“I can’t see, I can’t see. I’m going to die… Help me”

Mike says:

06:57am | 15/11/12

Agree, whatever happened to personal responsibility ?  If you don’t want to get tasered unfairly, don’t act like a tool and do stupid stuff. 

And I’m surprised re: the incident with the domestic….I would have thought that given the bile that is directed on this forum (rightfully) towards those _people_ who are partial to “violence against people”, to which Australia says “no”, that the feminazi sisterhood would form a crowd and egg the police on to taser such a “violent brute”...“that’ll learn ‘em, see how they like it” - certainly not be complaining !  (I can hear the lynch mob chants now - # ZAP HIM AGAIN,  ZAP HIM AGAIN #)

Double standards.  I guess if it was you that was getting beaten up by someone (anyone), that you would be ever so concerned about them getting tasered to get them off you…but stranger things have happened.

Shep says:

07:02am | 15/11/12

Thankfully smarter people than you and I are able to see that doing something illegal doesnt always warrant death to the perpetrator.  What next, being able to taser to death a person who is parked illegally and pissed off at being fined!!!

They’re a police force, they’re supposed to police the laws, keep the peace and protect people and property - ALL people, even stupid, drunk and high people.  They are not charged with vengence on our behalf, retribution is ours through the legal system.

And while I agree with you that no police officer deserves to be hit, they are trained to deal with agression, and their training is being undermined by the easy options of spray and taser.  And resultingly the levels of agression have risen all round. 

Tasers have just not supplied the solution they were supposed to, the Police are under more scrutiny than ever before.  The Taser was introduced as a way to lessen the need for lethal force, NOT as a protective mechanism for the police themselves, but that is certainly how they are bring used.

Shep says:

07:02am | 15/11/12

Thankfully smarter people than you and I are able to see that doing something illegal doesnt always warrant death to the perpetrator.  What next, being able to taser to death a person who is parked illegally and pissed off at being fined!!!

They’re a police force, they’re supposed to police the laws, keep the peace and protect people and property - ALL people, even stupid, drunk and high people.  They are not charged with vengence on our behalf, retribution is ours through the legal system.

And while I agree with you that no police officer deserves to be hit, they are trained to deal with agression, and their training is being undermined by the easy options of spray and taser.  And resultingly the levels of agression have risen all round. 

Tasers have just not supplied the solution they were supposed to, the Police are under more scrutiny than ever before.  The Taser was introduced as a way to lessen the need for lethal force, NOT as a protective mechanism for the police themselves, but that is certainly how they are bring used.

Ex says:

07:47am | 15/11/12

It doesn’t always warrant death…correct ...most certainly sure the Police didn’t intend, foresee, nor want him to die, but if you die as a result of actions YOU caused.

When you demand equal rights to employment and thus employ lightweight, tiny officers unable to protect themselves, well this is the world the PC idiots demanded.

Helt says:

08:03am | 15/11/12

If he had turned around then the story would be different as it is at least 5 police shot an unarmed man in the back handcuffed him and the tasered him again until he died

Happy with that? Maybe next time it wont be a dark man with an accent and it will be an Australian drunk on VB maybe then you may care

Achmed says:

08:05am | 15/11/12

Sheo - none of them died as a result of being tasered.  There were other reasons for them dying…like the drugs they had taken.

Its just people find it convenient to blame the police and the use of the taser rather than admnit to themselves that thier loved one was an irresponsible idiot who took drugs that lead to their death.

In this article the reporter conveneniently leaves out the actual cause of death.  To actully make comment on the cause of death would not suit the purpose of the article .

Consider how many police their are in Australia, consider how many arrests are made each year.

Articles like this and the comments are made by people who have never confronted a violent person who is resisting and have no idea what its like, the incredible level of strength even a small person person can exhibit.

I’m as sorry as the next person that they didn’t get to go home to their family, but I’m glad the police did.

Haxton Waag says:

08:10am | 15/11/12

@JTZ: Why did they continue after he was on the ground and cuffed? If anyone apart from the deceased was in danger before that, they certainly were not afterward. So, why?

A Concerned Citizen says:

08:45am | 15/11/12

Although drug-taking doesn’t deserve death, I do think if a person behaves in a frenzied manner with an intoxicant, the police should be allowed to make some tougher decisions to ensure they do not hurt anybody. And I hate to break some bad news, but a person in a frenzy isn’t going to stop just because their hands are bound, like in film.

Also, if drugs contribute to heart failure when stunned, that is simply bad luck- the safety of everyone else is more important.

If you feel tasers are too dangerous, how about trialing an alternative non-lethal weapon?

Borderer says:

09:06am | 15/11/12

@Haxton Waag
You’ve clearly never ever had to subdue someone sufferring drug induced psychosis. Trying to relate it to what you would do and are capable of if you were handcuffed on the ground and what they will do and are capable of are two different things. For the record, they are paranoid and aggressive so can’t be rationalised with, they are immune to pain so joint locks and pressure points do not work, they have super endurance so they don’t tire out and just keep coming and finally they are super strong and can throw you around like a rag doll. So what would be your solution?
I’ve had them break bones their own bones to get out of a restraining hold.
The guy they tasered last night in Sydney threw two coppers around, including through a window, they have him sedated till his system flushes the drugs out.
The only recommendation I strongly agree with is the fitting of cameras to tasers, accountability is important.

Jaqui says:

09:13am | 15/11/12

@Shep, well you joke about people being tasered to death for traffic infringements however in the US the abuse of tasers has reach epidemic proportions and a simple short search will show you at least a few cases of people being tasered for traffic stops in seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s26QTc1qKs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTFbtzlumgw

This WILL be happening here very soon.

Gregg says:

09:19am | 15/11/12

@JTZ
Sure, there are times when a Taser should be used and that would include when police may feel there is a threat to life, usually theirs but could include others and some sort of weapon is involved and a person is not prepared to disarm themselves, tasering in principle better than being shot I imagine.

If you look closely at the footage of the Brazillian students tasering, you will see that on at least two occasions he evades being apprehended, there being no sign of aggression towards them and though a call had initially gone out he was armed, it seemed pretty obvious he was unarmed, a guy without a shirt and repeatedly using one hand to keep his dacks from falling down so I’d suggest your what if scenario is hardly applicable.

The guy was obviously out of his head and yes that was from his own doing but once he was brought down and sat on and handcuffed, there was absolutely no need for the overkill with the Tasers and whilst there was no conclusive evidence as to the Tasering having caused the death, the extent of tasering may certaintly not have helped.

This article is all about the need for better approach to their use and it does seem we have plenty of evidence of cops being too trigger happy with their Tasers.
Without the Tasers, would they have shot the guy?
I hardly think so and they would have just tackled him to the ground if he had not already managed to end up on the ground himself through losing his dacks.

This was simply put policing gone quite crazy as described in the court.

Mark990 says:

09:25am | 15/11/12

One very big flaw in all the supporters arguments here. Yes taking drugs is against the law and yes by breaking the law you need to face the consequences. HOWEVER, it is NOT the role of police to enforce penalties for breaking the law. It is their job to apprehend law breakers and charge them, then leave punishment to the courts. To defend these police is completely one eyed and reprehensible. The fact that 11 officers were unable to detain 1 man is an absolute embarrassment to what the force has become!!

These 11 officers should be sacked purely for being a pack of soft pansies who cannot perform their job! You pick any 2 grown men of the street in Sydney and ask them to tackle a drunk on the run and I guarantee 90% of the time they will. The fact that “trained officers” cannot do the same would be laughable if the real life consequences were not so dire.

Axe says:

09:51am | 15/11/12

Well done Jaqui, your examples show the use of the taser was completely justified on both occasions.

Ex says:

09:53am | 15/11/12

Gregg, this may come as a complete surprise to you, but criminals hide their weapons, sometimes down their pants.  I am sure from your extensive experience in dealing with crimes you know this.

Mick says:

09:54am | 15/11/12

@shep “the taser was introduced as a way to lessen the need for lethal force, not as a protective mechanism for the police themselves”....WRONG. The Taser SOPS clearly outline that POlice can use a TAser to prevent themselves or others from being assaulted. What would you prefer, the cops who are just doing their job get belted and go home with a broken jaw or worse because they were forced to go “hands on” rather than taser someone to end the confrontation. When will civil librarians get it through their head that POlice are not punching bags and shouldn’t be expected to cop a hiding without defending themselves. Memo to crooks- if you don’t want to get Tasered don’t try and punch on with the cops!

Borderer says:

10:17am | 15/11/12

Mark990
You pick any 2 grown men of the street in Sydney and ask them to tackle a drunk on the run and I guarantee 90% of the time they will.

I agree, if he was only drunk, which he wasn’t. You have no expreience in dealing with those having drug induced psychosis or you would not have made the statement. The best way to describe them is a nightmare, and I mean that factually.

Haxton Waag says:

10:17am | 15/11/12

@Borderer: I am sorry, but I think you have been watching too much television. You make it sound like a handcuffed man can cause grievous bodily harm to those around him (i.e., a crowd of armed police officers). Suppose he does have superhuman strength? If his arms are confined behind his back, how is he going to utilise that strength to harm to officers? If you have an answer that is plausible, I am willing to change my opinion.

Ex says:

10:34am | 15/11/12

Mark990

Clearly you have never fought someone affected by LSD.  It can take a dozen officers and if you see them chasing him for most of the video, they aren’t using force, they are chasing him.

The Police weren’t enforcing any penalty, they were trying to subdue him.  To think otherwise demonstrates that you and reality aren’t close friends.

Your suggestion then that they are pansies indicates that for you, the solution was that they should have been more violent and aggressive.

Huh?

neo says:

10:38am | 15/11/12

The guy was handcuffed, on the ground, nearly naked. WTF danger did he pose? Clearly misuse of force.

Use of tazers was only justified while the dude was able to struggle. After he was on the ground, no danger was posed. Prosecution of the involved police officers is in order.

Ex says:

10:45am | 15/11/12

Haxton

I will happily let you handcuff me, lie on my back and proceed to kick you in face with my heavy boots while you lean over me.  I will cause you bodily harm, even if I miss you face.  I won’t stop at just one kick.

I hope this will cause you to change your opinion.

Rose says:

10:57am | 15/11/12

Axe, I’m not sure what you think you saw but neither of those videos showed anything other than police behaving badly. In both cases it is the Officers who escalated the situation, not the drivers.

Jaqui says:

11:05am | 15/11/12

@Axe: If you think those two occasions were justified then I hope you don’t get pulled over under the same circumstances.

Just so you are aware, any time a taser is used there is a very real risk the person it is being used on is going to die, so according to you Axe, these two people who couldn’t get their licenses out fast enough deserved to die.

Mark990 says:

11:10am | 15/11/12

Borderer - I think you’ve been watching too much A Current Affair. I can guarantee I have had more experience than you with people tripping on LSD (3 years at Uni as an occasional user, and a regular club goer). You are confusing LSD with all the hype over Ice which is known to cause violent behavior with claimed extra strength on occasions… This guy was tripping balls and stumbling down the road completely disoriented and paranoid. Stop believing the crap that the police feed the media! Yes this guy was having a psychotic episode and probably had a ‘scary’ expression on his face, but he had hardly turned into Godzilla!

just saying says:

11:14am | 15/11/12

Acid should come with a warning label. “Side effects may include dizzines, shortness of breath and getting chased by 17 armed cops, beaten to the ground and tasered until you die”.

Borderer says:

11:32am | 15/11/12

@Haxton Waag
Actually seeing it with my own eyes unfortunately.
@Mark990
Borderer - I think you’ve been watching too much A Current Affair. I can guarantee I have had more experience than you with people tripping on LSD (3 years at Uni as an occasional user, and a regular club goer)

I’ll let you reconsider your statement….
Five and half years as a crowd controller in an Australian capital city’s night club district, somewhere between a thousand and fifteen hundred physical confrontations and over a hundred plus dententions where people were handed to police for arrest. Plus court cases, visits to hospital, accident attendances, first aid to people having drug overdoses. I’ve dealt with people under drug psychosis, using weopons, attacking in groups, dealing drugs even having firearms, I could give more accurate numbers if I actually went through my notebooks. I did all this as I was funding my degree and stopped as soon as I’d paid for my last semester.

