Canadian Taser death caught on camera An amateur cameraman has released footage of the death of a man tasered by Royal Canadian Mounted Police at Vancouver International Airport. Cameraman Paul Pritchard filmed Pole Robert Dziekanski,40, in a "clearly agitated" state on 14 October in a "secure area outside the Canada Customs exit". At the start of the 10 minute …
Crikey, I've been through that airport twice in the last week. Maybe this story perhaps explains the large number of uniformed bodies for such a (relatively) small airport which struck me as kinda odd as we entered Canadian territory for the first time. Or is that normal for North America?
I'm not sure I have much sympathy. Didn't look like one of those "let's fuck with this guy, break out the taser" wrong doings.
He didn't deserve to die of course, but then if you fuck about like that in an airport in England (or the US I should imagine) tasers be dammed - you'll go down in a hail of bullets. Canadians appear to be a lot more forgiving, and for that matter, a lot more sensible when it comes to airport security.
Nope, looked like they tried to do the right thing, mistook his thrashing about for resistance (you try dealing with agitated, crazy people in a calm collected way) and unfortunately the taser was the end of him.
"Hit him again" didn't sound like "hit him again, this is fun", more like "for fuck sake hit him again, I can't keep him still to put the cuffs on".
Before someone says anything about medical conditions and pace makers, well if you have those then you probably ought not to act like a wanker in an airport.
this time, there's even video evidence the perp was dangerous. Throwing stuff, refusing to settle down. maybe you'd prefer the cops just shot the b@stard with normal bullets? or should they let him do whatever he wanted, board a plane, so you could all cry "government conspiracy!" when the plane goes down?
I notice not one of the archists posting here bothered to ask the question: "what as he on?" and of course, blamed the police for responding to the incident and the taser for the death, instead of the perp for starting the assault and chemicals in his system for the death.
I don't care if someone's naturally mentally disturbed or chemically off their crock when they assault someone or try to break security. I also don't care if they're drunk or sleepy when they cause an accident that harms or kills someone, the results are the same, so the response should also be the same-fast and definitive.
The cops had a less lethal alternative. @sswipe kept being hostile. he got it again. This time, it was more effective than worthless capsaicin spray. Normal people *don't* get up and thrash-your feel like you've run a marathon and powerlifted a few dozen reps without a warmup-all within a few seconds. Military trained, fanatically driven, seriously deranged and the chemically modified can resist taser shots. Anyone fitting the latter descriptions causing a ruckus is a serious enough threat, at least to anyone not living in a commune or ivory tower.
And for the conspiracy-minded, having a cameraman ready, nearby, and ready to record-and self-admitting to being the type to suspect "police coverup"...yet another probing attempt/set up to create more propaganda material for anti-Western outlets.
The arguments for police being armed with tasers tend to run along the lines of "we need them for incidents where the only other alternative would be to shoot them". I suppose in this case the end result would be the same, but honestly, 4 policemen would not have been able to restrain a lone, unarmed man in an isolated area? If they didn't have tasers they would have had no choice but to shoot him? Really?
Tasers would be useful in situations where the police would genuinely have no choice otherwise but to kill, but in reality I think they would only be a good idea if the majority of cops weren't bullied at school for being fat spotty virgins.
Not happen in the uk ?
Your taking the P right?
They use excessive force all the time in most police forces, no more effective way to subdue your victims, sorry, ''suspects'' before transporting them.
Have you forgot the tube ''mistaken identity'' shooting?
I suggest a google ''died in custody'' UK pages.............
''http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7005556.stm#map''
1. The guy couldn't speak English
2. He had a history of mental illness
3. He'd never been to that airport before
4. He'd been stuck in the sealed area of the arrivals lounge with no food, water or (important this, mate, re: 2 above) without access to his medication - for nearly ten hours (that's ten - 10 - hours, not minutes)
5. At no time did any of the airport staff, security, or RCMP attempt to communicate with him in his own language - nor did they even try to ascertain what language he was speaking.
6. He was waiting for his mother, who lives in Canadia; she'd told him to wait by the carousels. He didn't know how to find them.
