Posted on 05/07/2006 12:43:59 PM PDT by seowulf
REDMOND - The Redmond Police Department is facing a $1 million lawsuit after a woman says an officer used his Taser on her during a medical emergency.
Video from the police car camera shows that something was wrong with Leila Fuchs last July when police pulled her out of her car. For nearly 10 minutes when officers first pulled up, they say she remained unresponsive.
"She's just gotten into this collision at Redmond Way and 145th -- small accident," said defense attorney James Egan.
But he says it's the decisions an officer made when Fuchs wouldn't unlock her door that has them suing the department.
Egan says his client was suffering from a diabetic episode when medics tried to get her attention.
"So the medic brings a window hammer here," Egan says, pointing to the video.
Then, Egan says an officer took matters into his own hands.
"He bashed in the passenger side window, opened the door, and immediately ordered her to open her driver side door," Egan said. "Even according to (the officer), she was dazed, catatonic, and non-responsive. At that point, he pulls his Taser out, and says if she doesn't open it, he will shoot her."
Egan says the officer used his gun and hit Fuchs with 50,000 volts of electricity.
"He didn't shoot her for one second," Egan said. "He shot her for the full five seconds… and caused her to stiffen and scream, according to his police report as this happened, and here she was suffering a medical emergency."
Police reports claim officers could initially smell the odor of alcohol in the car, but after they got Fuchs out and did a breath test, they determined there was no trace of alcohol found.
"He jumped the gun... literally," Egan said. "And that's when he tried to electrocute someone he apparently thought was intoxicated."
Calls to the Redmond Police about the video and the lawsuit were not immediately returned Saturday evening. Police records, though, back up the fact that the Taser was used and that Fuchs did not have any traces of alcohol in her system.
That sounds good, everybody over 50 off the road... no more "old, gray and in the way."
(just kiddin')
How about seeing if they need assistance first? I can't believe that you think shooting someone for not responding to a verbal command is acceptable. What did police do before there were tasers? They damn well didn't go around shooting anyone who was "nonresponsive".
You could say the same about an random person on the street, but that is no reason to go around randomly tasering people.
More people are killed each year from dorvers who have heart attacks or stroke while at the wheel than from drivers having an incident of diabetic hypoglycemia. So should we reconsider giving drivers licenses to those over age 50 since they are at greater risk of having a heart attack or a stroke?
(Corrected spelling): More people are killed each year from drivers who have heart attacks or stroke while at the wheel than from drivers having an incident of diabetic hypoglycemia. So should we reconsider giving drivers licenses to those over age 50 since they are at greater risk of having a heart attack or a stroke?
"Electrocute?" So when I use a baton I'm "beating to death", when I touch somebody I'm "Killing with my bare hands"? Tasers "shock". They don't "electrocute". Outside of this thread I have never heard "electrocute" to mean anything other than "kill using electricity".
Yes! She was just in an accident. Should the policeman on the scene check a person who is a nonresponsive accident victim to see if they need medical help first or should he taser them for "not responding" to his commands? Maybe she had a serious head injury. Should that person be tasered?
Notice how you have changed the circumstances from a nonresponsive lady sitting behind the wheel of her car after being in an accident to that of an aggressive guy who punches you in the face. She didn't punch anyone. She was a nonresponsive accident victim still in her car in need of medical help.
It would depend on how much greater then risk was, wouldn't it?
Do you think someone who suffers with grand mal epilepsy should be allowed to drive? Heck, I'm sure some people can make it home with a blood alcohol of 1.6%. It seems to me most people agree that those with a heightened possibility of having their driving ability impaired should have their licenses pulled.
The quesiton becomes what amount of "heightening" is enough to trigger that response. Maybe being 50 years old isn't enough, but maybe being 50 years old with arrhythmia, high blood pressure, significant moribid obesity and lousy cholesterol numbers is enough. In any event it's the kind of question that will require gradation, subtlety, things which Free Republic does not seem able to deal with.
ANYONE walking the street could meet that criteria. Does that justify tasering everyone you come into contact with?
God forbid the cops should actually help someone. /sarcasm
Hope not, Taser has been a great stock investment ... nothing wrong with the weapon, or the market for the weapon. In this case, we just have a stupid cop, using it in an inappropriate situation, and even if the situation was what he thought it was, it would still have been inappropriate. Stupid cop.
Then we will have to deny licenses to all those over age 50 because of the risk of stroke/heart attack while behind the wheel.
Nothing wrong with the product ...
Related Quotes
Sym. Price Chg.
TASR Trade
News 10.61
15th Product Liability Lawsuit Dismissed Against TASER International
May 02, 2006 13:30:13 (ET)
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., May 2, 2006 (PRIMEZONE via COMTEX) -- TASER International, Inc. (TASR, Trade), a market leader in advanced electronic control devices announced that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, entered a judgment ordering the dismissal with prejudice of the product liability lawsuit filed by Kathi Hammock, individually, and as next of friend of Brittani Hammock, against TASER International, Inc. Dismissal with prejudice prohibits the plaintiff from re-filing this lawsuit in the future. This is the fifteenth wrongful death or injury lawsuit that has been dismissed or judgment entered in favor of TASER International in the past 24 months.
"We feel vindicated that the U.S. District Court ordered the dismissal of this product liability lawsuit," commented Douglas Klint, Vice President and General Counsel for TASER International. "We will continue to relentlessly fight these lawsuits with overwhelming medical and scientific evidence showing that the TASER(r) device was not the cause of any injury or death," concluded Klint.
It does. So do you want to deny ALL those licenses as well? Is that what you're saying?
A partial reason for that is that while the cops are here to protect me from a bad guy, who is here to protect me from a bad cop?
Even after an accident with the victim sitting behind the wheel with a possibly serious head injury? Do you seriously expect an accident victim to be fully in control of his/her senses right after a crash?
Fortunately he found a cooperative cop.
Now the city can decide if they want to continue paying huge amounts for this kind of publicity or change their policy.
The reason that these lawsuits are so successful is the police activity itself. You can't idiot proof a screwup, you only can get rid of one and make it as painful to the screwup as possible. Eventually policy will reflect that.
Public perception and statistical fact are that women are almost never a serious threat to a cop. "I vas only followink orders" won't help either.
Citizens and jurors will think: if I am sick or injured, do I want help from this highly paid cop who purports to be a professional in identifying the difference between criminal acts and medical emergencies?
Dead meat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.