Modern Primitive says:

11:51am | 15/11/12

Ok borderer, since you’re an expert on all things drug related, what are the physical signs that someone is tripping on acid? How do they differ from someone on alcohol, someone on ice, someone on eccy, and someone on coke?

For gods sake, people on acid don’t get superhuman strength. Ice, certainly, but not acid.

There’s a lot of stupid and mis information being posted today.

Ex says:

12:11pm | 15/11/12

@Modern

People don’t get eaten by sharks either.  I have never seen it so it apparently it doesn’t happen.

Mark990 says:

12:37pm | 15/11/12

Well if that’s the case Borderer you sound like you would actually make a good Police Officer (seriously). I am pretty sure you would not have been equipped with hand guns and tasers for that job and it sounds like you managed fine. I’ve seen guys like you in action at clubs and festivals and it is impressive. Fast response, take down the culprit (with the help of maybe 2 other guys), and escort them out of the venue. Its a crying shame that a significant number of our police force cannot exhibit the same skills.

Modern Primitative is right though, bundling all drugs into 1 basket just leads to massive misinformation. Someone on an LSD binge is not going to be a physical threat to anyone. Any apparent resistance this guy showed was probably because he had just been attacked and electrocuted by a violent gang on an empty street and he was scared sh1tless…

I’m all for tough policing, by tough police, with reasonable force relative to the crime. The cases Katie has highlighted were insanely over the top force, against unarmed perpetrators, by coward police. I realize that for every bad egg there are probably 10 good eggs, however that is still not good enough.

Borderer says:

01:58pm | 15/11/12

Modern Primitive
Ok borderer, since you’re an expert on all things drug related, what are the physical signs that someone is tripping on acid? How do they differ from someone on alcohol, someone on ice, someone on eccy, and someone on coke?

You seem to be labouring under the assumption I did my degree in toxicology. In general terms eccy’s made you happy, coke parnoid, ice crazy, acid loopy and alcohol sleepy. Apart from alcohol the quality and consistancy of the other drugs tended to be variable due to the lax quality proceedures of organised crime, perhaps you should write your dealer an angry letter? The dosage also has varying results particularly when individuals vary so much, dealers tend not to consider medical history’s when selling.
Obviously you have an agenda along the lines of “My drug didn’t do this!! Make it legal!!” and sure some drugs are pretty benign. I wouldn’t mind people using weed except they really do stink after a long session.

Borderer says:

02:02pm | 15/11/12

Mark990
I work in an office now on double what a copper does, I thought about it as a career but opted for a wife who doesn’t go to bed worrying about me.
See my post near the bottom, my first encounter with such an individual nearly killed me.

Emma2 says:

02:03pm | 15/11/12

I implore the Punch to not post any comment where the most vulgar term ‘feminazi’ is used in a dergatory manner against women.

If anyone stopped to actually think about what this word means and the implications for what it says about the men who use it - people might realise what a heinous term it really is.

Disgusting.

flocculant says:

03:21pm | 15/11/12

@JTZ, you appear to have tasered a straw man to death.

Ando says:

03:30pm | 15/11/12

EX,
“I will happily let you handcuff me, lie on my back and proceed to kick you in face with my heavy boots while you lean over me.  I will cause you bodily harm, even if I miss you face.  I won’t stop at just one kick.”
I thought Tasers were replacing the need for shooting, that is what we were told . What did the cops do in this situation before tasers, shoot a handcuffed man lying on his stomach? Are they now being used in preference to a headlock and 4 other cops holding the legs.
I am a staunch defender of police but they are not automatically beyond any criticism.

Ex says:

04:07pm | 15/11/12

Ando,

That’s the thing about the media, they don’t always print the truth.  Just because you hear it from them, doesn’t mean they are telling the truth.

Read the guidelines for their use.  No one said they aren’t subject to criticism.  Few occupations are criticised more than them.

Borderer says:

09:18am | 15/11/12

@BJ
I cannot see how tasering someone who is on the ground can possibly be justified

Look at what options the officer has when the person in cuffs is continuing to fight despite being cuffed.

1) Gun - that’s not going to go down well
2) Batton - Going all Rodney King isn’t popular any more.
3) Voice - He’s not acting remotely rational, will not work.
3) Pepper spray - tried, failed, he’s too drugged up to notice the effects.
4) fists/boots - see 2)
5) sitting on the guy - positional asyphixiation, may as well choke him.
6) taser - muscle spasms take the wind out of him, repeat until he can be secured in transport.

A good option would be leg restraints for such situations, these are not normal issue and are only used in prisons on dangerous criminals, that way the person can be fully restrained without further danger to officers.

Jaqui says:

09:40am | 15/11/12

@Borderer
6) taser - muscle spasms take the wind out of him,(and elevate his heart rate substantially) repeat until he can be secured in transport. (or is dead, either way the cops don’t care)

Borderer says:

10:29am | 15/11/12

@Jaqui
I agree, it depends on how frequently it is applied, but often there aren’t too many options and how often is too often and who’s running the clock?
I disagree that the cops don’t care

Mark says:

03:06pm | 15/11/12

So if they are all possibilities in a short space of time, Borderer. Why do we trust an uneducated police officer with 6 months training to apply the resolution? I wouldn’t trust myself to make the best decision in 2 seconds with 6 options on the table and I have a post graduate degree. How the hell does a university reject that was too lazy to get up early for a trade make a decision like that, accurately every time?

We need to stop giving powers to police officers that aren’t capable. They need clear operating guidelines and an effective means of escalation to someone who is qualified to make this type of decision. Too often have we seen a negative outcome produced because of an ignorant individual, or group, wearing the uniform.

Admiral Ackbar says:

03:55pm | 15/11/12

Couldn’t agree more Mark. We give these year 10 dropouts far too much responsibility. Dumbarses with a license to kill apparently.

nihonin says:

06:47am | 15/11/12

+1 cheap white trash

My eldest boy has applied to join the Police Force and I couldn’t be more proud of him.  I have friends who are Cops and I’ve never had any trouble with them or from them.  Support your local Cop rather than the local criminal.

nks says:

06:53am | 15/11/12

Great comment and so true too!!!

Take drugs - accept the consequences of your actions! Break the law, accept the consequences of your actions.

When I send my husband [a cop] to work, especially in the area he is in, I have to face the reality that with the extreme civil libitarian movement that protects the lawless and “rights” of criminals, that he might not come home!! How many times is the assault of a policeman doing his duty met with such media saturation?

The keyboard warriors who think they could do the job - should get out from behind the screen and become a cop. See how you feel to be damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

TChong says:

07:12am | 15/11/12

If police are held accountable for a handcuffed man dieing after repeat tasering “Evil will win”  ? - yeah, right.

fml says:

07:49am | 15/11/12

“Take drugs - accept the consequences of your actions! Break the law, accept the consequences of your actions.”

What rubbish, you do not deserve to die for taking drugs, tell me, have you taken any? do you deserve to die? Nah, didn’t think so.

“How many times is the assault of a policeman doing his duty met with such media saturation?”
Youve missed the point, what has that got to do with 11 police men standing over an already subdued man using excessive force resulting in death.

”  The keyboard warriors who think they could do the job - should get out from behind the screen and become a cop. See how you feel to be damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

‘The keyboard warriors who think they could do the job - should get out from behind the screen and become a cop. See how you feel to be damned if you do and damned if you don’t.”

Yer, simple cliched response, if its so easy you do it! It’s not easy, but the police need to be policed just as much as we do. Stealing a packet of biscuits which were not even stolen is not a reason to be killed. If a solitary shop keeper can handle one man, how can 11 policemen not? Maybe as you suggest they should swap professions.

Fred says:

08:13am | 15/11/12

FML, can you handle 1 drugged up lunatic on a rampage all on your own? I doubt it. You’d be calling for backup before you involuntarily expel the contents of your bowel.

A Concerned Citizen says:

08:30am | 15/11/12

Indeed- I definitely don’t want excessive force to be an acceptable standard, but when a person is on drugs and behaving in a frenzied unpredictable manner. I accept the police should be able to make a split second call on the potential risk, and even tolerate accidents.
Although such people don’t deserve to die themselves, I never fault the police for putting the risks against the subject themselves, rather than risk their own safety and the broader public.
If they were somehow able to tell a ‘harmless’ intoxicated frenzy from a ‘harmful’ one, wonderful. Personally, I think most Australians (including cops) would agree that police are there to protect the public from dangerous people- not arrest the offender and punish them after they actually hurt someone.

Tator says:

08:30am | 15/11/12

FML,
both coroners have found that the tasers used by the police did not kill them but the drugs did.  In my IMOST training, excited delirium is covered and the material states that basically once the person has reached such a state, unless medical attention is IMMEDIATELY available, they will die, no matter what the police do to them.
So basically, by taking the illicit subtances, the deceased took the risk as it is well known that taking illicit drugs may cause death as they are basically an unknown substance sold by criminals who do not have the health of their clientele in mind.

nks says:

08:43am | 15/11/12

fml - you’ve made my day…. I was waiting for the trolls and you didn’t disappoint.

I agree with Fred & while you are there wiping yourself clean, you better clean your chin as well…. you’re dribbling!

fml says:

09:08am | 15/11/12

Fred,

Probably not, but I think me and ten of my mates would be able to handle one without excessive use of tasers. Which is kinda really the point. Why can’t trained police officers?

Removing tasers from police is not the answer. Police should just be better trained in their use and examples of excessive use of tasers exemplifies this.

the other jay says:

09:22am | 15/11/12

@Cheap white trash - That’s rubbish. You’re just being precious.

A person in my family is in the army. I worry like hell when he is on active duty (and now had been several times) and his stories are just as harrowing. But he joined up voluntarily, and takes his very seriously. I don’t expect anyone to feel sorry for him, or for our family, and I don’t expect him to get off scott free if he cracks and behave in any conduct unbecoming of ADF personnel.

If getting off your head on drugs and stealing a pack of biscuits is your idea evil, then I’ve got no idea how to respond.

Fred says:

09:29am | 15/11/12

NKS, FML never fails to disappoint. He/she is always on here trolling with jibberings and non sense. You notice he/she never offers their own argument, but simply snipes at others with inane comments about this that or the other. Entertaining at least.

Jaqui says:

09:30am | 15/11/12

If the police are unhappy with their job, or more specifically unable to do the job without torturing victims to death then I suggest that they find another job since being a police officer does not suit them.

The police in Australia have the easiest job in the world, there are few countries in the world that have as complaint a society as Australia, try being a police officer in Nigeria, Brazil or South Africa, THEN you can complain about how hard it is. Until such time, do your job PROPERLY.

What is utterly ridiculous to me is that if, in the course of my job someone gets killed “accidentally”, I am 100% liable yet police are investigated by police and rarely if ever charged. This leads us to cases like Robertos where the police believe that they can torture and kill with impunity and little to no repercussions.

Mark990 says:

09:42am | 15/11/12

OH MY GOD! You cop supporters are so one-eyed and uneducated it is embarrassing. There is no part of this case that ads up in the favor of the police. 11 against 1, guy on a hallucinagent drug (NOT amphetaphine), tasered in the back, tasered whilst handcuffed, not threatening police, not threatening the public at that point, scared and delusional (not aggressive and violent). How can you guys be so blind to the facts? Its just the old “drugs are bad” argument being used to justify reprehensible behavior. Whether the report says it or not, the cops KILLED this guy. Had he been handcuffed and thrown in a paddy wagon as any reasonable citizen would expect of our police force the guy would be alive today guaranteed (look up recorded deaths from LSD, it probably numbers in the ummm… 10’s worldwide).

Yes its a dangerous job being a cop, and yes if you are threatened by someone you should have the right to defend yourself. But if 11 police can’t take down 1 guy without a taser then the problem is not “drugs”, the problem is poorly trained people who are unfit to be in the job.

fml says:

10:17am | 15/11/12

*Sigh*

Learn what the definition of troll is you n00bs. No, it is not someone who merely disagrees with you.

Yes, I think that 11 officers pinning down one man and consistently tasering him till dead is an excessive use of force. You two are diabolical.

Tell me what precludes the police from personal responsibility??

Tator,

Funny how excited delerium results from the taser. It’s only been used recently as an excuse to keep using tasers.