7. After several hours of waiting, his mother asked the airport staff to put a call out for her son over the tannoy, because she was worried since he still hadn't (apparently) turned up. They refused.
so to me, but obviously not to you, this is another "de Menezes" where the "our wonderful police are doing a great job brigade" bend over backwards to blame the dead man who can't speak for himself anymore. And like the sad but completely avoidable death of Jean Charles de Menezes, the RCMP in a pathetic and evil attempt to exonerate themselves, firstly refused to hand the video back (until a lawyer intervened) and publicly stated that the officers had behaved completely appropriately and that the dead man had tried to assault the officers who felt "threatened" - which the video does rather refute. Even now the video is in the public domain, the RCMP are still claiming that it's "just one point of view" even though all the eyewitnesses agree that it's an accurate record of what happened (except for those wonderful cops who tased a sick and agitated man 4 times to his death) - again not dissimilar to those cops who claimed they'd challenged de Menezes when 17 eyewitnesses said they hadn't. But people like you ALWAYS side with the cops against the dead.
doubtless you'll be trotting out the "bulky jacket and leaping over the barrier" stories. Perhaps you should get in first and help your police mates out with speculations about cocaine usage? People like you make me puke.
"Is being/behaving differently a crime?"
Why does some tool always pull out that argument as a one liner? Wait, did I just say argument? My apologies. I meant bollocks.
Of course behaving differently isn't a crime, but there are tolerances within society put in place to make it work.
<-- Imagine the thumb is a middle finger ....
Given the 'offenders' heavy and laboured breathing (dyspnea), palor and appearance - I'd go so far as to guess that he was already undergoing a cardiac event *before* the police tazered him. Agitation can be one of the signs, and was likely the reason that he was behaving like he was. You don't have to be a fe'cking' brain surgeon to figure out that his behaviour wasn't organised or rational.
Police training should cover the basic symptoms of things like a cardiac event, hypoglacemia, epilepsy etc, etc and that these things may cause behaviour changes.
It's just another case of a group of some burly blokes, who you'd be more likely to see doing a hundred press ups, than counting them (and who I'm sure could have restrained him -without- the tazer) playing with their new gadget without understanding the possible damage it can do.
Well done lads, you just killed a man who in all probability needed your help! W*nk3rs.....
Tawakalna, you are going to confuse the hell out of a lot of people here if you start introducing facts into the comment area. As you can see from the comments entered before yours there are many who need to demonize this poor fellow in an effort to convince themselves that he was a trouble-maker, and not a victim. Facts will only cause these people to doubt their useless opinions, so be very careful with them.
Tawakalna, you are going to confuse the hell out of a lot of people here if you start introducing facts into the comment area. As you can see from the comments entered before yours there are many who need to demonize this poor fellow in an effort to convince themselves that he was a trouble-maker, and not a victim. Facts will only cause these people to doubt their useless opinions, so be very careful with them.
FACTS!
ON MY /REG/ ?
I THINK NOT.
Cruise control for cool etc etc.
@@Tawalkana (Fellow Anon) and Glenn
I feel a need to question your sexuality. You arn't pedalphiles by any chance?
Confronted with facts you simply respond to the last few words, go you protectors of justice.
But it's okay - becouse murdering a mentally ill, foreign, starved, isolated person is fine in this day and age.
It's really very sad - I'm sure the opinions would be very different if it had been an English person having received the same treatment in a Chinese airport.
Also as an aside - a video isn't a "point of view" it's a primary source, as it shows what happend (unless tampered with.) Now a video of a re-enactment may be a tertiary source... seen as it would be a video of something someone else had scripted... hmmmm
Anon
I don't think one can say-Quote' that police treat it like a billy club....' I would like to think that most don't or won't. I hope the RCMP involved are as shocked from this awful learning spike as anyone. Cars kill too but not all do.
A very sad story especially involving an admired police service I think.
Crazy people are dangerous. Most of the time, Tazering is not. You people seem to be stuck on an idea of "Fairness". The police are there to maintain peace, this crazy dude was violating that peace violently. They can and should do anything necessary to restore this peace.
Coming into personal contact with a violent person is a bad idea. Who knows what they are carrying, or what's in their pockets. Imagine being a police officer and getting stuck by a druggies needle because you decided to try to physically apprehend him instead of hitting him with the taser. Hell, in most cases taser is the least violent option available.
