Police chief suggests report on Taser case may have been premature

See also: I heard what I heard, that much I know

September 18, 2009
Thana Dharmarajah, Guelph Mercury

GUELPH — The police chief says too much is being made of police communications surrounding a mental health incident in the city’s northeast earlier in the week when a Taser was used on a man.

Rob Davis said police spokesperson Sgt. Doug Pflug didn’t have the sufficient information on hand Tuesday to respond to media inquiries about whether a Taser was used to subdue a mentally ill man earlier that day. A report on whether a Taser had been used in the incident may not have been filed until the officers, at the scene, wrapped up their shift for the day, Davis said.

“There’s nothing here to be hidden,” Davis said Thursday, following a Guelph Police Services Board meeting. “We are not denying that he was Tasered.”

On Tuesday just before noon, police were called to an apartment building at 11 Manhattan Court, the residence of a mentally ill man. His mother placed the initial call to police. Police were told the agitated man might be carrying a sword or similar weapon.

A reporter arrived at the scene to find police officers trying to coax the man from his second-floor apartment, when a struggle ensued in the hallway. He saw and heard pushing, shoving, grunting and groaning. One of the officers shouted out “Stay down . . . or you’ll be Tasered again!”

When the reporter contacted the police spokesperson, he was told the man was “arrested under the Mental Health Act without incident. No one was injured.”

Davis said when the spokesperson said “without incident,” he meant that no one was injured.

Davis added the use of a Taser may not have been revealed immediately to the police spokesperson, because it’s simply another use of force tool that police officers now use.

“The use of a Taser when no one was injured is not a major incident,” he said.

This case was a perfect example of what the Taser was designed for, Davis said, adding the weapon was used to immediately immobilize the man without discharging a firearm. The man was able to be quickly taken to the hospital, where he can get the help he needs, Davis said.

The man’s mother declined to be interviewed yesterday. Her son is now in the care of the Homewood Health Centre.

EDITORIAL: I heard what I heard, that much I know

September 16, 2009
Greg Layson, Guelph Mercury

On Wednesday, we published a small story about the Guelph Police Service’s tactical unit responding to what it called “a mental health crisis” in the city’s northeast corner.

Preliminary reports suggested the man, with some history of mental illness and what a police dispatcher warned was a propensity to become agitated when the man sees police, may have had access to a sword or dagger of sorts. Hence the heavy police presence at the tiny apartment building at 11 Manhattan Court.

The official police account of what occurred late Tuesday morning appeared in the story.

“He was arrested under the Mental Health Act without incident. No one was injured,” Guelph Police spokesperson Sgt. Doug Pflug said.

But what didn’t appear in the story were important and contradicting details that seemed quite unresolved at press time Tuesday. In some ways, perhaps some still remain that way.

After officers spent several minutes coaxing the man from his second-floor apartment, a struggle ensued in the hallway. There was what sounded and looked to be pushing and shoving and grunting and groaning. Officers were visible to me from the waist down. Amid officers encountering and then apprehending the man, the distinct crackle of a fired Taser could be heard. And then, I heard one of the officers boom the following words:

“Stay down . . . or you’ll be Tasered again!”

When Pflug was specifically asked Tuesday what the term “without incident” meant, he said there was “no use of force” during the incident. I shared with him that I had observed what appeared to be a Taser being deployed in the incident and asked whether that was the case. He said he had been provided no information to confirm that. He also said officers must report their use of Tasers in the same fashion they report each and every time they discharge their firearm.

So, what happened in the incident? Had I observed what I was sure I did? Why didn’t that jibe with the official police account? Three questions with no definitive answers.

My wife may be quick to accuse that I don’t listen, but I know I hear clearly. And I heard what I heard.

“Stay down . . . or you’ll be Tasered again!”

We’re taught from a very young age to believe and trust in law enforcement. So, that said, given what the police asserted Tuesday, there could not have been any “use of force,” in this matter. Could there?

But again, I heard what I heard.

“Stay down . . . or you’ll be Tasered again!”

I suppose, without video evidence or other corroboration, neither my account nor that offered Tuesday by the police could be proven.

But I heard what I heard.

“Stay down . . . or you’ll be Tasered again!”

It’s our job as reporters to act as the public’s watchdog and as its eyes and ears at newsworthy events. We report in as much accurate and intimate detail as possible the daily happenings — good, bad or otherwise. It’s our job to make sure those who are deemed trustworthy are in fact so. It’s our job to ensure public servants first and foremost serve the public.

So, after pressing Pflug for a second day and in preparation for this column, he revealed Wednesday that several incidents, including the use of a Taser, occurred the previous day at Manhattan Court after all.

After double checking with the tactical unit that responded to the call in question, Pflug learned and revealed the man was apparently in an extreme state of psychosis. He said the man became non-compliant to verbal commands. He said the man tried to run. He said the man became assaultive. He said the man threw a punch. He said the man couldn’t be contained.

“So a CEW (conducted electric weapon) was deployed for one to three seconds,” Pflug said.

This wasn’t, nor will it be, a case reminiscent of Robert Dziekanski, the Polish immigrant who died at a Vancouver airport after being Tasered repeatedly by the RCMP. That incident was caught on tape. Police denied using excessive force and later denied under oath planning in advance to use their Tasers at the airport. But an email exchange between officers seemed to imply the responding officers had indeed planned to use Tasers when they arrived.

On Tuesday, I had no video. I had no email exchange. I had the word of Guelph Police. I wanted to believe that from the outset. But I knew I heard what I heard.

“Stay down . . . or you’ll be Tasered again!”

EDITORIAL: Anti-Taser critic worthy of praise

May 24, 2009
THE GUELPH MERCURY

No doubt some members of the Guelph Police Service and perhaps the Guelph Police Services Board feel otherwise, but outspoken police Taser-use critic Patti Gillman should be lauded for obliging both organizations to have a second look at something that troubles her.

Gillman, whose watchdog work and advocacy stems from the death of her brother following an arrest that saw him repeatedly shocked with Tasers, in Vancouver, is agitated over a private business started by a Guelph police officer.

The business, the Canadian Centre of the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc., came to upset Gillman in part for its many similarities to an American company. The American company, Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, has links and a business history with Taser International. Gillman appropriately considered it awry if the Canadian firm had like connections with Taser and wanted that explored.

Similar queries made by her of another Canadian police service led to that agency revising its conflict-of-interest policies.

She has no evidence of any inequitable issues related to the Guelph officer's company. Nor has any been established. But the basis for her feeling the need to call for a review of it are clear. The businesses sound alike. They engage in the same work -- training front-line emergency service workers in how to handle certain crisis situations. Their logos almost mirror each other. The founding Guelph officer has allowed publicly he had some co-operation on the startup of his business from its American peer. Further, both groups actively teach about excited delirium -- an alleged psychological and physiological state that has been politicized through its links to Taser-funded research and promotion.