- So what did he die from?
- Excited delerium
- what was that a result of?
- drugs.
- does this usually happen when on the drugs?
- no, only when tasered.
- so its a result of the tasering?
- no, the drugs.
- So he wouldn’t have died without the taserings?
- yes, and the drugs and not the taserings.

Ex says:

10:37am | 15/11/12

jaqui

The Police in Nigeria, South Africa and Brazil…shoot their criminals dead.

I won’t discuss your wild theories, they are remotely correct.

Ex says:

10:40am | 15/11/12

*Double sigh*

Excited Delirium:

“Excited delirium” was first explicitly described in 1985 as a condition relating to acute cocaine intoxication.

Wetli CV, Fishbain DA (July 1985). “Cocaine-induced psychosis and sudden death in recreational cocaine users”. J. Forensic Sci. 30 (3): 873–80

Prior to this it was referred to as “Bell’s Mania”; first described by Luther Bell in 1849.

Kraines. “Bell’s Mania”. The American Journal of Psychiatry.

Tell me fml, were tasers around in 1849?

At all?

*sighs again*

Rose says:

10:48am | 15/11/12

If you really want to protect family members who are police officers (I also have a close relative who is a detective) you would be better off supporting the call for better policing. When police officers do things that damage their reputation they encourage people to disrespect them and the end result is that people try harder to escape them, escalating already bad situations. The 14 year old was told he was to be tasered for SWEARING, not posing a threat, just for bad language. That is not policing, that is thuggery and all police are damned because of the behaviour of those few
If police are to be respected they need to ensure that they remain respectable!!

greg says:

10:50am | 15/11/12

Well it’s obvious that most commenters on this story supporting the criminal actions of the police are either police themselves, or family. This bloke took some drugs and the police killed him. It is as simple as that. I am sick to death of all you idiots trying to justify what they did. What if it was your son? Does taking an illicit substance justify being murdered? It is sickening, and I believe that the police involved should be prosecuted for manslaughter. The police in this country really need to have a think about the way they come across to the average citizen. They need to stop being so arrogant and perhaps try to TALK to their VICTIMS. Sickening, and you supporters of the police sicken me as well. I hope something similar happens to someone in YOUR family.

marley says:

11:10am | 15/11/12

@fml - while I agree with your point that the taser was improperly used in this particular instance, I don’t entirely agree with your argument about excited delirium.

This is a condition which was apparently described back in the 19th century, and which has been cited in medical literature since 1985, well before tasers gained their current notoriety.  It is associated primarily (although not exclusively) with drug use, especially cocaine.  And yes, people most definitely die of it without being tasered or without being in police custody.  It’s not entirely clear what the role of the taser is in all of this, thought it does seem to be a precipitating factor.

I’m providing a link which is a bit dense in spots but gives a bit of insight into the link between drugs and EXD, and shows how complex this issue really is.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3088378/

Ex says:

11:21am | 15/11/12

Well greg has all the solutions, apparently you just ‘talk’ to a criminal as he runs past.

fml says:

11:30am | 15/11/12

Marley,

Thanks I appreciate that. I understand it has been around for couple of hundred years, but the instances of excited delirium attributed deaths have increased with the introduction of tasers as compliance tools and an increasing proportion are resulting in police custody.

Another NCBI article, actually correlating the onset of “Acute onset excited delirium” Which only came about in the 80’s. 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19237843

Consistent with extant literature, acute onset excited delirium was first identified in Maryland during the 1980s

Ex,

*Triple Sigh*, while excited delirium has been known since the 1800’s acute onset delerium is only a recent phenomenon.

“Tell me fml, were tasers around in 1849?” No of course not, was acute onset excited delerium? no.

“*sighs again* “, Indeed. Take a deep breathe and think about what it feels like when the troll is right.

John L says:

11:31am | 15/11/12

I might also add that he wasn’t aggressive, he was paranoid. Why is that? Because he had just been beaten up, not by the police, but by some random unknowns. Maybe he didn’t even know it was the police who had him, maybe he thought it was the same group as before. I’ll also add he didn’t die from the drugs he had taken, just to silence the croaking from the anti-drug toads, the cause of his death remains undetermined.

fml says:

11:40am | 15/11/12

Marley,

You are correct is its a complex issue, I guess we have to figure out the cause of the two. It does seem however though that people do not often die from delirium while under the influence of drugs, but it does seem to occur while under drugs and police custody to a greater extent. So one has to think about the correlation between tasering alone and tasering when mixed with drugs. Especially drugs which increase the heart beat, which LSD is not one of.

Ex says:

11:42am | 15/11/12

fml

You have never been right, ever, even when you try and twist the facts. You can’t escape the fact that the illness has been around since 1849.  You can twist it any way you want, but you are only correct in your teeny tiny mind.

Jaqui says:

12:14pm | 15/11/12

@Ex: And in Australia they taser torture them to death, unless they are lucky enough to be shot to death first due to the blatant inexperience and whiney nature of the soft police we have.
I know I would be terrified to be a police officer here, not because of the criminals but because of my poorly trained work mates, was it not recently that a cop shot his work mate dead and they pinned it on the suspect?
I have seen how poorly trained police officers are here, I have seen how poorly they shoot, I have seen how poorly they react to situations with any sort of clarity (lo and behold a pilot was allowed the adrenalin excuse).

This is the simple version, remove tasers from police, it is clear they cannot be trusted with them for whatever reason. There is absolutely no reason for police to have tasers in a country like Australia.

marley says:

12:22pm | 15/11/12

@fml - I don’t see how you can draw the conclusions you’ve drawn from either the link I posted on the one you did.  Both make clear that “acute onset excited delirium” is primarily associated with drug use, especially coke, and that it has been a problem since 1985.  The taser was first used by American cops in 1998,well over a decade after the medical fraternity started taking notice.

fml says:

12:29pm | 15/11/12

Ex,

“You can’t escape the fact that the illness has been around since 1849”

*facepalm* I’m not denying that. In fact agreed with you, I did how ever say,  “Acute onset excited delirium” has only been around since the 1980’s and it seems its use as a diagnosis for unexplained death has increased since then and that there is a correlation between drug use, tasers and deaths in custody which are attributed to Acute onset excited delirium which needs to be investigated.

Ex says:

01:02pm | 15/11/12

Jaqui

Strangely, you aren’t able to provide single instance of where someone has been tasered to death in Australia. Interesting that they are soft and whiney for using a taser.  I suppose you would prefer them to beat and club criminals?

Why is it you have no judgement for a kid who gets hyped up on LSD, jumps the counter at a shop, terrifies the manager and the public, runs down the street evading the Police?  That’s apparently not worth mentioning.

Jaqui says:

02:18pm | 15/11/12

@Ex: Your supposition is correct, the police should manage criminals by the same guidelines they were using before tasers.

I have no judgement because the LSD has nothing to do with the behaviour of the police. The victim in this case was acting like an idiot however there is no justification to torture him to death.

Ex says:

04:10pm | 15/11/12

Well Jaqui, you should become a Coroner, you apparently know he was tortured to death, when the actual Coroner, having examined the actual evidence, says he was not.

Jaqui says:

04:38pm | 15/11/12

@Ex: So why is he dead Ex? Was it the gumdrop smiles and unicorn rainbows that the police were loving him to death with?
Or even more mystical, was it pure coinkidink that he happened to die right after he was tasered multiple times?

Pull the other one mate, 1000+ deaths attributable to this device whether you like it or not, fact is it is fatal in many, many cases and should not be in the hands of our police since they have clearly displayed on multiple occasions that they cannot be trusted not to use it as a pain compliance device.

Ex says:

05:06pm | 15/11/12

Jaqui

You demonstrate a clear inability to understand what fact is, but continue your delusional rant.

A Concerned Citizen says:

08:35am | 15/11/12

Indeed, it seems Amnesty International goes to quite an effort to ignore inconvenient facts in many of their advocated issues. But lets face it, they are like the Institute of Public Affairs- they get paid to advocate and lobby for certain issues, and are only doing their job by ignoring everything that makes their designated arguments look bad.

Last Man STanding says:

09:06am | 15/11/12

We need a @4corners documentary with medical personal psychiatrists to explain the characteristics of people on different drugs and suffering psychosis.
The Brazilian demonstrated the erratic behavior that occurs but can very easily turn into blood crazed massacre if the person is of poor character which the police have to guess taking precautionary measures.
Amphetamine users in the most part can be well behaved but one of violent character or psychosis can very hostile without emotion kill people in succession. They can be like zombies.  They are very resistant to taser
thinking they are bullet proof suffering delusional megalomania.
That is why we so many with samurai swords surround by police not realising that they cannot deflect bullets with their sword cops giving a wide berth.
In the heat of decision making police are called to make quick decisions that threaten their lives and others.
We need health professionals to explain this as it will help the youth that fall under the spell of mental illness on any illegal drug & legal ones for that matter like dexamphetamine when they eg: take 30 of them out of stupidity.  No drug is safe.

Ex says:

09:59am | 15/11/12

Agree with everything but the Four Corners part…Four Corners are notoriously left, extremely biased and blatantly distort the truth in order to facilitate their political agenda.

andye says:

10:09am | 15/11/12

Honestly, I find this LSD thing a little fishy. Really?

There are a number of drugs I would believe here - GHB being the top one. GHB with alcohol can also contribute to sudden death. It would also explain the depth of the crazy.

Acid just doesn’t seem right.

Ex says:

10:51am | 15/11/12

andye

From personal experience, I was called to a girl smashing windows and cars in a motel carpark, she was off her head on LSD, she had not been drinking.  My partner and I violently wrestled all over the car park with her for no less than ten minutes.  My initial call for assistance wasn’t treated as serious because they thought we would be able to handle a girl.  It took twelve of us to finally contain her to the point where she could physically be handcuffed. That’s no exaggeration - twelve of us, all struggling to violently contain her.

That super strength and struggle strains the heart and after 10 - 15 minutes of super aggression I am not surprised it gives out or causes excited delirium.

Mark990 says:

12:58pm | 15/11/12

Ex, you a clearly a cop and clearly a female or an extremely small guy. 12 police taking 10 minutes to take down a girl on LSD?!?!?! PLEEEEASE… I know nurses in Emergency who have detained ice addicts easier than that!... This is why there is a growing mis-trust of Police in Australia. These exaggerations, media firestorms about “epidemics” overtaking our cities, and demands for new laws to ‘make police jobs easier’ are getting beyond a joke!!! You think as a cop you can sit on a pedestal and tell everyone how it is, but you forget that there are thousands of people out every weekend watching you do your job.

Ex says:

02:19pm | 15/11/12

‘Ex, you a clearly a cop’ -wrong
‘and clearly a female’ - wrong
‘or an extremely small guy’ - wrong

Just because you haven’t experienced it, doesn’t mean it hasn’t occurred in the world.

The silent majority aren’t fussed, they know nothing happens to you if you don’t break the law.

Strangely, it’s only the ones who obey the Police when spoken to, who aren’t injured in any way.

What makes you think the junkies, the criminals and their apologists are the only ones entitled to an opinion?

Tator says:

02:22pm | 15/11/12

Mark990,
I am 6’1”, and back in my operational days, an athletic 100+kg and it took 8 guys my size to restrain one woman with mental health issues who was going out of her tree one day.  Even with my size and strength, wrestling with anyone can still cause serious injuries, just takes one twist too far the wrong way and bang, there goes your back, knee or shoulder.  I was never one to punch people as you can break your hand too easily and preferred to use other techniques such as hip throws to get offenders onto the ground where they can be more easily restrained.  But in comparison, a person on drugs or with mental health issues can be just as dangerous on the ground as they thrash around, which is why numerous officers can be required to safely restrain them, and normally it takes around half a dozen, two on each leg, and one on each arm to restrain them properly, and then it takes possibly another two to help carry them as they struggle to the cage car after which, getting them out is another ballgame if they still don’t want to comply.

Mark says:

04:30pm | 15/11/12

Ex - The long and the short of it is, a guy tripping out stumbling down the street does not deserve to be electrocuted to death in the back by inexperienced trigger happy cops. This is what the Coroner determined, this is why the officers involved lied about it, and this is what the video footage showed in black and white. How you can continue to defend this so strongly in the face of all the evidence and expert findings is a joke. You are simply one of these “cops are tops” bumper sticker guys who will defend anything these guys do in the face of any evidence.