Those of you speaking against it don't really have a firm grasp of what it's like in the field. I suggest going for a ride along with your local law enforcement. In the states, it's your right to do so. Go until you see a taser situation, then ask yourself how you have done it so all parties were treated humanely.
its interesting to see that none of the mainstream media is conveying in an accurate manner the events, they only refering at taser-ing him without explicity specifying the number of times that he was taser-ed - two to four times - which is apparently two much (see - I shot that man and it fell - he did not obey the command "stand up with your hand on the air" so I shot him again - he was clearly threatening).
I am happy that register is reporting the facts more accurately
ps: liked the news.bbc.co.uk diagram of a taser gun in the corresponding news article - it includes with bold letters a "MICROPROCESSOR" - this things are like magic put a microprocessor and all the common sense required to operate an almost lethal weapon is essentially there -probably thats why they do not screen security personnel these days.
moreover I cannot understand why they just did shoot the guy - he could have been a terrorist in anycase (a good thought would be to randomly shoot passengers - some of them might be terrorists)
I've had a few run interactions with the RCMP and I've got to say that overall they are the most reasonable and (apparently) well educated of all the "law enforcement" personnel in North America. While the RCMP has managed to avoid the digression into a pansy force like most western "law enforcers", it appears they too have begun the downward spiral.
Cops are paid to put themselves into dangerous situations but today's cops view everything as dangerous and many of them are no longer willing to put themselves into potentially lethal situations for the sake of others. It's too bad the law enforcement (and to a large extent) the military has lost this since of willing self-sacrifice. Police and military folk were traditionally the first people to jump on the grenade but that's changed now, they have become risk averse and just want to receive a paycheck and go home to their families. If a police(person) or military(person) isn't willing to die in the line of duty they are in the wrong line of work, better for everyone if they become garbage(people) or school teachers.
Oh that is such a tired, old, useless argument: "Who knows what he could have had in his pockets!" "He could have had a bomb!" I assume he had already gone through some kind of security. And logically the point is vapor--anyone could have anything anywhere so let's shoot/club/taser 'em all. This is not a reasonable facsimile of actual thought.
Do you know how often it happens that druggies attack cops with their needles? About as often as the code to disable a ticking time bomb has to be tortured out of a terrorist in custody.
I DON'T GIVE A FUCK about how hard law enforcement's job is. It's no surprise to them going into it, and they are given loads of tools and reinforcements. That's like saying teachers in inner-city schools should be able to beat students because their job is "hard." Rights are rights and if you're a cop who can't do your job without respecting the rights of everyone, then you shouldn't be a fucking cop.
They're obviously too thick to be trusted with Tasers. Send them back to fighting school until they can disarm a knife-weilding attacker without breaking a sweat.
Taser Inc. has repeatedly claimed that the Taser is a non-lethal weapon. Sue them into the next Universe. Hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars for every Taser death. They need to be bankrupted as soon as possible. Also, how about some criminal charges on them as well.
Having been in airports before and being subjected to the incredible and mind-numbing stupidity, it's a wonder more people don't go insane. Put in his shoes, I think anyone would eventually lose it.
The behaviour of the police in this case is disgusting. Also the airport authorities for allowing the poor man to be left waiting and waiting and waiting...
Time for some T-shirts: "Please don't Taser me." Wear it proudly when travelling by air.
I'm not entirely rational. Aspie. Now put yourself in a locked room with me for 8 hours. You will be bored shitless but you will be fine.
Then put a tazer on yourself.
Which would you prefer to happen again?
Crazy people are dangerous. Sometimes. Tazers are dangerous. Sometimes.
4-to-1 and with the police supposedly TRAINED to restrain???
Whip the bird out to you double quick.
RCMP killing someone by themselves? Now that's news. Usually they just have people deported to some hole in Syria to die out of sight.
Actually I think it is high time these weapons get banned. They are not as nonlethal as intended, and you can read stories about lighthearted use/abuse each and every week. Give cops a club, halfway decent martial arts training, and get over the fact that you cannot employ the wimpy in each and every job. Like, you know, in the good old days(tm), when police brutality was clearly visible as such (club = damage) and nobody got toasted.