We should want citizens to fairly question public agencies and agencies with public connections on their accountability and their transparency. Gillman did just so in this matter. And, the Guelph Police Services Board has added to the due diligence on this file because of her efforts.

Some will regard her as having wasted her energy and those of Guelph Police stakeholders. Others should regard this as active and responsible citizenship.

Guelph police board backs officer

Two anonymous comments I received today:

Anonymous said...
Oh yes, the fact that the Chief of Police in Guelph is monitoring Mulder should be enough to appease Miss Gillman. This woman has been monitoring taser misuse and abuse for 5 years now and has never been far off the mark. Perhaps we should all consider learning more about this non medical police/taser coined condition "exited delirium" since a good majority of us will probably suffer from it if taser use is not curbed. However, very nice of Chief Davis to "feel sorry" for Ms. Gillman over the brutal tasering death of her brother Robert. This issue goes far beyond the death of her brother...it encompasses the tasering deaths of 409 citizens to date. The list of the dead continues to grow...and the list of concerned Canadians is growing with the mistrust of our police forces and their documented brutality and coverups. So who are we to believe...Chief Davis and his monitoring? I don't think so!!!

May 22, 2009 2:11 PM
Anonymous said...
But Mulder's company ~IS~ linked to Taser International. Perhaps indirectly, but the dots can be connected.

1) His company is an obvious clone of the US outfit, and the US outfit has been linked to Taser International in several ways. (A bit stupid to copy the logo if you're trying to maintain an air of independence isn't it?)

2) Mulder also admits that he was in direct contact with the US outfit. It would be interesting to review his communications records if push comes to shove.

3) Also the purpose of Mulder's outfit includes promotion of the convenient excuse for a taser-associated death ("excited delirium"), very similar to the US outfit.

Mulder can claim pure-as-the-driven snow independence, but we do not have to believe him.


May 22, 2009
Greg Layson, Guelph Mercury

Guelph Police Service Chief Rob Davis stands by his man.

Davis yesterday defended Const. Gary Mulder and his private business, called Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc., which bears a striking resemblance to an American company called Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths.

Both companies offer emergency responders training in recognizing potentially dangerous in-custody circumstances and offer strategies to reduce the risk of fatalities. Both also tout the existence of a condition called "excited delirium" and offer training on recognizing and handling it.

The American firm has corporate links to Taser International. According to Mulder, his does not.

In an email sent April 27, outspoken stun gun critic Patti Gillman, whose brother died after being Tasered, requested the Guelph Police Services Board once again examine its conflict-of-interest policies because Mulder was allowed to start a private company.

Gillman's concerns were examined again yesterday at the Guelph Police Services Board meeting. Davis prepared a report and supplemented it with a recent study that supported the use of Tasers.

"We investigated the concerns in her email and there is no connection (to Taser International)," Davis said. "We're standing firm that everything was done properly."

Davis said he is satisfied and will not monitor Mulder's business.

"Any time an agreement is reached between a member and the board and approval is granted, they are responsible to abide by the rules set forth," Davis said. "We don't monitor the approval once it's been made but if something comes to our attention we'll investigate it."

City of Guelph councillor Gloria Kovach, who sits on the police board, was also satisfied with Mulder's arrangement.

"Due diligence was done," she said. "We should be promoting extra educational opportunities like this."

Last year, Mulder organized a Guelph seminar on excited delirium. More than 300 emergency personnel attended.

Excited delirium is a controversial term that describes a state of mind and body in which individuals are agitated, exhibiting both incoherent speech and extreme strength. It is not, however, listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association.

Gillman doesn't subscribe to the theory. Davis does.

"I feel sorry for Patti Gillman and the loss of her brother, but we still need to be progressive in recognizing this and training people in recognizing this," said Davis, whose department has a policy to, if possible, call for an ambulance before using a Taser.

The report Davis prepared cited a study published in Blue Line Magazine. It concludes the Taser M26 and Taser X26, which the Guelph Police use, are both safer than some over-the-counter headache medicines.

Guelph to address Taser critic

May 5, 2009
Thana Dharmarajah
Record news services

The Guelph Police board will consider a letter this month urging it to examine its conflict-of-interest policies.

But Dave Clark, chair of the Guelph Police Services Board, says he doesn't share the concerns raised in the letter written by anti-Taser activist Patti Gillman of Belleville.

Gillman is an outspoken critic of police use of the stun guns. Her letter focuses on concerns she has about a private company started by a Guelph police officer.

She writes that Gary Mulder's Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc. bears a "striking resemblance" to the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths. The latter is a U.S. company with business links to Taser International, she says.

The police board discussed this issue last month but dropped it after Chief Rob Davis said Mulder's business presents no conflict-of-interest concerns. Mulder said his company is independent from the U.S. company and Taser and has never received funding from either.

Both companies promote their expertise in the prevention of in-custody deaths and offer training to front-line police officers and others in recognizing potentially dangerous circumstances surrounding some people in custody.

They also offer strategies to reduce the risk of deaths in such cases.

Likewise, the two companies tout the existence of a condition called excited delirium and offer training in how it should be handled.

The condition isn't listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric

Mulder's company is organizing a two-day conference on excited delirium in Niagara Falls on May 25 and 26.

Clark said he didn't seek legal counsel but a Toronto lawyer assured him Mulder wasn't in a conflict-of-interest because of his company.

"His role is a teaching role," he said. It's possible the police board will look at the policies of other police services, he said.

SEE ALSO: EDITORIAL: Anti-taser critic worthy of praise

How appropriate ...

Be sure to check out excited-delirium's shredding of the logo shared by the Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Death (whose president is Guelph, Ontario police constable Gary Mulder) and the American Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Death (which has been linked to Taser International). Seems "anyone" can hang a shingle for a centre or institute for the promotion of excited delirium - no medical credentials required!!

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

A letter I sent today.

Dear Chair and Members of the Guelph Police Services Board,

I am writing to you today, further to Thana Dharmarajah's April 25, 2009 Guelph Mercury article entitled Too Close for Comfort? and the editorial entitled A private firm, but a public flap which said: "The Guelph Police Services Board discussed this month a suggestion that it should review whether the officer might have a conflict of interest through running his private company. But the matter was dropped when Guelph Police Chief Rob Davis informed the panel the subject poses no such concerns." I would suggest to you, the members of the Guelph Police Services Board, that you reconsider whether this subject indeed does pose some significant concerns.

