans shooting humans with the release of this weapon of nervous system assault from Taser (it was pulled from its web site once word got out about its portrayal of “the most dangerous subjects” as a big black man).As of mid-April, 68 wrongful-death or injury lawsuits have been dismissed or judgments entered in favor of Taser, according to the company. The company has not lost any product-liability lawsuits.
Related:
The day is fast approaching when robots will perform the most dangerous missions by engaging the most dangerous subjects…Taser and Irobot have formed a strategic alliance to make that day a reality.Taser - Protect Life
* The Blend Taser files.
31 Responses to “Ohio judge: delete references to Tasers from medical examiner’s reports”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Does a judge actually have the authority to order a medical examiner’s findings deleted from reports? I mean, that seems phenomenally close to ordering perjury, evidence tampering, and altering public documents as part of a cover-up.
Radley Balko has a good take on this…well, not good, more like horrifically depressing;
http://www.theagitator.com/2008/05/03/the-non-lethal-taser/
“Taser would rather medical examiners attribute such deaths to “excited delirium,” a vague condition relatively unheard of in medical research before the advent of the Taser, but that now seems to be a frequent cause of death in Taser-related cases–but totally unrelated to the actual Tasering, of course. Coincidentally, Taser is apparently also shoveling money at researchers willing to lend medical bona-fides to the “excited delirium” theory.
Those damn ivory-tower, elitist medical examiners think that just because they have a degree they can tell the rest of us why somebody died. [/sarcasm]
This is absolutely outrageous. How corrupt can this country get?
There’s going to be a backlash against this… right? The MEs, coroners, and decent judges across the nation are going to rip open the files and expose this dangerous weapon for what it is.
Won’t they? …
This is absolutely outrageous. How corrupt can this country get?
Bwahahahahahahahahahahah.
Bwahahahah.
Bwah - actually, the bitterness, it burns.
Keep watching…
(I am reminded that Gore looked likethe firm favourite back in the 1999 primaries - but Gore still got sworn in. The words “President McCain” seem quite, quite possible)
I just forwarded this to a friend of mine who’s a law student, and she says this judge doesn’t even have the authority over the medical examiner to make such an order. Can anyone else shed some light on this?
This judge should be fucking disbarred.
Um, this is a patently dumb question, but…
Do judges get handouts from Taser manufacturers or something?
I ask, because that’s the only way any of this would make any sort of sense. Otherwise, all I can do is sit here going “Why… why on earth… why the fuck would the judge do that?”
There was a time when I was a big fan of “less-than-lethal” technologies, but that time is long gone. The essential problem is that these technologies actually increase the use of force by police officers. If the only options are gun, talk, or hand-to-hand scuffle, talking is going to seem a lot more attractive. When you can go for the taser as an intermediate option, it’s going to be used not just as an alternative to the gun or the scuffle, but also as an alternative to talking.
Are these guys trying to privatize the medical examiner’s office? That’s what is going to happen, as any family member who has a question about cause of death at the hands of the police will need to pay for a private medical examiner - costs $$$.
Togolosh:
You took the words right out of my mouth.
These days, what adds to my worries is that there’s a poisonous attitude out there that some folks seem to have where it’s acceptable to live in a society where it’s dangerous for a civilian to mouth off to an officer.
To some very limited extent, I can understand a cop taking revenge in a petty way (arresting a person who’s arguing over a traffic ticket, and impounding their car - both legal, but rarely invoked, possibilities). It’s an ugly, stressful job, and doing that is wrong, but I reckon it’s human for it to happen once in a while.
But the idea that you should be in physical danger from a cop just because you were mouthing off? Gads… I don’t know why that doesn’t make more people sick.
Yes, you’d think that at bare minimum, they’d be, you know, less than lethal.
Call me crazy…
The judge ordered the ME to change the medical report?
How?
Although it reminds me of how my mom’s insurance company changed their list of covered meds and suggested she change her blood pressure medicine b/c they no longer covered it but other similar drugs.
Her doctor was livid. Different drugs exist b/c they affect different people, well, differently. People respond better to some rather than others. The fucking insurance company is practicing medicine without a license by “proscribing” what drugs she should take.
If some factotum in an insurance company has no respect for medicine, I guess it makes sense that a judge wouldn’t either.
I just don’t understand how changing the report isn’t perjury of some sort.
I use to be a big supporter of more widespread taser use, but it’s clearly been an outright travesty and needs to be completely reexamined.
Local example: my university’s trumpets had their annual toga party… cops busted in, everyone was actually cooperating, but the owner of the house got tased even though he wasn’t resisting or anything. After they’d deteremined most people there were in fact 21, they ordered everyone outside…. then threatened them with arrest for public intoxication. Fascist pigs.
OK, I read through the article, and it’s a case where Taser is requesting that they be removed from the report. The judge somehow determined that the Tasers weren’t the cause of death, and therefore ordered their removal. Apparently he found the coroner’s reasons for mentioning the Tasers as contributing factors less persuasive than
Taser’s bribesthey should have been.Funny how he didn’t order their deaths ruled as overdoses. Or maybe just being mentally ill was enough to cause them to drop dead accidentally. Or resisting arrest was just dying throes during their “undetermined” cause of death.
There is a related issue here in the use of things like UAVs in combat. By reducing the exposure of the “good guy” to the consequences of using force, we make it more attractive to use force. I fear that in the long term we will have wars fought entirely by either autonomous robots or by killing machines controlled by telepresence from secure bunkers in the USA. It’s clear that we are heading in that direction. Time will come when the United States can go to war without the risk of any lives on our side - when all the suffering and dying will be done by the “enemy.”