If police are empowered to carry an arsenal of weapons around their waist, then they must have strict guidelines for using them and be held personally accountable when they break the guidelines. Thats what this whole discussion is about, and you seem to be suggesting that we empower them to reach for the belt at their discretion for any crime which is really one step short of the Taliban. 

As for the whole 12 people holding down a girl on acid, I still believe this to be BS and if it really happened then I am sure that she was on something else as well.

Ex says:

05:20pm | 15/11/12

Mark,

Find someone who can explain the Coroner’s report for you, as you don’t seem to understand what it said.  As I have said elsewhere on this thread, the only thing the officers have been cleared of is causing his death.  Their use of the taser is still under investigation.  I am in no doubt they will be charged with internal offences at the very least, if not criminal ones.  Feel free to continue to tell me what you think I have said, seen and done in life, apparently though you weren’t there, you know.

Shep says:

07:08am | 15/11/12

Nicely put….appropriately given your pseudonym.

A Concerned Citizen says:

08:40am | 15/11/12

I should also point out that police use stunguns following the official facts about stun gun use based on testing with human participants;
-stun guns do not actually ‘hurt’, but seize up your muscles and nerves- feeling very uncomfortable
-stun guns restrain people
-stun guns subdue people, making them more sedate and less willing to be violent.

And we are surprised that police officers would use these as an extra precaution to restrain someone?

That’s all there is to it- so long as these are the official properties of the taser, we can’t fault the police for using them exactly along the lines they are supposed to be used.

Jaqui says:

11:13am | 15/11/12

@A Concerned Citizen: And yet the United Nations committee against torture classified these devices as “devices of torture”.

Fact is, tasering is torture and tasers are being used as pain compliance, if you don’t believe that they hurt, how about we demonstrate the no-pain thing for everyone here, set up something and video it.
While you are at it, set up the “safety” test, get three tasers fired off at the same time into you and taser you mulitple times (say 7 or 8) you know, standard police behaviour. Post that video too. I will warn you up front though that the taser manufacturer only claims its safety based on one weapon tasering you one time and now not in the torso area.

John L says:

01:22pm | 15/11/12

@A Concerned Citizen: if tazers don’t hurt people then why is the use of drive stun known as “pain compliance”?

marley says:

01:27pm | 15/11/12

@Jaqui - I’m not sure why you think it would be such a great idea to take away the taser and leave the cop with his only option a loaded handgun.

Rose says:

02:20pm | 15/11/12

Marley, I think taking away the taser should be considered if police continue to use it force compliance rather than to respond to real danger and risk. If a 14 year old boy is told “I will light you up” because of his swearing, there is clearly a problem. that very same policeman would not have considered threatening to shoot the boy for swearing would he?
At this stage I think we need to educate police more thoroughly on the use of the taser, with significant penalties for using it inappropriately. However, if there is no improvement in police use, then yes, look at getting rid of them.

Jacqui says:

02:24pm | 15/11/12

@marley: That has not changed, a loaded gun will ALWAYS be used when required regardless if they are carrying a taser or not.
This case is yet another case where it exposes the lie that tasers are any alternative to shooting someone.

Fact is that the taser is not saving lives, it is taking them, it was never intended to, it was intended to be used as a device to torture victims who are non-compliant or mentally ill (sometimes to death) and or as a deterrent to those who don’t want to be tortured to death, a lot like medieval times.

marley says:

05:27pm | 15/11/12

@jacqui - “If any officers are to be entitled to carry these significant weapons (and I recognise that they were introduced as a far safer option than a firearm), then there is a considerable need for them to be clearly taught the
circumstances in which they should or should not be used, and to be educated more deeply in the exact meaning of the SOPs”

So, even the Coroner in the Curti case believes tasers have their place, but that training and procedure needs to be improved.  That’s more or less what I’m saying, and a far cry from what you’re arguing.  Why do you think the Coroner’s wrong?.

DexteR says:

07:41am | 15/11/12

Tim, there is also a vast difference from not being innocent and being killed, or are you saying that resisting the police should warrant the death penalty?

nihonin says:

08:15am | 15/11/12

DexteR, do you have proof, insurmountable proof, are you implying the Police set out to deliberately kill noncompliant criminals with their tasers each and every time?

DexteR says:

09:03am | 15/11/12

nihonin, I’m pretty sure I didn’t say that reading my post, but thanks for taking my comment and interpreting it in such an inflammatory way:)  Let me try and be more succinct. 

I am saying that running from police is not grounds for the police to taser someone multiply times, someone struggling whilst on the ground in handcuffs is not grounds for the police to zap them multiple times until they stop struggling. 

Doing so can cause someone to die, just as a choke hold held too long, a baton strike to the wrong place, or a gun can.  I am saying the police need to be more careful in the use of tasers and use them sparingly, shock someone once to incapacitate them, but don’t use it like a cattle prod to cause pain to stop the person from struggling

If we get to the stage where this is acceptable then we are in a huge amount of trouble.

Tim says:

09:05am | 15/11/12

Dexter,
did you miss the part of my comment where I said that Police misused their tasers? They definitely shouldn’t be using them as compliance devices which seems to be the case in a few of these incidents.

Doesn’t mean they are 100% responsible for these events as the article seems to claim.

If you do illegal things then you are putting yoursefl at risk. Doesn’t mean you deserve to die but sometimes mistakes happen.

AdamC says:

09:06am | 15/11/12

Tim, I agree that it is the use of tasers as a compliance tool that is the problem.

I disagree with the author that tasers should only be used in situations where lethal force would otherwise be used. Rather, tasers should be deployed where use of the taser is proportionate to the threat of harm posed by the offender. It is not rocket science, but it is proving a hard rule to maintain in the field. As some of these cases show.

Also, I just hate it when activists misuse statistics so brazenly. It just insults our intelligence. So 500 people died ‘after being tasered’? In how many of these cases was the tasering the proximate cause of death?

Jane Goodluck says:

09:46am | 15/11/12

“5. CRITERIA TO DISCHARGE TASER (PROBES DISCHARGED; DRIVE STUN)
5.1 Protect human life.
5.2 Protect yourself or others from person/s where violent confrontation or violent resistance is occurring or imminent.
5.3 Protect officer/s in danger of being over powered or to protect themselves or another person from injury.
5.4 Protection from animals.

NB: Once TASER has been used, officers should attempt to restrain the subject as quickly as possible. Once the subject is effectively under control, the use of TASER should be discontinued.”

and

“6.9 Continued/multiple use of the TASER should be avoided where practicable and must be justified in all the circumstances following assessment of the subject and in accordance with the Tactical Options Model.

One or more Criteria To Discharge TASER (Probes Discharged; Drive Stun) must be present to justify further use of a TASER.

NB: Multiple cycles or prolonged use of TASER may increase the risk of serious injury or death.”

and

“High Risk Situations
The circumstances and types of situations which may be defined as High Risk vary widely. The essential judgement that needs to be exercised is whether the real or impending violence or threat to be countered is such that the degree of force that could be applied by the police is fully justified.

In this context, one or more of the following criteria may be used to define High Risk for the purpose of these guidelines:

Seriousness of the offence committed by the suspect/offender;
Expressed intention by suspect/s to use Lethal Force;
Reasonable grounds to believe that the suspect:
may use Lethal Force;
has or may cause injury/death;
has issued threats to kill or injure any persons;
The suspect has:
a prior history of violence;
is exhibiting violence now;
Involvement of innocent participants (e.g. hostages, VIPs or bystanders).”

NSW Police Procedures document
“Use of Electronic Control (TASER) Devices” Jun 2012
http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/188322/TASER_Use_Public_Information.pdf

Jaqui says:

11:19am | 15/11/12

@nihonin: The police are well aware that multiple tasering has a high likelihood of serious injury and or death. It is clearly stated in their procedures document.
So when they taser a victim multiple times then yes it could be argued that they are deliberately setting out to cause serious injury or kill the non-compliant suspect.

Borderer says:

10:11am | 15/11/12

From her article profile
Katie Wood is Amnesty International Australia’s legal affairs spokesperson - amnesty have been campaigning to ban tasers so she clearly has an agenda.
Prior to working at Amnesty, Katie worked as a solicitor predominantly in the area of commercial litigation. - Having a comercial interest is always a good motivator, the offender hasn’t any money and the state does, which way do you think the litigator would jump?

Not really objective journalism is it?

Rose says:

12:10pm | 15/11/12

The mother of the 14 year old alcoholic did not abandon him, she is dead, and has been since he was 7.
Maybe the state should have done its job and ensured the boy’s well being seeing as his mother was so irresponsible as to die before he was old enough to look after himself.

Helt says:

08:46am | 15/11/12

How about personal retribution? Seems like the police were mad at Mr Curti so the punished him for running by repeatedly tasering him

Helt says:

08:46am | 15/11/12

How about personal retribution? Seems like the police were mad at Mr Curti so the punished him for running by repeatedly tasering him

Helt says:

08:46am | 15/11/12

How about personal retribution? Seems like the police were mad at Mr Curti so the punished him for running by repeatedly tasering him

Borderer says:

09:31am | 15/11/12

Helt,
That would have been from your indepth interview of all parties involved, video evidence etc. Yet you arrived at a different conclusion to the coroner? Are you just making things up to satisy your own conclusions?

Ex says:

09:43am | 15/11/12

You have some strange thoughts Helt.

helt says:

03:09pm | 15/11/12

What did the coroner say? They acted like the kids in Lord of the
Flies? Do you know what happens in Lord of the Flies? I doubt it as you seem to be an uneducated sheep willingly walking into a police state but suffice it to say the police acted like they were above the law and executed a lawbreaker without trial? Maybe she should have referenced Judge Dredd instead

Borderer says:

03:44pm | 15/11/12

Helt,
“Kill the PIG!!”, it must be shocking that I can quote the book as well as having read the story….
The coroner was being dramatic, like that’s never happened before….
If they planned to kill the guy like you implied, aren’t their glock pistols far more efficent at it than the taser? Or is this some sort of premeditated plan?

Ex says:

07:55am | 15/11/12

He wasn’t compliant whilst in handcuffs, he wasn’t calm, he wasn’t subdued.  I have been and have seen many officers assaulted by offenders in handcuffs. 

Generally, Police only elevate the force,  when you do.

Something to consider.

Mahhrat says:

08:44am | 15/11/12

@Shep, with respect, I think we forget that (at least here) Police have the same expectation to a safe workplace that we all do.

Their job is inherently dangerous - they accept that as part of the job.  That doesn’t mean they should take uneccesary risks when undertaking their lawful duties.

As to notions of “piling on”, I think we like to see an even contest - it’s why we love sport, for example.  The “piling on” or “excessive force” line is lower for us, because we have unrealistic expectations of what is “fair” in such situations.

If a person is not in control, they must be brought in control quickly and with the safety of all involved - general civilians and the police enforcing the law.

We tend to view a 10 on 1 scenario as an “unfair” fight.  A fight should never be “fair” between a police officer and someone they have to subdue.  It should be incredibly one-sided, and the police should win.

JB says:

08:46am | 15/11/12

Seriously mate, if you think being a cop is SO easy and clear cut then man up and join,  until then STFU as you have nothing intellegent to say tucked nice and safe behinds your keyboard!!
Simple concept even you can follow is don’t resits and then you won’t get zapped!!! Even Forrest Gump can follow that one, can you!!!!!

Tim says:

09:42am | 15/11/12

JB,
I disagree.

A taser should not be used simply because a person resists arrest. Particularly not if they are already handcuffed. They should be used sparingly.

Shep says:

01:13pm | 15/11/12

@JB Firstly .... not your “mate”.  Secondly you don’t know me, don’t know my background nor my profession so perhaps you should follow your own advice about Shutting the @#$& up.

Last - you are the perfect example of what I was saying about the rise in agressive behaviour.  Nasty, disrepectful of anyone else’s opinion, and hopelessly sellf-aggrandizing to the point of hysteria.

Rant on to your heart’s content, hopefully even a Neanderthal can follow that one!!!