A police captain told me that police work isn't a gun problem, its a people problem. If you don't like people, don't become a cop.
From what it looks like, the RCMP went for the Taser as a convenient solution. I didn't see the guy throwing officers around. Resisting, yes, but aren't they trained for that? Too bad the camera didn't have a better angle.
I wonder if anybody is going to take the airport to task for leaving this guy for 10 HOURS. What is with that?
As for the IT angle, the Taser x26 has a USB port, and the microprocessor delivers 50,000V for a five second burst. (50,000V is great for annoying someone, but don't count on incapacitation.)
1) I'm not saying a druggy would whip out their needle and use it as a weapon. I'm saying that during a struggle the officer could be stuck. Given how effective tasers are, and the known fatality rate of taser victims ( hint: it's extremely low, and almost non-existant in people who don't otherwise have medical conditions ), it makes sense to tase a suspect to bring him under control instead of risking the life of a officer. Which leads me to my next point:
2) Ok, so I have waited several hours in a locked room for something undetermined to happen ( wish I could be more specific, but can't ). As angry as i got at the folks responsible for this, I did not at any time pick up a chair and start throwing it around. I raised my voice, true. I did not threaten physical violence to those in my immediate area.
I am truly sorry this nut job couldn't contain himself, but if he really couldn't be trusted in public alone he should have had a guardian with him. Note that this is not the policemen's fault.
Now, a seperate point I wish to make:
Tasers are actually a more humane and less violent way to bring a suspect under control. Have you ever seen a situation where the cops have to bring a violent suspect under control without a taser? The suspect necessarily gets the snot beat out of him before the cuffs go on. Further, the officers involved get roughed up too. Now add on top of that the danger of any foriegn objects ( like needles in the pocket, ect... ).
Now take that same situation and use a taser. 1 or 2 hits, and the suspect is now following officer instruction. This happens in the overwhelming majority of the cases. I've done ride alongs, I've seen both. I can tell you which is preferred ( by both the suspect and the officers involved ).
Yoda: So you don't care about officer safety? These people who are sworn to keep the scum of the world off the streets and keep you safe, and you don't care if they are kept safe? Make sure you tell that to your local law enforcement, I'm sure they'll still keep you safe even though you don't care or respect them and what they do. Which makes them heroes in my book.
Latest news is that New Labour contractions will soon be leading to SECURITY checks at over 260 stations in Britain, SECURITY officers at centres of mass assembly in every municipality, and MORE SECURITY for everybody through SECURE SECURITY information on everyone entering and leaving the UK, some 90 pieces of info. If you've got any spare cash, invest it in SECURITY securities, the SECURITY industry is sure to EXPLODE any day now.
Meantime the unemployed (ie sponging layabouts) should be forced to volunteer as training material for the cops to practise profiling, herding, and unarmed compulsion on. No giros for refuseniks. Trusted individuals discovered among the material could be encouraged to join the cops, thus killing several sick jokes with one Taser.
Like Imran Khan and Benazir Bhutto, anyone refusing to obey the orders of the MAN IN UNIFORM, or not looking happy, should be classified (for ever) as terrorists and dealt with on the spot.
One sensible thought at last. In most cases a month of Aikido training is 100 times more usefull than a Tazer. Everything else aside it teaches our idiot plods how to hold a suspect correclty so he/she can be handcuffed. Yep, they may break a hand once in a while. Frankly a broken limb once in a while is better than people having heart attacks from 4 fat bastards sitting on their head while the fifth is having fun electrocuting them.
I won't comment on the difficulty of police work, except to say that in these parts, there are other jobs where the death rate is much higher. Many loggers would argue that police have cushy jobs. As to whether a crazy person is really dangerous, I guess that is cultural.
I have lived almost 50 years in Vancouver and the police have a very bad reputation there. Check out the history of police racism in Vancouver since the 1900's. It looks pretty bad. Yes, they often do good work, but every few years they screw up royally. I've seen undercover cops use billy clubs on tourists and people just passing by, including a pregnant woman. That event caused many lawsuits, police firings, and a general media frenzie. It was eventually forgottne about, but some years later there is another incident... it's a recurring theme. There are many news stories where I can't judge, but excessive force, racism, and plain old bad judgement, are recurring convictions.
