(Good stuff in here – promoted by JulieWaters)
Ever so quietly in a Thanksgiving Day news story Vermont State gives notice of an out of court settlement and payout in a taser related incident from 2006. The $40,000 settlement is called “frankly, a business decision” to avoid risk of trial.
The Vermont Attorney General’s Office has paid $40,000 to settle a lawsuit brought by a man who claims he was Tasered in 2006 by state police as he was having a seizure that was mistaken as an attempt to resist arrest.
State police deny wrongdoing, state assistant attorney general J.J. Tyzbir told the Valley News. He said he agreed to the settlement to avoid the risk of trial, where a jury could have awarded more money.
“We still believe Mr. Fairbrother was not actually in the throes of a seizure,” Tyzbir said. “We believe Mr. Fairbrother was actually trying to evade the officers and was resisting them and was noncompliant. But whenever you go to trial, you risk not getting a favorable outcome. This was, frankly, a business decision.”
A wise business decision might include continued review of the Taser policy as local police continue to equip themselves with the Tasers. This October the Taser Company issued a training bulletin warning that 50,000 volt tasering could cause an “adverse cardiac event” when shot in the chest. Avoiding the chest, face and neck is now strongly advised. Suggested shot placements currently include back, abdomen and thighs.
The Vermont AG Taser policy report of 2008 in its conclusion suggests room for further review of their safety.
There remain questions about the safety of the taser’s use in certain situations and on certain categories of subjects. These questions are particularly important in situations when multiple tases or extended continuous tasings of a subject are inflicted and when subjects are manifesting a condition called “excited delirium”. Continued study of the safety and health effects of tasers is warranted.
I suppose, just as with money, everything in society falls to inflation in some way or another.
When I grew up, Joe Friday and Sherm Potter (later incarnation) just asked you to put your hands behind your back and get in the car. That attitude continued with Andy and Barney, all the Hawaii 5-0 boys, etc. and I seem to remember most of the cops fitting into that norm also… Get stopped for speeding and you usually saw a fairly friendly face poke in the window.
Later kids grew up watching Tubbs and Crocket blowing 9mm all over the place, and the friendly service oriented cop show was replaced by some SWAT glorification. The speeding cop at your window now stands at the rear door with hand on some big ass gun. At the first sign of anything, people are jumping on everyone and banging heads into the ground…
Maybe there is some truth to it being a rougher environment out there, but I am not sure it is to the point where little old grandmothers need to be juiced up for non violent action. The taser should be used as a last resort to avoid violence-not as a remedy for nonconformity.
I am gonna hate to see what happens with the police state when the kids who grew up on video games start to get on the force…
I look for someone progressive taking us back to a time when CRIME PREVENTION was the primary goal, not LAW ENFORCEMENT-which to some degree is the same as tax collection.