JB says:

03:18pm | 15/11/12

@Shep, Sorry “Mate” didn’t know you skin was that thin.
Did you actually have anything insightful to say on the topic or reveal your qualifications.
Clearly you are Anti-Police and have no respect for the law. If you knew any service police or had access to the statistics you would actually know that the number of assaults on police has increased substantially as well as the number of violent crimes. Your old copper has it a bit easier “Back in the day” when people might have gotten drunk but were usually not violent. Today once people get some grog into them they change and bash anyone who disagrees with them. Maybe the Aggression coming from the police is in response from the aggression they encounter EVERY DAY!!!!
FYI all police officers on general duties receive the same training.
“recapture a more gentle sense of entitlement and to instill this in our kids” good luck with that when parents don’t respect the police and that flows DIRECTLY to their children!
Young people today have NO respect for the law or the police. Get done for drink driving, hey no big deal! Get done for stealing,hey no big deal, Get done for drug possession hey no big deal, Get done for going armed in public hey no big deal and he list goes on.
My “aggressive behaviour.  Nasty, disrespectful” Well mate, you seem to be the one sinking the boot into the police who have a bloody hard job so show some respect before being an arm chair critic who has all the answers all the while sitting there nice and safe because you have not contradicted that statement!

Haxton Waag says:

08:18am | 15/11/12

You used the word “simple”; in my experience that shows you are not facing reality fully.

Borderer says:

09:26am | 15/11/12

@Haxton Waag
You used the word “simple”; in my experience that shows you are not facing reality fully

That would on the basis of the massive number of incidents of police tasering random people? Or are you merely insinuating police brutality every time someone is caught doing the wrong thing?

Haxton Waag says:

10:25am | 15/11/12

@Borderer: Whenever I have seen the word “simple” used in forums like this one, the poster invariably hasn’t thought it through ... in my opinion. In this case, for example, I think it is going too far to call people who attract the attention of the police “parasites” or “idiots”. Often enough, they are just troubled people. I think it is wrong to try to dehumanise them. Also, perhaps it is true that you will not get tasered if you behave yourself, but there is still the notion of appropriate response. The coroner has clearly concluded that the police response in this case was not appropriate. I can see that it may at times be very difficult for police to determine whether a person poses a threat or not, but despite that it seems clear that they went too far on this occasion.

Haxton Waag says:

01:20pm | 15/11/12

@Borderer: You make a fairly compelling argument. I have to some degree changed my opinion. Glad to see someone who can express himself without going off the deep end.

Tim says:

08:42am | 15/11/12

You don’t die from LSD. You’re a moron. Take a pharmacology lesson. Failing that, stop lumping all chemicals into “dangerous, will kill you” categories.

You can however die when you have thousands and thousands of volts applied directly to your skin from the actions of a bunch of meathead cops.

Borderer says:

09:37am | 15/11/12

Tim,
Please consume 20 tabs of LSD and call me in the morning…. what??? It will kill you???
Dosage…. that stuff isn’t prescribed medication, alcohol will kill you in sufficent quantity as will panadol or Red Bull. Yet you call d a moron….

Ex says:

10:03am | 15/11/12

Spoken like a true druggie Tim.

Kassandra says:

10:52am | 15/11/12

LSD is what was found in the man’s system on blood analysis in the lab. That does not mean it was the only drug in his system. The behaviour of this man as described in the coroner’s findings does not sound typical of the sort of behaviour LSD produces, even in “bad trips” which are basically acute anxiety states not psychosis. It is possible he also consumed other drugs which are not detected on current tests - there are a few synthetic “designer” drugs on the streets now like this that have effects more like PCP or ICE.

In none of the cases referred to was the taser found to have caused death and that is probably correct, although it may have contributed to it. The voltage of the taser is irrelevant - it’s the amount of current passing through the tissues that is relevant to its effects and that has nothing to do with voltage.

lea says:

05:00pm | 15/11/12

“the dumbass brazillian, he died from the drugs.”

Really? Where’d you get that from? The coroner certainly never said or even implied that. She said that whilst a cause of death could not be determined, he died in the course of being restrained by members of the NSW Police Force.

The guy stole two packets of biscuits from a convenience store. He didn’t deserve to pay with his life.

Brian says:

09:19am | 15/11/12

No she didn’t, Rob. She never said that the Taser was NOT responsible for the death. What she said was that she couldn’t rule any one cause IN, not that she could rule the taser OUT.

For me, the problem isn’t that he was tasered… it’s the sheer number of times it was done - if it hasn’t subdued him after a couple of hits, it’s unlikely further hits would do anything other than stress the body to the limit.

Borderer says:

09:44am | 15/11/12

Rob,
Cause of death in these situations is not clear, there are contributory factors that may in part be responsible but to refer to something as being the cause of death is like in a criminal conviction, it has to be clear cut.
The reason they would say specifically the taser was not the cause of death was a political one, it is correct, the taser did not cause death but the emphasis was made for political reasons. Unless the coroner made such a statement, opponents of tasers would take it as an admission of guilt.

Rob says:

11:06am | 15/11/12

Brian, I draw your attention to this piece taken directly out of the Coroner’s Report.
“there was no medical evidence that a Taser was directly responsible for the death.”

Fred says:

07:24am | 15/11/12

I agree narelle…a couple of nights stationed at the Bankstown, Lakemba, Cabramatta LCA will be enough to send the likes of Katie back into the comfort of her office where she can direct her attacks at some other section of the community from the comfort of her keyboard.

fml says:

07:51am | 15/11/12

Blah, blah, blah If you think you are so tough why don’t you do it! leave our boys in blue alone! They are sooo precious.

If the police cannot do a job that they applied for properly, they shouldn’t be police. Just because it is a tough job does not mean they shouldn’t have to show restraint in required circumstances and doesn’t make these shows of excessive force acceptable.

narelle says:

08:35am | 15/11/12

@fml - redundent comment buddy.

Police are a necessary part of our society. Maybe the next time you need police assistance, refrain from calling them. They might not handle the job to your liking….

Gotta love keyboard warriors!!

Tim the Toolman says:

08:45am | 15/11/12

“If the police cannot do a job that they applied for properly, they shouldn’t be police. “

They are doing it properly.  Some (soft) people don’t like what is necessary.  Fortunately, they’re not the ones we have to rely on.  Unfortunately, they like to yell and scream a lot.

Len says:

08:53am | 15/11/12

“They are sooo precious”...FML If you or your family were confronted with a violent offender would you instruct the attending police officer to be gentle with the offender, to use non forceful means to subdue them? I certainly hope you do. Otherwise your ramblings on this article about police brutality are a mere furphy from another keyboard warrior.

fml says:

10:58am | 15/11/12

Tim, Len.

Next time you get the cops called on you I hope it doesn’t take 11 of them, I also hope they don’t excessively taser you till dead when already subdued.

“to use non forceful means to subdue them? ” No, are you being facetious? use forceful means to subdue them, don’t taser him 27 times when already in handcuffs, I find it abhorrent that you think that is acceptable. Who was this guy seriously that he had the strength to overpower 11 police officers! 11! Oh, thats right, he didn’t over power them he was subdued already, then they tasered him. Diabolical.

narelle,

You have to love blinded sided apologists too. 11 people to taser an already subdued man to death is EXCESSIVE. As I have said before, me and ten of my mates could subdue him with him being killed. Why can’t 11 trained police officers.

Mark990 says:

11:26am | 15/11/12

Yeah yeah… We get it. All the wives, brothers and sisters all band together to stick up for their police mates / partners. The fact that you are actually saying Katie should join the force and go work in Lakemba highlights the problem perfectly. We allow anyone to join, 20 year old kids who are 5’5 and 60kg are sent in to patrol the most dangerous hot spots, and then when they can’t handle the heat in the kitchen they shoot people in the back with tasers, cuff them, and shoot them some more…. Oh but the guy who was stumbling down the street deserves it because he was on drugs…. NO! what he deserved was to be apprehended (maybe with a couple of black eyes or even a single taser shot) by a COMPETENT police officer….

Mark990 says:

11:26am | 15/11/12

Yeah yeah… We get it. All the wives, brothers and sisters all band together to stick up for their police mates / partners. The fact that you are actually saying Katie should join the force and go work in Lakemba highlights the problem perfectly. We allow anyone to join, 20 year old kids who are 5’5 and 60kg are sent in to patrol the most dangerous hot spots, and then when they can’t handle the heat in the kitchen they shoot people in the back with tasers, cuff them, and shoot them some more…. Oh but the guy who was stumbling down the street deserves it because he was on drugs…. NO! what he deserved was to be apprehended (maybe with a couple of black eyes or even a single taser shot) by a COMPETENT police officer….

narelle says:

12:08pm | 15/11/12

@FML - “As I have said before, me and ten of my mates could subdue him with him being killed.” Did you mean to have NOT in that sentence somewhere.

I assume that you have been confronted by an agitated delirious drug addict before?!?!

I am assuming that you bragging about you and your 10 mates strength means that you are probably simply a legend in your own lunchtime, sitting behind a computer with the thesaurus open.

fml says:

12:37pm | 15/11/12

narelle,

Ooops, yep thanks for pointing out my typo, but yes you get the drift.

“I assume that you have been confronted by an agitated delirious drug addict before?!?! ” Yes I have, I not being a police officer walked away the first occasion and on another occasion I stopped another from hanging them self.

“I am assuming that you bragging about you and your 10 mates strength means that you are probably simply a legend in your own lunchtime, sitting behind a computer with the thesaurus open”

Me: People saved from death = 1
11 policemen people killed = 1.

I think I did a pretty good job for a keyboard warrior. It takes one keyboard warrior with no life experience to save a life and it takes 11 trained police officers to take one.

narelle says:

01:29pm | 15/11/12

@FML - my hero….... *rolls eyes*

Do you need validation from someone? I can give you 50c to tell someone who cares.

I am sure that the amount of times a cop has saved a life outnumbers yours by 1000’s. The Coroner did not find that the cops caused his death. Maybe you should revise your tally.

As far as I am concerned - you committ an offence, you have to accept the consequences.

fml says:

02:19pm | 15/11/12

Narelle,

You arrogant twit, I wasn’t trying to get any acceptance from you. I did it to save it for that person, You know what you are an unempathetic <you know what> to even suggest that I did it just to get “50c” from you? You should be ashamed of yourself. Maybe you would have preferred it if I had let them die. Obviously you are incapable of feeling any emotion, you hold the sanctity of life in such little regard, and apparently I am the one they call a keyboard warrior.

“As far as I am concerned - you committ an offence, you have to accept the consequences. “

And I don’t disagree with that! But the punishment in this instance doesn’t fit the crime, there is no death penalty in australia and the police are not the ones to mete out punishment anyway. Throw him jail for the night, yes. Taser him while he is subdued till he is dead? No, most definitely not.

You are an unempathetic sadist, lest others show less when it’s your son next.

fml says:

02:22pm | 15/11/12

NArelle,

“The Coroner did not find that the cops caused his death.”

Of course not, because it is an ambiguous cop out. The symptoms of taser death mimic acute onset excited delirium. It is only an excuse to get police out of murder.

narelle says:

03:15pm | 15/11/12

@ FML - pfft….. water off a ducks back!!! You don’t know me or my life circumstances so say what you like, I am not so insecure that I feel the need to tell the punch thread about my “heroic” actions.

You on the other hand, judging by your comments on this thread seem to be intent on having a debate with anyone who differs from you in opinion and boasting about you and your mates prowess!

The fact of the matter remains, whether it be you and your 10 mates or a drugged up idiot creating havoc, your behaviour, demeanour and actions determine the consequences. We do not have full entire coverage of the situation that night, so we do not have the right to pass judgement on these cops. The job is hard enough without people like you making comments without having all the facts.

I might be in your opinion “an unempathetic sadist”, but to call me arrogant is rich coming after your boastful comments.

Tim the Toolman says:

03:53pm | 15/11/12

“Next time you get the cops called on you I hope it doesn’t take 11 of them, I also hope they don’t excessively taser you till dead when already subdued.”

Amazingly, never had the cops called on me.  Hard to believe I know.  Given that I don’t act like a complete tool in public, I’m unlikely to have the cops called in me as well.  Which means I’m also unlikely to be tasered.  Can you connect the dots here?  You know what else?  I wouldn’t resist the people with deadly weapons with a physical response.  That’s called being an idiot.