In August 2005, in a complaint which I submitted to the Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner for British Columbia, I outlined my concerns about Victoria Police Sergeant Darren Laur, who strongly endorsed tasers and played a pivotal role in their introduction into Canadian policing, but had been shown to have financial ties to Taser International. It should be noted that, like Constable Mulder, Sergeant Laur DID have the approval of the Victoria Chief of Police to operate his private company. And, in fact, during the five months following my complaint to the OPCC, the Victoria Police Chief sought to have my complaint dismissed, because he personally felt there was no recognized default having been committed by Sergeant Laur. I continued to insist and the OPCC agreed that, pursuant to the BC Police Act, he was obligated to properly characterize and process the complaint. And so in January 2006, the Chair of the Victoria Police Board directed the Chief of Police to conduct an investigation.

The ensuing investigation, which was completed in August 2007, undertook to review the issues respecting conflict of interest and police officers, including a review of existing policies and practices and legal opinions from several jurisdictions both in Canada and elsewhere. During the course of the investigation, it was determined that the Chief of Police was a witness and, as such, his role as Discipline Authority was designated to the Chief of Police of the Port Moody (BC) Police Department.

A very thorough investigation concluded that the Victoria Police Department's policies dealing with conflict of interest issues were inadequate and that there did in fact exist a perceived or apparent conflict of interest in this case. A number of significant policy-change recommendations were made to the Victoria Police Board, which the Board in turn strongly supported. Those recommendations have now been implemented into a new and comprehensive Conflict of Interest policy that will give the public more confidence and should greatly reduce the number of instances where the off-duty interests of police officers would conflict with their roles and responsibilities to the police departments with whom they are employed.

The Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner for British Columbia, in its final review of the investigation, noted that the types of policy changes as a result of the investigation were worthy of other police departments to take note of and recommended that consideration be given to amending the BC Police Act to include a section dealing with conflicts of interest. The new Victoria Chief of Police, Bill Naughton, said "it [conflict of interest] is a common, but largely unexamined, area of concern in North American policing. This is not a Victoria issue alone, this runs across Canada, and as far as I know we're the only agency across Canada trying to take a serious look at this issue."

Fast forward to Constable Mulder's Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths and its "First Annual Excited Delirium Conference."

A February 13, 2009 article in the Toronto Star said: "The Mounties [RCMP] have also dropped the term "excited delirium" - a phrase that has no medical foundation, and was criticized earlier by the Commons Committee [on Public Safety and National Security], the RCMP's public complaints commissioner, independent consultants and civil liberties groups."

I suggest that all members of the Guelph Police Services carefully review the following media reports:

A two-part NPR (National Public Radio USA) investigative report from February 2007:
Part I - Death by Excited Delirium: Diagnosis or Coverup?
Part II - Tasers Implicated in Excited Delirium Deaths

Taser's Delirium Defense: How lawyers used junk science to explain away stun-gun deaths, Mother Jones, March-April 2009

Tasers in medicine - an irreverent call for proposals, Canadian Medical Association Journal, May 2008.

Police ethics adviser quits over sponsors - Concerns over role of companies like Taser International in funding lavish conferences were rebuffed, Globe and Mail, April 8, 2009

Finally, I urge you to visit http://www.excited-delirium.com/. The website's owner has uncovered many connections between Taser International, their lawyer Michael Brave, and the American Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Death and those who would promote excited delirium as a convenient cause for taser-associated deaths. The dash (-) in the website's address is critical because of the many similarly-named websites registered by Mr. Brave that include the words excited and delirium in the name.

And please keep in mind that so-called "excited delirium" has NOT been the common denominator in the at-least 405 deaths that have occurred proximal to the taser. Tasers ARE the ONE AND ONLY common denominator.

Notwithstanding the significant controversy surrounding tasers and excited delirium, and regardless of whether Constable Mulder has been or ever will be compensated directly or indirectly in ANY way by Taser International or the (American) Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Death or any other related organization or person, the facts which include (but are not limited to) his company bearing such a striking resemblance to the IPICD (which has so clearly been linked to Taser International), his "firm benefiting from some cooperation between the Canadian Centre and the IPICD regarding initial startup concerns and general business practices," and Taser International's use of excited delirium as a LEGAL DEFENCE to contradict its weapon's role in in-custody death lawsuits MUST be enough to prompt your Board to further investigate whether a conflict exists and whether the Guelph Police Service would want to be linked in any way to this controversy.

I do have a copy of the Victoria Police Department's new Conflict of Interest policy; however, while the policy has received Board approval, I understand that it may not yet have been delivered to the department's members and so I am unable to share it with you at this time. If you contact the Victoria Police Board directly, they may be willing to do so. And I would be more than willing to provide further background information to you, should you require it.

I look forward to a written reply from the Guelph Police Services Board at your earliest possible convenience.

Sincerely,


Patti Gillman
Owner of TNT - Truth ... not tasers

Too close for comfort?

April 25, 2009
Thana Dharmarajah, Guelph Mercury

An outspoken Taser use critic wants the Guelph Police Services Board to examine its conflict-of-interest polices because of a private company started by a city police officer.

Patti Gillman, a Belleville resident and creator of the Truth Not Tasers blog, said she's concerned about a firm started by Guelph Police Const. Gary Mulder because the company bears similarities to a like-sounding American firm with corporate links to Taser International.

Mulder's firm is called the Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc. The American firm Gillman is comparing it to is the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths.

Mulder denies any link between his company and the U.S. firm or Taser International. He has been cleared of any conflict of interest in this endeavour by Guelph's chief of police and the Guelph Police Services Board.

Both of the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths companies offer front-line police officers and others training in recognizing potentially dangerous in-custody circumstances and in offering strategies to attempt to reduce the risk of fatalities in such cases.

Likewise both also tout the existence of a condition called excited delirium and offer training on recognizing it and how it should be handled if it's suspected.

Excited delirium is a controversial label that describes an alleged state of mind and body in individuals where they have been described as being in a delirious state, with extreme strength and incoherent speech.

It has been frequently cited by some police sources as a medical condition of subjects encountered who were subsequently shocked by Tasers.

It is not, however, listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association, a guide for professional psychologists and psychiatrists.

Gillman -- whose anti-Taser advocacy developed after the death of her brother Robert Bagnell in 2004 after he received at least two electrical shocks from police Tasers -- is among those voices in the debate that questions the existence of excited delirium.

"It only seems to be cited when someone has been Tasered," Gillman said.

She said she is troubled by an excited delirium conference being staged next month by Mulder's company -- a two-day Niagara Falls event that will see a workshop led by a founder of the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths.

John Peters, the American firm's founder who is to appear at the Canadian company's event, started his firm with a corporate lawyer for Taser.

Attempts to arrange an interview with Peters weren't successful.

But Taser International spokesperson Steve Tuttle confirmed it gave setup grants to Peters' firm and has paid for Peters to speak about excited delirium and to do training about the subject at its Arizona headquarters as well as at various U.S. law-enforcement agencies.

Mulder said he wasn't aware of Peters previously receiving Taser International funding to speak about excited delirium and that isn't the case this time.