A few years ago I moved out of town to a place where the RCMP have jurisdiction. Their shiny national reputation does not extend to rural areas. Here, at least, their work is often sloppy. Our local constabulary was recently caught shooting at a gas station with unsuspecting people inside because someone they were chasing ran in there. No one (miraculously) was hurt and it will just be another investigation. That was a few months ago and people have already forgotten about it. There are many police stories, both good and bad. The problem is the bad ones.
A man was killed because some furniture got damaged. Life in North American (Canada) is so cheap these days. You must remember that the Police themselves are not above the law either. As a minimum a charge of manslaughter. Taser'ed 4 times! 4 times! for heavens sake. He is down on the ground, helpless and they continue to attack him? Justify that? The Police should have tried to calm the man down, get him to sit down, get an interrupter. And don't give me that bullshit about how dangerous he was, he was clearly unarmed. They made no effort to communicate with him, they just could not be bothered, could they? just taser him and cart him off, don't think at all.
@Sean Kennedy. I do know what it is like, ex-RMP. Its your duty to calm situations down! not start a war, an incident. The Police are there to maintain the LAW! and to act in a lawful manner themselves! These Policemen acted unlawfully in my view and showed a complete and utter lack of professionalism and knowledge of the WEAPON they where using. If these thugs cannot think for themselves they should not be Policemen.
A man was killed, it is murder plain and simple, there is no justification for it. NONE.
"there are many who need to demonize this poor fellow in an effort to convince themselves that he was a trouble-maker, and not a victim."
He threw a computer on the ground, ostensibly smashing it in the process. That pretty much qualifies a person as being a troublemaker. Now you can argue that it's not his FAULT that he's a troublemaker, but of the fact that is IS a troublemaker, there can be no doubt, and if you're f*cking around in an airport, sh*t like this is gonna happen.
Yes, shame on the RCMPs for not figuring out that "hey, when we pump this guy full of electricity, he convulses, making him hard to cuff."
However, there is a misconception about when to use tazers. You people seem to think that tazers are for when the only other alternative is to shoot them. Not so. Most police departments have a policy to use a tazer when to subdue using a lesser method would either not adequately subdue the target, or when a lesser method would potentially endanger the safety of the officer.
Could the RCMPs have tackled the guy? Sure. Would the guy have kicked, clawed, scratched, and bitten? In all likelihood, yes. And that, in fact, is a life-threatening situation for a cop. Guy bites you. Guy has AIDS. Guy draws blood. Guess what?
In the vast majority of cases, tazers do not cause any long term injury.
So given that a lesser means of subduing the whack-job would be either ineffective (he's thrashing about, going mental) or would endanger the cops (s.o.b. freaking bit me!), AND given that tazers are in general quite effective, and relatively safe, their usage is, in my mind, completely justified.
Maybe you idiots would prefer rubber bullets (which can also kill if they hit the wrong part of the body), tear gas (causing respiratory distress...for everyone in the airport, thanks to the ventilation system), or bean bags (which again, can kill, and at the very least will leave some nasty bruising, and possibly broken bones)???
The fact is that under the circumstances, tazering isn't a half-bad idea. We all have the luxury of hindsight. We can all say "yeah, tazering doesn't usually kill, but it sure did with this guy", but that, frankly, doesn't matter. The intent to kill the man was not there, and though it is regrettable that the man died, the chances of that occuring were quite slim. So yeah, it sucks that this guy died, but that doesn't immediately translate into an excuse to crucify those men and women that will protect your ass, should the need arise. Maybe you should say thank you to them, every now and then...
Just a thought...