John says:

04:17pm | 15/11/12

@narelle
“I am sure that the amount of times a cop has saved a life outnumbers yours by 1000’s.”
1000, really? I’d be very surprised if this was even remotely correct for ANYONE. Perhaps I’m not doing enough questionable activities to validate the presence of police .

John says:

04:25pm | 15/11/12

@narelle - as much as I enjoy reading this argument I suggest you stop making emotional responses, I don’t think it is helping your cause. Just because someone has a hard job doesn’t mean they should escape accountability, or does it? I still like to at least believe that politicians are held accountable even when it’s perhaps not always the case.

fml says:

05:42pm | 15/11/12

narelle,

“You don’t know me or my life circumstances so say what you like, I am not so insecure that I feel the need to tell the punch thread about my “heroic” actions.”

Right, but you are more than happy to judge me saving my schizophrenic brother from suicide… Thats how I know your character.

“with anyone who differs from you in opinion”
WEll thats kind of the point of a blog. Not really difficult to understand really.

and boasting about you and your mates prowess!”
Right, so you think it is impossible for 11 police officers to safely detain one person?

you avoid the question, why is it ok to taser someone who was already subdued 27 times? The point I was making was about my prowess, it was about me being untrained individual who is able to subdue a psycotic individual with out killing them. The death was unecessary.

“The fact of the matter remains, whether it be you and your 10 mates or a drugged up idiot creating havoc, your behaviour, demeanour and actions determine the consequences”

No, the fact of the matter is that they don’t deserve to die for some thing of inconsequence, he deserved to go to jail, yes, he didnt deserve to die. Tell me he deserved to die. Tell me my brother deserved to die. You think you are much tougher than I am, telling unknowns on a blog that their brother deserves to die. Thats why I think you are arrogant and sadistic.

“so we do not have the right to pass judgement on these cops. The job is hard enough without people like you making comments without having all the facts.” we have the facts, they tasered an unarmed already subdued man 27 times to the death. that is not an act of bravery it is an act of cowardice.

I might be in your opinion “an unempathetic sadist”, but to call me arrogant is rich coming after your boastful comments. ”

Well I think saving your own brother from suicide is a good thing, a brave thing and I am proud of it. You wouldnt be but that just shows your character. well lack of it,.

Ex says:

08:10am | 15/11/12

Bouncers don’t have legal authority nor training to handle these situations.
Bouncers kill how many people a year?
Bouncers are frequently victims and are offenders are continuously charged with assaulting Bouncers. 

I gather you don’t work in the industry because if you did you would know this to be true.

Helt says:

09:05am | 15/11/12

EX You say they dont have the training to handle these situations. That might be true but where do you think these Ice addicts go at night? Bingo? The ballet? Perhaps the opera? No they go to clubs and pubs and who night after night have to deal with them? Bouncers? They arent legally entitled to any protection bar their mouths and their bodies?

Yet when faced with these drug affected superstrong Yahoos the bouncers are expected to talk them down or restrain them gently. sometimes police dont show up for an hour when called. If the bouncer has held them there for an hour they police question why If they have do defend themselves sometimes very agressively the first thing they do is look at the videotape and ask why the bouncer acted the way they did. Worst case scenario? An Ice head goes out of control and gets in a psychotic rage and the bouncers as police would have to gang tackle the Icehead out the door. The police dont show up and in the morning the IceHead goes to the police and complains that the bouncers assaulted him. The police go back and look at the video and charge the bouncers because they dont believe the polite little man who showed up at the police station has done anything wrong and when the bouncers say he was on something he denies it and there is no way to test him so the bouncers lose their license and livelyhood the club gets a black mark David Penberthy slanders the whole industry on the Punch and the Ice addict? He has to pick a different pub to go to to spend his payout which shouldnt be hard because there are thousands out there. Probably has a better quality of Ice as well funded by the bouncers he attacked

Helt says:

09:05am | 15/11/12

EX You say they dont have the training to handle these situations. That might be true but where do you think these Ice addicts go at night? Bingo? The ballet? Perhaps the opera? No they go to clubs and pubs and who night after night have to deal with them? Bouncers? They arent legally entitled to any protection bar their mouths and their bodies?

Yet when faced with these drug affected superstrong Yahoos the bouncers are expected to talk them down or restrain them gently. sometimes police dont show up for an hour when called. If the bouncer has held them there for an hour they police question why If they have do defend themselves sometimes very agressively the first thing they do is look at the videotape and ask why the bouncer acted the way they did. Worst case scenario? An Ice head goes out of control and gets in a psychotic rage and the bouncers as police would have to gang tackle the Icehead out the door. The police dont show up and in the morning the IceHead goes to the police and complains that the bouncers assaulted him. The police go back and look at the video and charge the bouncers because they dont believe the polite little man who showed up at the police station has done anything wrong and when the bouncers say he was on something he denies it and there is no way to test him so the bouncers lose their license and livelyhood the club gets a black mark David Penberthy slanders the whole industry on the Punch and the Ice addict? He has to pick a different pub to go to to spend his payout which shouldnt be hard because there are thousands out there. Probably has a better quality of Ice as well funded by the bouncers he attacked

Ex says:

10:07am | 15/11/12

Right Helt, the Police have no idea of the type that go beserk outside nightclubs.  99% of the time, Police side with the Bouncer, yet you don’t get media reports on that…do you.  The rest of your story is…rarely true.

Achmed says:

08:36am | 15/11/12

Stephen - you forgot the collective knowledge and wisdom of journalists.

Shame police aren’t empowered with hingsight so they would know the outcome before they acted

helt says:

09:09am | 15/11/12

Then why does this fantastic attitude not apply when police deal with bouncers? Bouncers have to deal with the same people without any tools but their wits and bodies yet if they have toi lay hands on a patron police come down on them like a hammer and take away their livelyhoods if they can.

Borderer says:

09:59am | 15/11/12

Helt,
I always had a good relationship with the police, maybe it was directly proportional to my efforts in working with them and how many of their collective backsides I saved when they were attacked by crazies. I also did my paperwork properly, took time to give detailed statements and give evidence in court. I had colleagues get pursued on charges for assault, even murder, yet for massive quantity of incidents I was involved in, not a single charge. Do I believe that all the charges were persued fairly? Not really, some exibited a prejudice against them, did I believe they could avoid the charges in each case if they had a good soliciter, certainly.

chris says:

08:33am | 15/11/12

Spot on. Our police are having to put their bodies on the line every time they deal with drugged out criminals. Until the judge has to face what they do, she has little chance of understanding the realities of they world the police work in.

Len says:

09:18am | 15/11/12

A good post. The fight or flight response you allude to with the dumping of adrenalin into our body has evolved over thousands of years of evolution. It was part of the survival of the fittest mantra that ensured we survived as a species. Unfortunately, our police officers are also part of the same species and cannot voluntarily turn off this response and remain in a un-aroused state when confronted with a threat. Just like caveman had to respond to the threat of a saber tooth in his cave, those that were docile or remained un-aroused usually got eaten.
But judging by this article, and the comments from the usual suspects like FML, there is an expectation that police turn off this response and hold hands with the offender until they ‘calm down’.

Expat Ozzie says:

09:43am | 15/11/12

@Tator: I agree with most everything you have said. My feeling is this problem is being generated by a belief that the use of a Tazer is non-lethal and therefor the police may be using it to early in a confrontation in order to achieve a speedier result. I do think most police have the right intentions when they do they job.

I certainly agree with your take on reactions in pressure situations. You really don’t know how you will react unless you’re actually put in one. Over my 20 years in the ADF I was involved in some situations that were similar to what you describe, I mean in a high adrenaline manner, although there was one episode with a mentally unstable rather large guy that got a little exciting. I learned alot about myself from them. I also learned how valuable training and command an control are when these situations occur.

My bet is we’re seeing the early stages of use of this rather new weapon and the evolution of training for it’s use. The one point I don’t agree with is your early assertion that those who haven’t walked in your shoes don’t know what there talking about. My experience is those that are to close often are not the best to make a judgement. Sometimes it’s the guy’s on the outside that can see the problem clearer then those one the inside. That didn’t make any easier for me to swallow there opions however.

Ex says:

10:10am | 15/11/12

fml is rarely correct, don’t feed the troll

fml says:

11:03am | 15/11/12

Can we preclude n00bs from posting till they learn the definition of the word troll? Please? or maybe we can use 11 police officers to taser them 27 times, because that is obviously an acceptable response.

Ex, You’re a n00b and you know you are, the internet has been around for a few year now, you might want to join the older kids, but you will have to learn the lingo first.

Borderer says:

11:08am | 15/11/12

Expat Ozzie
I don’t agree with is your early assertion that those who haven’t walked in your shoes don’t know what there talking about. My experience is those that are to close often are not the best to make a judgement.

I beg to differ, most critics can’t rationalise what is happening due to their own experience being insufficient. Having dealt with drugged up loons I can say with sincerity they are frightening to try and handle one on one.
My first encounter was with one about 80kgs, I was 110kg, extremely fit and an experienced practitioner in hand to hand combat. The guy is going mental at this other bloke so I go over to instruct him to leave the premises, he hits me in the chest. I lock the extended arm, pull him forward, double him over in a head lock and start walking him to the door. He reaches between my legs and just picks me up off the ground in a hyperextended lift, raises me above his head and goes to throw me across the room. I hang onto his head so I pull him down with me as he tried to throw me.
I hit the ground hard, pound the cartlidge in my elbow pretty bad as well as my knee. I roll over over and punch him in the goin, zero response. I crawl onto his back to use a jujitsu restraint where I lock my legs around his body and my arms imobilise both of his. He then stands up like I’m a five year old kid hanging onto his uncle and breaks the arm hold like I’m not even trying.
I sweep his legs, take him to ground and apply the sleeper hold, by the time he loses conciousness my vision is tunnelling, I’ve used up so much energy and blood oxygen I was about to black out. The police take him away. 10 minutes later, the adrenalin wears off and I pass out for real. I end up in hospital, elbow and knee x-rayed (not broken) and I feel like I’ve run a marathon for then next 3 days.
Now I will be honest, I was nearly killed, if I’d blacked out first, god only knows what would have happened. I was very experienced in fighting at this point, even against multiple opponents and I was completely taken by surprise. Everything I was taught and had experienced of working didn’t and I was forced to use a choke hold or quite likely die as a result. So when I read some of the ill informed posts on here, I feel obliged to disagree and point out their ignorance, they have absolutely no idea how utterly terrifying it is to confront a person who quite literally behaves like they’ve walked out of your worst nightmare. I don’t intend this to come off like I know it all but thought that by sharing my experience that you would gain some better insight of the reality of these situations.

Expat Ozzie says:

01:44pm | 15/11/12

@Borderer: Don’t get me wrong I’m not writing of the value of the first hand knowledge of those in the front line. It is highly valuable knowledge. I have over the years learned the value of the input from other sources. I’ve come to realise there are others that may see things at different angle and may have worth while advice to give. I only high lighted that line because it tends to be dismissive of those that don’t have first hand experience.

An example. I used to work on Aircraft for a living. When we modified things or did major up grades the test pilots used input from the engineers in order to work up test flight procedures. The engineers don’t necessarily need to know how to fly the thing but they know what they built. The engineers also took the feed back from the pilot to rework problems even though the pilot is not necessarily an engineer. Now I’m in IT and I see the same parallels e.g users that don’t know how to program give me feedback I use to deliver a result. This is common across most fields.

Here I think the police need to take the feedback from the courts and the data that is has been generated since the introduction of Tazers and use it to formulate operational procedures and tactics that eliminate unnecessary deaths. Elimination of unnecessary death must be the end goal here not using excuses to justify the problem (excuses might be harsh word here, sorry).

Unlike others here that seem happy with the outcome of a death because a young person made a silly choice and they have decided he is a criminal for it, I certainly am not satisfied. I have a young daughter and she will in time come into that age group where we make silly decisions, and most here would have to admit to making a few of those. I for one would like to know that the police might help to protect her if she does something wrong and ends up in an unfortunate situation. I would not like to think the police are a danger to be wary of.