He said he will pay Peters and other speakers personally for their full speaking fees and recoup that expense from conference registration revenue. Tuttle confirmed Taser International isn't funding Peters to speak in Niagara Falls.

The conference will feature a session called Conducted Energy Devices: Are They Safe Options?

But Mulder said Taser International isn't sponsoring anything at the conference and no company will be advertising at it.

Further, Mulder said his company has never received funding from either Taser International or the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths.

In an email this week, he said his firm benefited from "some co-operation between the Canadian Centre and IPICD, Inc. regarding initial startup concerns and general business practices."

But in the same message, he added: "I can assure you that the Canadian Centre ultimately operates independently from the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc. or any other company."

Tuttle confirmed Taser International has no links or past funding relationship with Mulder or his firm.

"It's honestly and truly not my intention to have any association with Taser at all," Mulder said. "I am 100 per cent the owner (of this company). I have complete control over the company."

Guelph Police Chief Rob Davis said he doesn't see Mulder's personal business as a conflict of interest. Mulder signed a contract with the Guelph Police Service that his company wouldn't have any affiliation with it. "I'm satisfied that he's followed the proper protocol," Davis said.

As for the conference, Davis said he sees nothing wrong with Mulder educating others about the knowledge the officer has obtained in his policing career.

Mulder is an 18-year police veteran and has been assigned to the Guelph Police Service's training unit as a certified use of force instructor since 2003.

After fielding inquiries related to this story, Guelph Police Services Board chair Dave Clark asked at this month's board meeting whether the firm followed all Police Services Act requirements.

Davis responded at that session that it did and the matter was left at that.

Mulder said he believes in excited delirium and that he wants to educate emergency personnel about behaviours associated with it so they can act as a team when they encounter it.

"It's something that happens very fast and deteriorates very quickly and everybody's abilities and actions are being questioned," he said. "What I want to do is to provide the information so people can be informed to make the best decision under duress."

Gillman said the fact that Mulder is actively drawing attention privately to a condition that has gone "hand in hand" with Tasers in so many cases warrants a thorough police board review.

She said she is pondering a written request to that effect to the board.

In 2005, she complained to the Victoria Police Department about the involvement of one of its officers with Taser International. The officer had done a variety of paid work for Taser during the period of his employment with that police service. The department began modifying its conflict-of-interest policies after she raised that matter.

Gillman's brother died after an encounter with Vancouver police in June 2004. The 44-year-old was the subject of a 911 call to the downtown hotel where he lived and had smashed things in a common washroom.

A 2007 inquest jury found that being Tasered played no role in his death. It concluded his death resulted from "restraint associated cardiac arrest" arising from cocaine intoxication and psychosis. The jury offered no recommendations.

Gillman has said publicly she wants a moratorium on Taser use until there is more independent research on their use and possible connection to deaths that have followed their deployment.

EDITORIAL: A private firm, but a public flap

Logo of the "Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths"


Logo of the American "Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths"

April 25, 2009
Guelph Mercury

Compare the logos of a United States consulting and training firm with open ties to Taser International and an apparently independent company in the same field started by a Guelph Police Service officer.

You're left with a sense the two must be connected.

The Guelph police officer vows that's not the case. He asserts only that there has been "some co-operation" between his business, Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc., and its like-named and like-logoed U.S. counterpart, the Institute for Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, regarding "initial startup concerns and general business practices."

The Guelph Police Services Board discussed this month a suggestion that it should review whether the officer might have a conflict of interest through running his private company. But the matter was dropped when Guelph Police Chief Rob Davis informed the panel the subject poses no such concerns.

End of story?

Perhaps.

But not if Patti Gillman gets her way.

Gillman, an outspoken Canadian opponent of police Taser use and the survivor of a sibling who died after being hit repeatedly by a police Taser, wants a more rigorous and public review of this subject.

For her, the issue includes and goes further than the strikingly similar names and logos of the Taser-linked firm and the Guelph officer's business.

She's troubled by the insistence of principals for both firms as to the existence and purported best in-the-field strategies for front-line emergency workers to handle an alleged condition called excited delirium.

The medical and scientific community is yet to reach a consensus on the existence of this described condition, which is frequently mentioned by police services as afflicting persons just before they were shocked with Tasers.

Taser says it has paid to inform various stakeholders of the existence of excited delirium and how to recognize it. It says, one way it has done so is by hiring the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths and or its staff to offer speeches or training on the subject.

Gillman asserts the Guelph officer's private business efforts to tout the existence of excited delirium should spur more probing by the city police board about a potential for a real or perceived conflict of interest.

It will be interesting to see whether the police board takes this further.

EDITORIAL: Damaged goods

April 9, 2009
Prince George Citizen

If you are like most right minded Canadians, you can’t help but be saddened as you witness yet another spasm in the death spiral of the reputation of the RCMP.

As the shameful spectacle of the Braidwood Inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski illustrates, this is a brand in serious decline and along with it, the ability of the Force to command the respect that is essential if its 24,000 members from Iqaluit to Corner Brook are to be able to do their jobs effectively.

To quote the philosopher Sophocles, “Nobody has a more sacred obligation to obey the law than those who make (or enforce) the law.”

To gain some understanding of how the reputation of the RCMP has been reduced to this state, first go to YouTube and watch the video footage of Robert Dziekanski in his final moments, www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPe_hf7aBXM, then consider the following:

1.”Members know or ought to know that whatever misadventure happens to them, the Force will stand by them so long as there is some justification for doing so.” “That policy has been in effect for over 30 years.” Ex-RCMP Commissioner William Higgitt, in an internal memo and comments presented to the Commission of Inquiry Concerning Certain Activities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 1979.

2.”There has been a tendency to look at this as a black and white situation...I would ask Canadians to reflect for a moment before they jump to conclusions.” RCMP Commissioner Ward Elliott March 22, 2009 (commenting on the Dziekanski case.)

3. Be professional, be prepared and know the facts. Be patient. State who you are and why you are there. Ask for an interpreter, as required. Allow people an appropriate amount of space. Let person(s) vent their frustrations. www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca Conducted Energy Weapon-Verbal Intervention. Instructions to RCMP officers summarizing verbal and non-verbal communication, negotiation, mediation and conflict management skills.

4. Question? Why does the RCMP website have a link to The Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths 2007 Conference? This is an event whose main sponsor is LAAW International Inc., and whose president, Mr. Michael Brave, also happens to be lead counsel for TASER International, the controversial supplier of the weapon used on Robert Dziekanski. As the politicians say, check out the optics on this one.

Like a scene from the movie Groundhog Day, the RCMP keeps reliving the same mistakes that saw it ripped apart in the 1980s, when the RCMP Security Service was shut down and replaced by a civilian agency, the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS)

Then, as now, the motto “Maintain the Right” was replaced by “Maintain the Force” (no matter the cost).