I still cannot understand, what was that guy doing for 10 hours in airport. I have not travelled a lot, is 10 hours of waiting for no apparent reason is normal? On my first flight I flew to Charles de Gaulle airport, and I had an appointment in 2 terminal, my plane landed in 1 terminal. I do not have a history of mental illness (I hope :)), and I knew basic French, but I got a bit anxious, since I assumed that I can get to the other terminal by foot, so I was searching for some directions how to get there on foot. It took me about 30 minutes of wandering inside and outside the terminal, to figure out that there is a bus, that goes to terminal 2. If I had to wait for 10 hours, with nobody taking any interest in me, I for sure would have freaked out big time, possibly not like that guy, but something similar. Yes the police maybe did not do anything really wrong, by tasering that guy, but why nobody explains, why that guy was left for 10 hours, and did the police know that before they tasered him. Cause if they knew, that is for sure not cool. OK lets keep this guy for 10 hours for no reason, oh he got a little upset, let's TASER HIM. That will teach him for sure. That is surely not proper police behaviour.
4 cops should have the training to restrain one man.
Whilst he appeared agitated, he did not appear hostile in a life threatening manner.
Also the knowleedge that he cannot understand English, should give you a clue as to why saying things like calm down may not have much response, after the first taser shot the fact that he becomes more agitated is not a suprise.
Note even then it was not by making threatening moves towards the police like a drug crazed homicidal maniac but just reacting to being tasered, training should allow you to asses this situation and the reactions to it quick enough to realise this, otherwise your training is lacking.
The problem is tasers are percieved and marketed as non lethal so its becomes an easy way out with the perception its not really going to do much damage so its a good option.
Taser training should be on a response level just below guns, i.e somewhere near last resort when the threat is to great to try any other methods.
What the fuck is it with cops around the world nowadays. Shoot first ask, sorry, answer the tribunals questions later. What the hell ever happened to trying to communicate with people. Sure in this instance there was a language barrier, but there are always ways around that. Being a cop for 10 years and having to deal with all sorts of people, from those with mental disabilities to the truly deranged not once have I needed to escalate the use of potentially lethal force.
A cop is to ensure the safety of the public, the person and themselves. Whilst the cops were there , unless he was doing something immediately dangerous contain him and the situation until you are able to communicate effectively with him. Moving chairs and tables, distrubing yes, dangerous no. Any cop who is willing to jump into a situation and start using force without assessing the situation should be stripped of their weapons first and their badge second.
It certainly appears that many of the cops nowadays also would like to interpret the use of the taser and cap spray differently. Particularly in the case of tasers these are typically only used in which the officer seriously beleives that either himself or another member of the public is imminently about to suffer serious injury or death. IN other words the taser is used instead of the firearm. Can they honestly answer that serious injuury or death was imminent.
</rant>
If the penalty for being a jerk in Canada was death, our country would be completely de-populated.
Tawakalna, an excellent summarization. These other people are probably not aware of statements made by other witnesses, and are solely going by the video, and their own prejudices.
One other fact that people may not be aware of is that there is a 20 minute break between the start of the film, where he is throwing things, and the segment where police show up. The camera was running out of storage capacity, so the cameraman stopped filming. My perception is that the that the throwing of the computer took place in that first segment.
This guy had been left unaided in a secure area for 10 hours. The self-serve telephone help line to interpreters was not working. No officials thought to aid him early on, before he entered his medical crisis.
When police showed up, the victim appeared to be obeying police instructions, had his hands down, and presented no immenent threat to the lives or physical well-being of the officers or other humans.
So there was no "just cause" to attack the victim physically.
It looks to me no different than any other 4 people confronted with a difficult situation, over reacting, and committing what we in Canada call "manslaughter", which is one of the things police would charge an ordinary citizen with if they did that, except that these were trained professionals, were trained in these kinds of difficult situation, had many years of experience, and they'd probably given some thought and premeditation to what they did. That would make if first of second degree murder under Canadian law.
Our mounties (the RCMP) go through very thorough training, which supposedly includes the use of the Taser. If the problem is training related, it is improper training, not lack of it.
I think the root cause of the problem is that our police, like any good criminal gang, tend to follow "omerta" the mafia law of silence. The "blue wall of silence" principle is usually very effective when violently criminal police want to recruit other police to become "accessories after the fact" to their violent crimes.
Couple that with the moral principle that "if you don't get a criminal conviction you didn't do anything unethical" and you have a small segment of the Canadian population that commits a significant percentage of the crime here, but thinks itself non-criminal.
These four officers, and the "accessories after the fact" colleagues who have sheltered them from investigation, are a disgrace to the profession of policing.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