I appreciate your experience and you rarely come of as a know it all Borderer. However your situation was one on one and not with weight of numbers as police usually and rightly employ. My concern is the police may not be being trained to use the lest invasive tactics and that possibly the Tazer is being used because it being perceived as non lethal and a means of protecting police over the citizenry. Last I was aware of Oz isn’t a police state. I realie the police are in danger but they are supposed to protect first at the end of the day.

Borderer says:

03:06pm | 15/11/12

My opinion the police need to be better resourced in dealing with the situations. My post near the top indicates what options are open to the officers. They really don’t have the option of a prolonged physical struggle as the offender being able to get hold of their firearm can be a real concern and its something most ordinary people overlook.
They should have access to leg restraints , either zip ties or cuffs and be able to literally truss people up for their own safety.

Tator says:

03:48pm | 15/11/12

Expat Ozzie,

You will find that all police services take coroners findings seriously and they shape policy and procedures on what coroners find on a regular basis.
As for the training, in SAPOL all tactical options are included in our IMOST training course, from tactical withdrawl to firearms and everything in between including empty handed techniques, baton, OC spray and now ECD’s have been recently included.  So it is not really a training issue.

Expat Ozzie says:

06:43pm | 15/11/12

@Tator: I’m glad to hear these things are taken seriously. I’m not having a go at individual police, I’m actually concerned for those guy’s as much as for the people they are trying to deal with. I would hate to think the service is putting officers in a position that causes an outcome such as an unnecessary death. That would be something they have to deal with for the rest of there lives.

@Borderer: I agree on the resources. Outcomes such as the inquires are just another resource. Hopefully all this is just a learning experience and further refining of usage protocols will better equip the guy’s in the future.

P.S It’s good to talk to some sane people on this forum every once in a while.

Mark990 says:

01:06pm | 16/11/12

Feeling for ya FML… I for one am behind you 100%. What the broader argument is here is whether we are willing to live in a police state, and I for one will fight that till the end. The fact that so many people blindly support the police no matter what they do is downright scary…

This case should be no different than the bouncer who was committed of manslaughter for killing David Hookes. He was doing his job. It was a tough job. But his use of force was excessive and he paid the price… The facts in this case should be put in front of a judge, and the police force and their network of one eyed supporters should have no influence on a fair trial and justice being bought for the victim (yes, the victim, who had a far greater crime committed against him than he was committing).

Regardless of all the world experience Ex, Tator, Borderless and others on here would like to instill about completely separate cases they have been involved in; in this case a 21 year old man was set upon by police who “behaved with an ungoverned pack mentality, like school boys from lord of the flies” to quote the person who actually has all the facts.

Mark990 says:

02:35pm | 16/11/12

Glad to see you have finally exposed your true motive after 100+ posts on the topic ex

The cops could have disemboweled the guy and gang raped him and you would still be supporting their behavior because “he took drugs”.

Ex says:

10:20am | 15/11/12

Let’s see…the taser was invented in 1974, the handgun shaped taser wasn’t invented until 1999 and NSW didn’t adopt the taser until 2008.  It’s been VERY rapid.

Ex says:

10:28am | 15/11/12

If you don’t try to violently resist arrest, nothing happens to you.
If you don’t try and run away, nothing happens to you.
If you don’t assault the Police, nothing happens to you.

Police don’t have the opportunity to assess whether it’s drugs or mental illness is causing a person to react, so yes if a mentally ill person behaves in this way, the same may happen to them.  Is it the mentally ill person’s fault?  Probably not, but it’s not the officer’s fault either.

They weren’t introduced as an alternative to a firearm, you are misinformed.

If the Police hadn’t of stopped this drug crazed maniac and he punched somebody in the head who fell down and died (because one punch can kill) the media and the armchair warriors would be screaming why didn’t the Police taser him.

Love, Hugs and Kisses doesn’t bring down a violent offender.

Modern Primitive says:

11:25am | 15/11/12

Ex stands for ex cop presumably? One would expect such a black and white attitude from a former serving member. All rules and reverberating an no ability to consider the grey.

And yes, they were brought in as a non lethal alternative to firearms. Police using them as pain and compliance tools is outside of operating procedure. The police are using them outside of their own regulations, and then lying about it.  I think it is you who is misinformed.

Drug crazed? Maybe, what evidence is there that he was violent though? What warranted 6 officers electrocuting and kicking him while he was on the ground screaming? How did he present a threat to any officers life that would have warranted him being shot had they not being equipped with Tasers?

And aren’t police supposed to try and diffuse a situation to avoid zapping them in the first place? Bouncers can do it with drunks and people affected by drugs, why not professional police?

Fml is right, you apologists are pathetic.

Modern Primitive says:

11:25am | 15/11/12

Ex stands for ex cop presumably? One would expect such a black and white attitude from a former serving member. All rules and reverberating an no ability to consider the grey.

And yes, they were brought in as a non lethal alternative to firearms. Police using them as pain and compliance tools is outside of operating procedure. The police are using them outside of their own regulations, and then lying about it.  I think it is you who is misinformed.

Drug crazed? Maybe, what evidence is there that he was violent though? What warranted 6 officers electrocuting and kicking him while he was on the ground screaming? How did he present a threat to any officers life that would have warranted him being shot had they not being equipped with Tasers?

And aren’t police supposed to try and diffuse a situation to avoid zapping them in the first place? Bouncers can do it with drunks and people affected by drugs, why not professional police?

Fml is right, you apologists are pathetic.

Modern Primitive says:

11:25am | 15/11/12

Ex stands for ex cop presumably? One would expect such a black and white attitude from a former serving member. All rules and reverberating an no ability to consider the grey.

And yes, they were brought in as a non lethal alternative to firearms. Police using them as pain and compliance tools is outside of operating procedure. The police are using them outside of their own regulations, and then lying about it.  I think it is you who is misinformed.

Drug crazed? Maybe, what evidence is there that he was violent though? What warranted 6 officers electrocuting and kicking him while he was on the ground screaming? How did he present a threat to any officers life that would have warranted him being shot had they not being equipped with Tasers?

And aren’t police supposed to try and diffuse a situation to avoid zapping them in the first place? Bouncers can do it with drunks and people affected by drugs, why not professional police?

Fml is right, you apologists are pathetic.

Ex says:

11:56am | 15/11/12

So the grey only serves to advantage the criminal I see?  Why is that?

From the procedures outlined by Jane Goodluck (9.46am) above, the use of the taser was completely justified in this instance.

The Coroner could have stopped proceedings at any time and recommended Murder, Manslaughter, or charges of Grievous Bodily Harm or other assault, but did not.  Why do you think that is?

The taser was brought in as another operational tool, not a replacement or alternative to a firearm.  A firearm causes death, a taser does not.  That’s been medically proven time and time again.

If you struggle against the police that’s violence. 

Bouncers frequently beat people to a pulp, but you have never heard of that apparently.

fml is never right, you drug/criminal apologists are pathetic.

Kev says:

12:49pm | 15/11/12

Modern Primitive - “One would expect such a black and white attitude from a former serving member. All rules and reverberating an no ability to consider the grey. ” I would expect such a comment from an armchair textbook critic who has never spent a minute in the shoes of a police officer.

Consider the grey? Unlike you police don’t have the benefit of hindsight to make decisions like these. They can only go on what is presented in front of them. You critics are the pathetic ones.

Modern Primitive says:

01:50pm | 15/11/12

Just so we’re clear here, you guys are saying its ok to kill mentally impaired people instead of trying to help them, correct?

Another thing I find interesting is that the coroner said it was probably drugs that caused the man’s death. Interesting that we only hear about drug deaths when Tasers are involved isn’t it?

Ex says:

04:21pm | 15/11/12

Modern,

Just so we are clear, no one says it’s okay to kill mentally impaired people.  Not sure where you got that from?

You are right, you only hear about drug deaths when their is a taser involved.  This is because the media know they can milk hysteria out for a good month or two, based on scant information and innuendo with no desire for the actual truth to come out. 

Strangely drugs alter the mind and yet that’s the time when they come to the attention of Police.  You are all righteous about what the Police should be doing right or better, but couldn’t care two hoots about what the drug user has done.  Why aren’t you critical of his crimes?

Druggies drop dead daily, probably by the dozens, but nobody prints that story - it’s not exciting.

Bananabender56 says:

10:59am | 15/11/12

@Peter Scott - well they wouldn’t be charged then, would they? The Coroner said that death wasn’t caused by the taser.

Ex says:

11:28am | 15/11/12

Peter,

Perhaps you are not aware of the Palm Island affair?

Taylor says:

10:29am | 15/11/12

It’s like gay marriage. It’s ok to make a comment about it just as long as you don’t oppose it.

fml says:

10:10am | 15/11/12

What precludes the police from personal responsibility?

EC says:

11:08am | 15/11/12

Nothing at all and if a criminal offence has occurred, I’m all for the police to be prosecuted, just like everyone else. It just seems to me that personal responsibility for one’s actions has been conveniently ignored.

fml says:

11:44am | 15/11/12

I am not saying that doesn’t happen and that people shouldn’t be held responsible. I am saying however that the response needs to be proportionate.

In this instance it was not proportionate, I think the response given diminishes his personal responsibility. He took drugs and was given some biscuits, that doesn’t deserve being tasered to death.

If personal responsibility is to be a rationalisation for this mans actions then the police should be held to the same level, the police uphold the law, they are not above it.

Bananabender56 says:

10:55am | 15/11/12

The UK also has as many CCTV cameras as people (perhaps a slight exaggeration), used in part to see events unfolding and possibly prevent a serious event. The UK police did a sterling job in recent riots though - didn’t they? Interesting to know how many police per head of population there is in the 2 countries.

Peter Scott says:

10:50am | 15/11/12

@Joke You are a joke for defending those scum bag officers! They deserve to be jailed for manslaughter

Ex says:

11:31am | 15/11/12

And yet Peter, a Coroner (someone actually qualified, unlike yourself) examining just that issue, determined they should not be charged with manslaughter.

michael j says:

11:32am | 15/11/12

Well them police just Tazered a bloke 56yer old in Sydney,,
probably the guidelines need more reviewing ,,
when they test these things they test them on the biggest , fittest copper they can,, clearly the general public are not that fit and therefore some ,,’ lots lately DIE ’ but when an ABUSE of Authority occurs they should be Charged ,
for mine i would rather be smashed in the face with an AXE-HANDLE like the olde days,

Ex says:

11:35am | 15/11/12

The laws do allow it, that’s why the Coroner didn’t recommend criminal charges.  At any time a Coroner is satisfied a crime has occurred, they can stop proceedings and refer the matter to the DPP. 

Similarly, the uneducated determining what the average IQ of a Police Officer is and their ability to interpret the law is also harmful to justice and society’s perception of the aforementioned individual.

Big Jay says:

11:54am | 15/11/12

@Mark - Interesting you use the word “profession”.

This is what bugs me about the police. I just figured they were supposed to be “professional” and know how to exercise JUDGEMENT and discretion within a certain framework rather than stick solely to rules and procedures (I know the police would need a lot these anyway, and thats fair enough).

Clearly to them its just a job, not a vocation and half of them wouldn’t know the difference.

Most professions will punish (if not expel) a member that does the wrong thing and brings whole profession into disrepute, the police always go into cover-up mode.

Ex says:

12:20pm | 15/11/12

Doctors never cover up mistakes.  Lawyers never cover their own criminals.  Journalists never cover up. Judges, Politicians, Priests…name a profession that doesn’t cover up it’s indiscretions.  Please!

Big Jay says:

01:24pm | 15/11/12

@Ex - Whatever…I’m in a profession, if I do something high-profile that brings the profession into disrepute I’m not expecting anyone to come to my aid and cover-up my incompetence, and the same vice-versa.

I like the excuse “but those other professions do it, so why can’t we?”...very mature.

I also like how you would think it would be good for the police to be respected in the same vein as lawyers, politicians and catholic priests.

Ben says:

04:08pm | 15/11/12

Mark is an angry little man with a lot to say. One of his many beefs is that the average IQ of a copper “would have to be less than 100”. He fails to provide a source for this. He argues that police “need a clear set of operating guidelines that tells them exactly what to do in each situation”. Given each situation is unique, that’s quite a statement. Perhaps the police should call ‘timeout’ and get the policymakers in when each situation arises? When challenged about his assertions, Mark labels the questioner a “moron”. He also advocates that people on this forum who bring up the subject of personal responsibility are “stupid”. Oh and Mark wishes everyone to know he has a postgraduate degree.