While replacing former commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli was a step in the right direction in moving the Mounties away from this old-school thinking, it is clear that his replacement, Commissioner William Elliott, is incapable of leading the cultural change needed to bring the Force into the 21st century. He needs to go.

For the good of Canadians and people like Robert Dziekanski, for the sake of the RCMP and the members who put on the red serge for all the right reasons, and especially in the interest of preserving public trust in our national police force, and the criminal justice system.

If Mr. Dziekanski’s death leads to a major overhaul of the Force, it will not have been in vain.

From Truthnottasers: STAY WITH ME HERE.

Here is a link from the RCMP website to The [AMERICAN] Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths 2008 Conference (http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/?eng=http://www.ipicd.com/seminars/symposium.html)

Click on View this website now.

Tsk, tsk, tsk - the least the RCMP could do is link to the CANADIAN CENTRE for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths INC. (ccpicd.com)

The nice people over at The [AMERICAN] Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths (ipicd.com) link to the CANADIAN CENTRE for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths INC. http://www.ipicd.com/docs/2009_Canada_Conf_Bro.pdf

Now APPARENTLY, the "CANADIAN CENTRE" (whose president is Guelph, Ontario police office Gary Mulder) and the "AMERICAN INSTITUTE" are IN NO WAY connected to each other. A simple look at the friendlies, the links, the speaker lists and logos would strongly suggest otherwise.

How STOOPID do these people think we really are?????

A very long, very strange trip indeed gets EVEN STRANGER

PLEASE FOLLOW ALONG VERY CAREFULLY

HOW DID WE GET FROM HERE:

Taser expert backs ban on cops' private deals
December 12, 2007
Rob Shaw, Times Colonist

A Victoria police expert in Tasers, whose involvement with the company that manufactured the devices sparked a conflict-of-interest investigation, says he backs a department proposal to ban officers from doing personal business with weapons manufacturers. Sgt. Darren Laur, reacting to reports questioning his association with Taser International Inc., and its effect on subsequent reviews of the device, said he had the full support of the Victoria department to work with the company.

Still, he agrees that creating new guidelines, as the Victoria force plans to do, would help "separate perception and reality on these conflict-of-interest issues, because it can cloud the water," he said.Laur's involvement with Taser began in 1999, when the company paid him as the Victoria department's use-of-force expert to travel to Arizona to train as a master instructor. Rival company Tasertron had also paid him to travel to train in California in 1998. His training, and a 1999 report he wrote about the devices, made him Canada's foremost expert on Tasers. He is widely credited with introducing the devices to Canadian police, and the Victoria police became the first department to try, and then adopt, Tasers into regular use.Laur also runs his own company, Personal Protection Systems Inc., which Taser paid a total of $498.07 US to travel to Alaska and Oregon to teach Taser use in 2000. Laur's company, which he owns with his wife, went on to design a Taser holster. Taser International purchased the design for $5,076.25 US in stock in 2001. Laur cashed the stock in 2003, for an undisclosed amount.Each situation was approved by the serving police chief, said Laur. "I've always fully disclosed that, and I've always been very sensitive to the conflict-of-interest issues," he said yesterday.

Nonetheless, an internal review of Laur's ties to Taser said he had projected an "apparent and perceived conflict of interest."

The review, which concluded five months ago, was sparked by a a public complaint from Ontario resident Patti Gillman in 2005. Gillman's brother, Robert Bagnell, died in 2004 when Vancouver police hit him with a Taser during an altercation. After his death, Vancouver police asked their Victoria counterparts to conduct an independent review of Taser safety. Laur was appointed to the review panel, although he said he focused only on medical issues and not Taser use because of his ties to the manufacturer. The final report contained a disclosure of Laur's business with Taser. Gillman hired a lawyer and filed a complaint.

Victoria police Insp. Cory Bond's subsequent internal investigation concluded Laur was not technically in conflict because he fully disclosed his dealings with Taser, had sold his stock nine months before the report, and received department approval for all his actions. However, Bond also wrote there "remains a reasonable perception" that he "might have been affected by his prior financial interest in Taser." In retrospect, the department should not have put him on the review panel, she said. The B.C. Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner, which reviews internal investigations, agreed with her report.Despite the findings, acting police chief Bill Naughton said Laur has been "upfront and straightforward from the very get-go and I think suggestions he has been otherwise are incorrect."

Gillman said she is not pleased with the investigation. "I would like to see police and weapon manufacturers held at complete arms length from each other," she said yesterday.

As a result of the complaint, Victoria police have proposed a step towards such an arrangement.The department wants to ban officers from doing personal business with weapons manufacturers as part of a pending overhaul in its conflict-of-interest policies. Under the rules, officers who train with weapons companies as part of their duties would not be able to profit by creating a private business and becoming trainers for the weapons company.

Weapons companies often pay for officers to attend their own training seminars, hoping it will encourage a police force to buy their products, such as Tasers, bean-bag guns, incapacitating sprays or other items. It is a common, but largely unexamined, area of concern in North American policing, said Naughton.

"This is not a Victoria issue alone, this runs across Canada, and as far as I know we're the only agency across Canada trying to take a serious look at this issue," said Naughton.

The conflict-of-interest rules will also force Victoria officers to fully disclose the private businesses they run outside of policing, their stock holdings and any business ties that could be conflicts. The guidelines are being reviewed by department lawyers before becoming official policy, said Naughton.

Meanwhile, Laur said he thinks people are trying to put blame on his Taser reviews because of recent deaths that occurred after Tasers were used on suspects.

TO HERE:

From http://www.excited-delirium.com/
Thursday, August 21, 2008

IPICD (Institute for the Prevention of Deaths in Custody), LAAW, Micheal Brave & "Excited Delirium"
IPICD (aka Institute for the Prevention of Deaths in Custody) is sponsored by LAAW.LAAW is basically lawyer Micheal Brave. Mr. Brave has registered at least two Internet domain names with 'excited delirium' in the URL. These domain names are redirected to point to IPICD. And thus the circle is complete:...IPICD <> LAAW = lawyer Brave <> "Excited Delirium" URLs <> IPICD...So, what does this have to do with Taser?Taser's chief litigation lawyer is (or was?) a certain lawyer named Mr. Micheal Brave, Esq. etc. You're either in on it, or you're being played like a trumpet.

It should also be noted here that Michael Brave is also the whois owner of the Electronic Control Devices: Legal Resources website.

TO HERE:

From the Toronto Star
February 13, 2009

"The Mounties have also dropped the term "excited delirium" – a phrase that had no medical foundation, and was criticized earlier by the Commons committee, the RCMP's public complaints commissioner, independent consultants and civil liberty groups."

TO HERE:

Taser's Delirium Defense
How lawyers used junk science to explain away stun-gun deaths.
From Mother Jones
March/April 2009

I highly recommend you read the entire article by clicking on the above link.