When that time comes the threshold for war will be lowered to such an extent that it becomes no more than a vote on American Idol. Liberals take note of the more than 4000 American dead and point to this as a reason to avoid war. Time will come when the greatest risk will be not a few thousand dead, but rather a few tens of millions of dollars worth of hardware expended. War is not evil because it risks the death of our neighbors and fellow Americans. It is evil because it causes death. Who dies is far, far less important than the fact that the people who die are human beings.
Has anybody yet found something about the legality of a judge ordering an ME to change a death report? I’m still kind of stunned by the very idea.
This also reminds me of why i think it woul be a good diea to have a government agency empowered to make findings of scientific fact. The potential for abuse is obvious, but I contend that it would be less than the current system, in which judges, legislators, agency bureaucrats and the authors of “signing statements” make “findings of fact” without even ther pretense of regard for actual fact.
Has anybody yet found something about the legality of a judge ordering an ME to change a death report? I’m still kind of stunned by the very idea.
This also reminds me of why i think it woul be a good diea to have a government agency empowered to make findings of scientific fact. The potential for abuse is obvious, but I contend that it would be less than the current system, in which judges, legislators, agency bureaucrats and the authors of “signing statements” make “findings of fact” without even ther pretense of regard for actual fact.
Has anybody yet found something about the legality of a judge ordering an ME to change a death report? I’m still kind of stunned by the very idea.
This also reminds me of why I think it woul be a good idea to have a government agency empowered to make findings of scientific fact. The potential for abuse is obvious, but I contend that it would be less than the current system, in which judges, legislators, agency bureaucrats and the authors of “signing statements” make “findings of fact” without even ther pretense of regard for actual fact.
Has anybody yet found something about the legality of a judge ordering an ME to change a death report? I’m still kind of stunned by the very idea.
This also reminds me of why I think it woul be a good idea to have a government agency empowered to make findings of scientific fact. The potential for abuse is obvious, but I contend that it would be less than the current system, in which judges, legislators, agency bureaucrats and the authors of “signing statements” make “findings of fact” without even ther pretense of regard for actual fact.
Has anybody yet found something about the legality of a judge ordering an ME to change a death report? I’m still kind of stunned by the very idea.
This also reminds me of why I think it woul be a good idea to have a government agency empowered to make findings of scientific fact. The potential for abuse is obvious, but I contend that it would be less than the current system, in which judges, legislators, agency bureaucrats and the authors of “signing statements” make “findings of fact” without even ther pretense of regard for actual fact.
——————————————————————————–
BTW, there is a possible Taser death case developing here in Jackson, TN. I’ll send more information if the story turns out to have legs—the local paper is being somewhat circumspect, since the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation hasn’t released their findings yet.
Judges have great leeway, why else would the Bushies want the job.
Your law student should pull out their UCC and codes for the jurisdiction. Bare min, the ME may have overstepped their authority and the judge was asked to rule. Tasers may have contributed but the COD seemed more likely to be attributed to the drugs or other causes. MEs don’t get to avoid the law as written.
Most posters seem to live in nice areas with little crime or thugs. One was entitled, ‘wahhh they treated us like every one else, wahhh’. Mayhaps you should tell us the rest of the story.
As posted before, Tasers are much besser than guns. Talking is safer, but sometimes the option isn’t there. Do actions that are threatening and you’ll likely get Tased. Duh.
Most depts have UOF (Use Of Force) Guidelines. Officers can be fired for not using them. So, unless you are stoopid, most encounters are discussions. Oh, in many localities, failure to abide by the UOFs leaves the officer personally liable.
Officers are less likely to retaliate for slights or condescending behavior than the general public. Officers are under scrutiny. If it helps, think of teachers. Only police are watched much more closely.
Well, that’s an empty threat if officers actually DON’T get fired.
And that sidesteps the very real question of whether the UOF Guidelines need to be re-written, given the actual field experience with tasers.
By the way…that may still be inappropriate if there wasn’t an outside examiner brought in as another expert opinion (from what I could tell, there wasn’t….)
Your law student should pull out their UCC and codes for the jurisdiction.
Well, I already suspected Mold was an idiot, but this proves it. Hey Mold, you do realize that the Uniform Commercial Code deals with the sale of goods and therefore has fuck all to do with a judge, who undoubtedly knows less about causes of death than an ME, ordering an ME to change an autopsy report, don’t you?
I did, however, check the Ohio statutes, and it seems that this judge was within his discretion. I personally think this is total bullshit.
ORC Ann. 313.19 (2008)
§ 313.19. Coroner’s verdict the legally accepted cause of death
The cause of death and the manner and mode in which the death occurred, as delivered by the coroner and incorporated in the coroner’s verdict and in the death certificate filed with the division of vital statistics, shall be the legally accepted manner and mode in which such death occurred, and the legally accepted cause of death, unless the court of common pleas of the county in which the death occurred, after a hearing, directs the coroner to change his decision as to such cause and manner and mode of death. (emphasis added)
Shut the fuck up, Donny.
Ophelia..UCC was the starting point..gots to have standing. I do applaud your research for relevant statutes instead of whining. Citing is even besser.
Wait, you just proved part of what I had said. So you find it unfair but essentially correct. Hmm. less ad hominem, please.
Mold, the UCC doesn’t deal with standing either. The Uniform Commercial Code has nothing to do with this case. NOTHING. It deals with the sale of goods.
Mold,
Kindly disappear. You are worthless. As long as you continue to hold the supposed authority of abusers over the rights of the public, you are unworthy of even being alive.
You’ll have to forgive Mold, Ophelia. He seems to have some kind of cognitive disorder that prevents him from absorbing relevant information.