Ex says:

04:26pm | 15/11/12

Big Jay,

Please point out where I said that justified the behaviour?  Waits…

I never mentioned a desire for respect - you did.  I notice you have a vivid imagination of what was said.

I also mentioned Doctors, Journalists and Judges…you aren’t selectively protecting yourself and your own are you?

Not very professional!

Ex says:

12:22pm | 15/11/12

Precisely.

Mark says:

03:03pm | 15/11/12

You definitely can you moron. If you have to resort to violence to restrain an unarmed man then you are doing it wrong.

Seriously, your logic is so flawed. The cops couldn’t shoot in this situation before tasers, so they couldn’t possibly have killed him in previous years. The fact is, if tasers were not used, this situation would not have escalated and a man would not be dead. Any other reasoning is just buck passing.

Also, you obviously don’t know the first thing about drugs. They don’t all make you act the same way, LSD definitely does not produce super human strength in a psychotic state. That is GHB. If the perp was on GHB, the 11 cops wouldn’t be able to restrain him. LSD is a completely different beast. He would’ve been absolutely scared out of his mind, but not threatening nor dangerous. As I said previously, the over reaction of the cops and the tools they had available made this outcome happen.

marley says:

03:29pm | 15/11/12

I read the report as well.  The cops were disorganized, some of them were very junior, and the more senior ones behaved badly.  None of them really seemed to understand proper protocol for the use of either the spray or the taser.  The whole thing struck me as evidence of insufficient training, inadequate guidelines (the coroner singled out a couple of them) and very poor judgement, particularly by the senior cop on the spot. 

I think, if the senior cop had been more on top of things, the situation would have ended as soon as the young man was handcuffed after the first taser shot brought him down.  That the situation was allowed to escalate, that further measures were taken when he was no threat to anyone, is the issue.  It’s not so much the taser as the lack of control that was the problem.

Ex says:

02:06pm | 15/11/12

It’d be great if people didn’t take drink or take drugs, but they do.
It’d be great if people didn’t die as a result of drinking or drug taking, but they do.  Sometimes that also occurs whilst in custody.

1) When there is bedlam from one end of the street to the other, protection of the community comes first, not counting how many times something has happened, whether two people are tasering at the same time (yet to personally see evidence that this occurred).  It’s a violent struggle, where do you expect things to be done in an orderly fashion?  Why doesn’t the criminal have to struggle in an orderly fashion?

2) Pretty sure EVERYONE knew he was in an agitated state.  Again physical containment of the out of control psychotic is the primary aim, so that your husband/wife/child isn’t murdered as they innocently walk down the street.

3) This isn’t tea and scones at the Senior Citizens Club, it’s a violent struggle.

4) Your the first medical expert to determine Positional Asphyxiation as the cause of death.

5) So you can’t help nor protect your fellow officer unless you are fully aware of why it’s happening?  So if I punch your mother repeatedly in the face, you can’t help her because you don’t know why I am doing it?

No one is saying that you can’t have an opinion because you’re not an officer, what there saying is you are less likely to understand what went on, why it did and why sometimes life isn’t pretty.

Whether he was tasered unlawfully whilst on the ground, is still being investigated.  No one has been cleared of that, they have only been cleared of causing his death.

Tator says:

03:24pm | 15/11/12

CM,
Point 1:  This incident occurred over a period of a few minutes,  in situations like this, it is nigh impossible for one person to keep track of what is going on, let alone one person keeping track of everything going on with the number of people involved in this.  In situations like this, everyone is focussed on one outcome, restraining and controlling the subject.  In a perfect world, there would have been one person co-ordinating the takedown and everyone would have been able to co-ordinate with each other.  In the real world, this sort of coordination takes teamwork and extensive training as a group, which police do not receive as we do not always work with the same people every shift and some incidents have patrols from different areas attending who don’t always work with each other so having that sort of choreographing of force usage is utterly impracticable due to the training requirements.

Point 2:  It is difficult to ascertain from a quick examination of an overly “excited” person to work out what is actually the problem as that takes more than just looking at a person.  You actually have to have a conversation with them to help judge from their responses.  Now according to the Coroners findings, Curti basically ignored the police and tried to avoid them.  In SA, what happens is if they appear to have mental health issues and they meet the criteria for detention, they are detained and then assessed by the Psych duty registrar who makes the judgement as whether they are drug affected, have mental health issues or just plain anti social.  The Police don’t make that call as we are not qualified and the training required is prohibitive in time and cost for most police services, especially when most public hospitals have on duty psychiatrists who are trained.

Point 3:  Would have to agree, one of the big things reinforced every year with SAPOL’s Incident Management and Occupational Safety Training course is positional asphyxia and how to avoid it.  Reading through the Coroners findings indicated to me that the officers involved did not think of this when restraining Curti and it was mentioned as one of the possible causes of death.

Point 4:  Refer above
Point 5:  in cases like this where a suspect is being chased on foot, it is difficult to run and give full details over the radio to brief other patrols who are coming in as back up.  Having been a comms operator for over 9 years, the radio transmissions from officers chasing someone on foot are nearly unintelligible due to the exertion from running after the subject.  Even elite athletes cannot sprint and talk at the same time.  In addition to this, due to the nature of policing, you just have to trust that your fellow officers are trying to do the right thing and you back them up at an incident like this even when not knowing the full circumstances.  This is because the back up patrols will hand the suspect back to the originally tasked patrol so they can complete the job as they have all the details to complete the investigational file etc.

CM says:

04:35pm | 15/11/12

Hi Ex, Here are my comments on your comments:

1) I disagree with you on this point. I don’t think the “protection of the community” was paramount here as he didn’t pose much of a threat. It was hardly “bedlam from one end of the street to the other” but rather a man in a state of drug paranoia who had stolen two packets of biscuits. I concede that I’m slightly wrong about the tasering by two officers happening at exactly the same time, but it was pretty close. The Coroner’s Report states that “five drive stuns were…..administered by Probationary Constable Barling, at a similar time to two drive stuns being administered by Senior Constable Edmondson, and at least some of the contents of each of three cans of capsicum (or OC) spray were discharged at his face by Senior Constable Ralph” (page 7 of the Coroner’s Report).

2) The officers may have known he was in an agitated state but they didn’t alter their tactics to cater to it. Roberto was in a state of delusion and paranoia. Being pursued, crash-tackled and tasered didn’t help him, it just ramped up the anxiety he would have been going through.

3) Yes, it was a violent struggle. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t have been handled better. The police pursued him for about an hour. That’s a fair bit of time to perhaps come up with another strategy that didn’t need to end in a violent struggle.

4) I didn’t say anything about Positional Asphyxiation as the cause of death but was commenting on the fact that there was a stage where his ability to breathe must have been hindered.  The Coroner’s report mentions that one officer who attended the scene at the end “was concerned that Roberto was on his stomach…..(and) when Roberto was rolled onto his side… noticed his face was a dark deep purple” (page 13 of the Coroner’s report)

5) What officers needed to be protected in this situation? The only person at risk was the victim. He never provoked an attack on the officers. I don’t understand how officers attending to the scene were never aware of what their purpose was. Wouldn’t the style of your response as a police officer to someone you were pursuing be based on what you were chasing them for? As it states in the Coroner’s report, “A few of the other Constables seem to have thrown themselves into a melee with an ungoverned pack mentality…...with no idea what the problem was, or what threat or crime was supposedly to be averted, or concern for the value of life” (page 22 of the Coroner’s report)

I don’t think I am less likely to understand what went on in this case at all. There is a lot of information out there about this case. Nearly every element of it has been reported on. There is also a lot of CCTV and Tasercam footage which has been publicly released. I think the public is very informed about what exactly went on here and able to comment.

Ex says:

05:42pm | 15/11/12

Hi CM,

1) The initial reports are an armed robbery.  Until you search the offender, you don’t know whether he is armed or not.  It’s irrelevant that the initial report is wrong - at the time the Police don’t know that.  An armed or potentially armed offender running down the street is a threat to the public.  Would you prefer Police not chase armed robbers or armed offenders or potentially armed offenders?  Just letting them go?

How is it you are able to determine what kind of a threat he was at that time?

So if a person is in an agitated state you just let them run?  What if he is armed? What if he runs out in front of a car?  Do you think the Police would be criticised for letting a drug affected psychotic run out into the traffic and dying as a result?  What if he runs past someone walking down the street and clubs them from behind?  Out of control people are a threat to safety and need to be contained as quickly as possible.  His feelings are not the primary concern.

3) What alternative strategy do suggest?  Bear in mind while you are contemplating this new strategy, he continues to run further away.

5) When you have an offender running down the street, purportedly from an armed robbery - they all need to be protected.  Even if he is not armed, that he is violently struggling - they all need to be protected.  It’s a bizarre phenomena that Australians are being encouraged to think it’s acceptable to attack Police, because they should expect it.  When did we think assaulting anyone is socially acceptable?

An offender is running away or a mental patient is running away or a drug induced psychotic is running away…why does every officer need to know the precise crime he has committed, the objective is stop, contain and arrest him.

You haven’t got complete footage, there is plenty that happened off CCTV, bits and pieces off shop cameras aren’t the entire picture. The taser film doesn’t show what happened before they were activated.

Again, no one said you can’t comment, nor question what went on.  No one has said that.  Your questions themselves indicate you don’t have a full understanding of why Police do things and what Police are legally allowed to do.

Mark990 says:

01:47pm | 16/11/12

Yes. It would seem fleeing from police is VERY dangerous… especially with your back turned…

Modern Primitive says:

03:29pm | 15/11/12

I think some of these people really believe that drug users deserve to die in such a way, and will ignore everything you’ve written. That, or they really believe what they’re told.

+1 Dave.

Mark990 says:

02:25pm | 16/11/12

+1 again. Hear hear! What a great response about how it REALLY is out there on weekends. We’ve all seen it, but are just called names by the “cops are tops” crew whenever it is bought up.

marley says:

04:16pm | 15/11/12

“It has been said” - that’s classic weasel wording.  Who said it? 

And what’s the logic to it?  Why is arming cops with tasers worse than arming them with guns?  If you read the coroner’s report, which I doubt you did, even the coroner thinks that tasers have their place in policing.  The problem lies with training, protocols for usage, and discipline, all of which would have been just as critical if the cops had been beating on the poor kid with batons.  And I’m not quite sure how you think it’s safe to hit a guy with a baton, or force him to the ground, without knowing his medical condition.  But if getting him to the ground is less risky than having him hurt innocent people, then down to the ground he will go.  The cops can take his medical history later.

Jaqui says:

04:44pm | 15/11/12

Well they had better learn to start to respect their employer, you know, the people that pay their salaries through their taxes.
Personally I think that if ANY cop has this attitude he/she should leave the force immediately.

P. Walker says:

05:03pm | 15/11/12

Ben that was riveting!  Obviously written by a bitter twisted cop.  And yes we have them in our family, so we do get to hear all the wonders and perks that go their way also. 
I’ll wait for the other installment, “why the public hate cops”, and my lot would wonder why.
Oh, and Ben, as you rip into the bloke Mark, you like to espouse you are a cop excuser.  No matter how they conduct themselves, eh?  You appear to see things in black and white similar to prison warders.  Not many shades of grey, up top in the grey matter.

Ben says:

05:03pm | 15/11/12

And what do you think it is that makes them that way, Jacqui?

Ex says:

05:46pm | 15/11/12

P.Walker

So a cop excuser is unacceptable, but a criminal excuser is acceptable.
Shades of grey don’t afford benefit to Police, only to criminals.

Makes perfect sense.

Ben says:

06:53pm | 15/11/12

@P. Walker

>You appear to see things in black and white similar to prison warders.  Not many shades of grey, up top in the grey matter.

Yeah, well a lot of people have read that Shades of Grey book. I’m not a fiction man myself.

Helt says:

09:38am | 16/11/12

I wonder if this is the attitude that got that brazillian man killed.  The cops hate the public and saw an opportunity to kill one of them and they took it