"… But the company [Taser International] is remarkably tight with America's foremost ED training and advocacy business. The Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths (ipicd) was cofounded by police trainer John Peters and an old acquaintance, Michael Brave, Taser's national litigation counsel ...

... In 2005, Peters filed corporate papers for the ipicd listing himself and Brave as the founding directors. Within six months, the institute was leading eight-hour sessions at Taser's Scottsdale, Arizona, compound, teaching cops to recognize ED and often touting Tasers as the most effective tool for subduing agitated individuals. In the first two years, Brave estimated in a deposition, Taser paid $70,000 to $80,000 for the sessions. To date, Peters says, the ipicd has certified some 10,000 officers worldwide as in-custody death prevention instructors.

Taser also pays the way for Peters and ipicd instructor David Berman to speak at outside conferences, directs business Peters' way, and helps plug the ipicd's annual conference in Las Vegas, where past presenters have included Taser-backed researchers and employees. A flyer for last October's three-day shindig, which drew 250 attendees, promised the "historic" opportunity to help form a "general consensus about excited delirium that will then be published in leading medical, legal, and law enforcement journals." As an expert witness for Taser, Peters charges $5,000 plus $2,750 per day; in 2007, he was paid about $42,000.

Peters sees nothing inappropriate about his Taser connections. "We are not aligned with them at all," he says, although "we did not distinguish ourselves enough" at the start. (Brave, now listed as an inactive director, says he remains a legal adviser at ipicd.) In any case, the institute will continue in its quest to entrench ED as a medical and psychological diagnosis, Peters says, "to quiet these folks" who don't believe it exists.

These folks include Heston attorney John Burton, who, not surprisingly, finds the ipicd/Taser bond problematic. "These guys want to help the police stop killing people, and they're trying to build a liability defense for when they do," he says. "The two things are in direct conflict." "

ONLY TO END UP HERE:

First Annual Excited Delirium Conference

Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc.

PRESIDENT: CONSTABLE GARY MULDER, GUELPH POLICE SERVICE

A few of the speakers at the conference:

DR. JOHN PETERS JR., PHD.INSTITUTE FOR THE PREVENTION OF IN-CUSTODY DEATHS, INC. (see Mother Jones above) (see also, from February 2007, the two-part National Public Radio investigative report here: Part I - Death by Excited Delirium: Diagnosis or Coverup? and Part II - Tasers Implicated in Excited Delirium Deaths)
Chris Lawrence, a trainer with the Ontario Police College (Canadian excited delirium "expert" and coroner's inquest witness)
Dr. Christine Hall, big-time taser fan and Canadian excited/agitated delirium proponent, employed by "Vancouver Island Research", has an e-mail address at the Canadian Police Research Centre as follows: chris.hall@cprc.org - see Public risk from tasers: Unacceptably high or low enough to accept? (Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine, January 2009) and "expert" witness at MANY Canadian coroner's inquests, including that of my brother Robert Bagnell.

The Canadian Centre is proud to be hosting its First Annual Excited Delirium Conference. "Are You Prepared?" brings together North America's preeminent leaders on this topic. This 2 day conference will provide those in attendance, regardless of their knowledge base, a greater understanding of what is required when faced with a potentially deadly situation. From first contact by police, fire and EMS requirements, this conference will prepare those emergency services with the ability to recognize and act accordingly. Not only will this conference educate the "first responders," it is designed to inform the Emergency Physicians on best practices based on solid research and scientific findings. The goal of our conference is to simply promote teamwork and early recogition of a medical emergency which has manifested itself into a difficult and rapidly deteriorating situation.

"ONE OF THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES POLICE OFFICERS AND EMERGENCY PERSONNEL FACE IS HOW TO HANDLE INDIVIDUALS ACTING IN VIOLENT, ERRATIC AND BIZARRE WAYS – OFTEN REFERRED TO AS EXCITED DELIRIUM. SUDDEN DEATHS HAVE OCCURRED, PUTTING THE ACTIONS OF ALL INVOLVED AND THEIR AGENCIES UNDER AN INTENSE PUBLIC MICROSCOPE. THIS EVENT BRINGS NORTH AMERICA’S PREEMINENT LEADERS TOGETHER FOR A COMPELLING 2 DAY DISCUSSION ON THE TOPIC OF EXCITED DELIRIUM."

Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc.

MY COMPANY
The Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, Inc. is a new company founded by president Gary Mulder. Gary brings with him a wealth of knowledge, experience and a long list of contacts known throughout North America for sudden, "In-Custody Deaths" including those described as "Excited Delirium." A current and sworn Ontario police officer in his 18th year, Gary is currently a certified Use of Force Instructor with a foundation in Tactics and Rescue. As a trainer for the past seven years, Gary has attended numerous training courses and has organized several successful conferences on the topic of Excited Delirium, as well as other police related topics.

MY GOAL
My goal is to provide transparent, unbiased information and education to any relevant stakeholder so that they might be able to make informed decisions in critical situations while they protect everyone involved.

MY MISSION
To Provide Honest, Ethical and Factual Information.

***********************************************

A search for this incorporated "Canadian" centre at Industry Canada and Sedar returned no results for this "Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc."

A whois search for the company's website http://www.ccpicd.com/ did return the following:

Domain Name : ccpicd.com
Registrant:Canadian Centre for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths Inc.627 Arkell RoadRR#2Guelph, ON N1H6H8CADomain name: CCPICD.COMAdministrative Contact:Mulder, Gary 627 Arkell RoadRR#2Guelph, ON N1H6H8CA519.241.6080Technical Contact:Administrator, DNS 5915 Airport RoadSuite 1100Mississauga, ON L4V 1T1CA+1.8008530954 Fax: +1.8009799587Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.Record last updated on 12-Mar-2009.Record expires on 05-Dec-2009.Record created on 05-Dec-2008.Registrar Domain Name Help Center:http://domainhelp.tucows.comDomain servers in listed order:ns2.officelive.comns1.officelive.com

Police praise Tasers

February 25, 2009
Scott Tracey, Guelph Mercury

Guelph's deputy police chief welcomed a position document released yesterday that would see all officers authorized to carry Tasers.

"We do support the use of Tasers . . . and in the future we'd like to see Tasers for all officers," Brent Eden said in an interview.

The Canadian Police Association and Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police issued a joint statement yesterday supporting so-called conducted energy weapons.

At a news conference on Parliament Hill, representatives of the two organizations alleged the public has been misinformed that the weapons cost lives.

Tasers have come under close scrutiny, especially during the past month as a public inquiry plays out in Vancouver into the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski, who died in October 2007 after being stunned with a Taser by four RCMP officers at the Vancouver International Airport.

Earlier this month, RCMP Commissioner William Elliott announced his organization had revised its policy for using the weapons, adding that risks involved with using them include "the risk of death."

Eden conceded there are risks to using Tasers, as there are with all weapons, but noted there have been situations in which they have prevented injuries to officers and civilians.

"There's definitely a risk to using them," the deputy said. "They are a use-of-force application and there can be a risk associated with any use-of-force option."

Guelph Police received Tasers in December 2002, but currently only front-line supervisors and members of the tactical unit are authorized to carry them.

"We support a provincial push to have all officers equipped with conducted energy weapons," Eden said.

The Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police passed a resolution in 2007 asking the province to allow all officers access to the weapons.

Yesterday, OACP president Ian Davidson said his organization is still waiting.

"If a police officer, legislatively, can be trusted to carry a firearm then surely he or she should be permitted to carry a conducted energy weapon," Davidson, chief of the Greater Sudbury police service, said in an interview.

Davidson conceded the weapons have "come under significant scrutiny" by the media, which has "raised some questions" about the safety of Tasers that must be addressed.

But he said he is confident legislators and the public will eventually embrace the weapons as a valuable policing tool.

"Although not without risk, the CEW is a very viable use-of-force option," Davidson said. "This is something that simply has to be in the hands of officers."

Eden conceded the most important element of wider Taser use would be training, noting use of the weapons is not currently part of the curriculum at the Ontario Police College.

He noted training has not been a serious issue in Guelph as the weapons are only used by tactical officers, who receive the most training in the police service, and by supervisors who necessarily have years of policing experience to rely upon.

EDITORIAL: We'd welcome fuller disclosure

January 21, 2009
THE GUELPH MERCURY

To the RCMP it was known simply as Occurrence No. 2007-34748. But in the form in which the document was publicly released to two major national media organizations last year, it was difficult to get a full picture of exactly what had occurred.

Through liberal use of a blackout pen, the name and rank of the police officer involved in the incident and the name of the officer's supervisor were among the pertinent details deleted. Also deleted was the name of Robert Dziekanski, whose death in a Tasering incident at Vancouver International Airport in 2007 provoked a national debate about the use by police of these controversial electronic stun guns.

The absurdity of deleting the Polish immigrant's name from an official police report into his death -- a report that was pried loose by The Canadian Press and the CBC through access to information legislation -- brought loud complaints from opposition MPs and human rights groups, who criticized the Mounties for suppressing key details about Taser cases.

Fewer complaints have been voiced following the release of an annual national freedom of information audit commissioned by the Canadian Newspaper Association, part of which related to police reports about Taser use.

The association, a non-profit organization that represents all of Canada's daily newspapers, set itself an ambitious goal: to seek the release of all reports prepared by officers at various Canadian police agencies during 2007 and 2008 related to the use of Tasers or similar electronic control devices.

Not surprisingly, only five per cent of those requests resulted in full disclosure. The Guelph Police Service was not among them.

Now let's make it clear -- Guelph Police do a better job than many of their counterparts when it comes to conveying information on Taser cases.

The Guelph force reveals details of Taser incidents its officers are involved in through summaries that are released quarterly -- and publicly -- at police board meetings. And we've reported on what's contained in those summaries.

But that's what they are -- summaries, a distillation of the official reports filled out by police officers about specific incidents. We're assured by the department that the summaries are more than a precis of an incident and that they contain "all of the details" -- with some notable exceptions.

Not included for public edification is the name of the officer who used the Taser, the name of the person who received the electronic jolt, or the exact date or time of an incident. Guelph Police say they are precluded from releasing those details under provincial privacy legislation -- which echoes the response from the RCMP in the case of the heavily censored four-page form related to the death of Robert Dziekanski.

But censored or not -- and the Mounties later apologized for the excessive secrecy surrounding its use-of-force Taser reports -- that RCMP document was released following a freedom of information request.

In the Canadian Newspaper Association audit, the responses to requests for the release of those so-called field reports ranged widely, from outright refusals to the release of the reports with key information, such as the names of those involved, removed prior to release.

This is an issue of public accountability. There's no reason for some Canadian police forces to feel it's their duty to release these reports, however censored they are, while others feel they can only safely release summaries of those reports.

Full reports, even with large sections blotted out because of privacy concerns, have the potential to provide the public with a fuller context and a better picture of how Tasers are used.

That's vital as the debate continues about when and how police use them -- or whether they should be used at all.

"Excited delirium" blamed for deaths

May 17, 2008
Adrian Humphreys, National Post

The message inside the meeting room was one thing -- "we're not talking about Tasers" one speaker said three or four times during a presentation to 250 police officers and paramedics -- but the chatter outside was quite another.

"I've been Tasered twice -- once sober and once drunk," said an officer during the break. "How many times have you used yours?" another asked a colleague. A third complained her force now makes her fill out a form every time she uses her Taser, while another described it as "kind of freaky" zapping someone for the first time.

As emergency personnel reached past the baskets of apples, cookies and chips during conference breaks, talk quickly turned to the Taser, the police-issue stun guns thrust into the public spotlight when an agitated Polish immigrant in Vancouver's airport collapsed and died after being hit by police Tasers and held to the ground.

Controversy over the increasing use of Tasers and the attention accorded in-custody deaths is, after all, why most are here, in Guelph at a conference hosted by the local police force on recognizing the signs of excited delirium.

While the Taser draws most of the heat, debate over precisely why people die after a brisk battle with police to restrain them -- whether using a Taser or not -- is growing as more attention is being paid to a condition that is only now being popularized.

On one hand, the officers and medics who are called to deal with the agitated and disturbed

people say they know the phenomenon well. They have seen the irrational responses, bizarre behaviour and hyperactivity of the people; they have felt their superhuman strength as they struggle.

Police readily grab hold of the medical terminology of "excited delirium" to describe it.

That excited delirium is a condition almost exclusively associated with a struggle with police, however, creates concern with some. One does not hear of a person dying of excited delirium during a barroom brawl or a fight with a spouse or when out camping or shopping.

"Anytime you see a specific condition being referenced in only one context it raises serious question," said Graeme Norton, the director of the public safety project with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

Opponents in the United States go further, saying the term is used to mask over-aggressive police force.

Excited delirium is a term that has been accepted in the United States by the National Association of Medical Examiners, but not by the American Medical Association. It has been dismissed as a "pop culture phenomenon" in the pages of the Canadian Medical Association Journal and listed as a contributing cause of death in several coroner's reports in Canada.

At Thursday's conference, such debate was pushed into the background. As the presentations progressed, few in the room seemed to be nonbelievers.

A jerky video projection showed a large young man -- naked and agitated -- walking down the street with only passing compliance with orders to stop that are repeatedly called out by a growing cluster of police officers anxiously fingering canisters of pepper spray in their latex-gloved hands.

When the man starts punching out large sections of a wooden fence, the officers move in, bathing him in spray and piling on him as he pushes back with apparent superhuman strength.

As the video of the confrontation finishes, Chris Lawrence, a trainer with the Ontario Police College, turns to conference attendees and parodies what critics of police are saying: "We'd like you to negotiate with this individual; we can't understand why you just can't talk to these people."

The room erupts in knee-slapping laughter.

"We don't do this because we want to; we do this because we have to," he said of police restraint techniques, including Tasers, pepper spray, batons, handcuffs and physical holds.

Mr. Lawrence studied 407 police-related deaths in Ontario that went to inquest and are archived at the police college. He found 35 cases where excited delirium was deemed a factor, either by name or by mention of common features. The first death was in 1988.

Only one involved a Taser, although more recent examples may still be in the inquest system and are not included in his study. All but one of the 35 victims was male. Their average age was 34.

He found excited delirium deaths occurred over the years on every day of the week, but most often on weekends. All of the victims were either substance abusers (overwhelmingly cocaine) or suffering mental illness (most often schizophrenia) but rarely both at the same time. He found cases where the temperature was 31C and cases where it was -7.2C; cases in the biggest city and in rural northern Ontario.

"We cannot seem to eliminate the problem," he said.

Dr. Christine Hall, an emergency room doctor with the Vancouver Island Health Authority, addressed critics who dismiss excited delirium because it is not listed in the

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the standard guidebook to psychiatric diagnosis.

"It is not a diagnosis -- get over it," she said. "It is a state, a condition."

She compared it to other conditions, such as abdominal pain. Appendicitis might be the diagnosis for someone with abdominal pain. Excited delirium, she said, is a symptom or condition of an underlying disorder.

She echoed the contention that police restraint is typically necessary. "Psychiatrists do not undertake talk therapy with delirious people … the medic's job is not to capture people," she said. "Physicians and nurses do not undertake treatment on people who are trying to kill them."

Dean Popov, paramedic practice manager at Sunny-brook-Osler Centre for Prehospital Care, told the conference that no matter what police and medics do in these cases, it could end badly: "The outcome may still be negative, even if everything is done properly. We truly don't 100% know what is causing this yet."

See also: Excited-Delirium

Police learn about excited delirium

May 16, 2008
Lisa Varano, Guelph Mercury

The police encounter an agitated, paranoid, violent person who is naked and sweating profusely. Several officers are needed to restrain him because he is stronger than he looks and he won't stop struggling. He tries to kick out the windows of the police cruiser. Then, within minutes of quieting down, he is dead. What happened?

The person may have been in a state of "excited delirium," a medical condition that has garnered media attention recently.

Police officers and emergency personnel from across the province learned about the signs of excited delirium at a conference in Guelph yesterday.

The conference, organized by the Guelph Police Service, was the first in Canada to simultaneously educate the policing and medical communities about recognizing excited delirium. The condition has garnered attention recently because of some deaths in police custody.

Suspects in a state of excited delirium have died after being stunned with a Taser gun.

But an expert on excited delirium said deaths have also occurred in people who were not stunned. "We have no medical evidence" that police officers should not use a Taser on a suspect in excited delirium, said Dr. Christine Hall, an emergency room doctor and researcher in Victoria, B.C. She said research on excited delirium deaths should consider the effect of Tasers, but not fixate on the stun guns.

People in states of excited delirium have died of cardiopulmonary arrest in police cars, jail cells, ambulances and hospitals, Hall told 250 police officers and emergency medical technicians at Lakeside Church.

Excited delirium is not a diagnosis but rather a symptom of an underlying disorder, she said. Causes of excited delirium may include certain psychiatric illnesses, drug intoxication, alcohol withdrawal and heat stroke.

Police officers must restrain the person and describe the condition to medical personnel, Hall said. "What we're needing to start doing in Canada is to teach our nurses and our physicians what it is you're dealing with," she said.

Over the past decade Guelph Police have faced people a few times who may have been in excited delirium, said Constable Gary Mulder, a conference organizer and use-of-force trainer. None of them died in police custody, he said.

"First contact is the police. Then you get into medical involvement. Everybody has to treat it as a medical emergency," Mulder said. "We can't diagnose this person on the street. We're not doctors. We just have to recognize (excited delirium) and try to take the best possible course of action."

Excited delirium focus of meeting in Guelph (Ontario)

May 16, 2008
By THE CANADIAN PRESS

GUELPH -- Police officers and emergency personnel from across the province were in this city yesterday to learn about the signs of a controversial medical condition called excited delirium.

The conference, organized by the Guelph Police Service, was the first in Canada to simultaneously educate the policing and medical communities about recognizing excited delirium, which has garnered media attention in recent years because of some deaths in police custody.

Suspects in a state of excited delirium have died after being stunned with a Taser. But an expert on excited delirium said deaths have also occurred in people who were not Tasered.

Tasers subject of talk

October 26, 2007
THANA DHARMARAJAH, Guelph Mercury

Guelph Union of Tenants and Supporters (GUTS) are calling for a complete ban of Tasers by city police officers.

Recently Guelph Police Chief Rob Davis expressed a desire to outfit every front-line officer with a stun gun.

Currently, only tactical unit officers and front-line supervisors carry Tasers. However, individuals from the anti-poverty organization said the money would be better spent on city social services.

GUTS organizers are gathering Nov. 3 at Norfolk United Church at 1 p.m. to speak about the impacts of Tasers. They will be joined by a speaker from Amnesty International, which is also calling for a ban on stun guns.

There've been far too many deaths after the use of stun guns, said GUTS organizer Curtis Snoba.

Last week a man who was acting erratically at Vancouver International Airport died after police used a Taser on him, Snoba said. A Quebec man also died recently following the zap of a stun gun, which was used because the intoxicated man became aggressive during questioning, he said.

Some health experts, Snoba said, have questions whether it's safe to use stun guns on a subject who is intoxicated or under the influence of drugs.

In July, a Guelph man was stunned by police because he was acting irrationally and was suspected of being intoxicated, Snoba said.

"What we think is ridiculous is that they would Taser a man who they knew was already drunk."

Under the Guelph Police Service's Use of Force model, police officers are allowed to use Tasers on subjects that are assaultive to police officers, Snoba said.

But he doesn't believe Guelph Police officers are using their Tasers in appropriate situations.

Deputy police chief Brent Eden said police officers are authorized by law to use Tasers and every officer assesses the situation before determining whether employing a Taser is appropriate.

Under the Use of Force model, some situations where officers can deploy a Taser are to prevent being overpowered when violently attacked, disarm a dangerous person armed with an offensive weapon and control a potentially violent situation.

Eden said Tasers are used as an alternate use of other force.

"If there's a situation where you can use a Taser to render someone unable to fight . . . by far that choice will be preferable to shooting somebody," he said.

At GUTS' gathering next Saturday, participants will brainstorm on ways to keep Tasers out of Guelph, Snoba said.