Electric shock from Tasers can injure and kill, lawsuits claim.

Police officers depend on the Taser gun as a less deadly alternative to firearms for subduing suspects. But recent injuries and deaths that may be linked to Tasers have prompted law enforcement agencies and the public to question the weapons' safety.

Tasers temporarily incapacitate a suspect by firing metal barbs that deliver 50,000 volts of electrical charge into the body, causing muscles to contract involuntarily. The weapon can be shot from up to 25 feet away.

Many police suspects have been injured or killed after being shocked with Tasers, and officers themselves have been injured during Taser training. Critics, who believe the device should be used only as an alternative to lethal force, say it is currently used too freely--on officers in training, on suspects who do not pose immediate danger to themselves or others, and even on uncooperative children and pregnant women. Police in Florida used the Taser on a 12-year-old girl skipping school and a 6-year-old boy threatening to cut himself with a piece of glass, according to news reports.

Lawsuits have emerged against both the device's maker--Taser International, Inc., of Scottsdale, Arizona--and its users. "The law enforcement community as a whole has been duped into believing that the Taser has no potential to cause serious injury," said Phoenix lawyer John Dillingham, who represents a former sheriff's deputy who claims he suffered a back injury while in training to use the device.

Tasers' popularity has grown considerably in recent years. The manufacturer says the devices are being tested or used by more than 7,000 law enforcement, military, and correctional agencies. Some police departments have issued Tasers to all their officers.

"Electrical devices like the Taser have been used for years, but the Taser has become very popular because it has proven to be very effective, as it applies more electrical energy than previous devices," said Riverside, California, lawyer Andrew Roth, who represents the plaintiffs in a wrongful death suit involving the Taser. "It's a very effective tool for controlling someone, but the problem is that, without warnings about the potential injury or death it might cause, it is being misused."

The company calls the Taser "non-lethal." But an ongoing Arizona Republic investigation found that out of 101 deaths following police-administered Taser shocks in the United States and Canada since 1999, medical examiners have cited the Taser in 12 autopsy reports. The Taser was listed as a cause of death in three cases and a contributing factor in six, and it could not be ruled out as a cause of death in another three cases, the Republic reported in March.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has launched an informal inquiry into statements Taser International made about the weapons' safety--which appeared to bolster stock prices shortly before company directors and executives sold $68 million in shares--and into the accounting of a year-end sale to a distributor. Soon after Taser International announced the SEC investigation in January, a stockholder filed a class action against the company for misleading investors about the safety, of, and demand for, its products.

In an SEC riling in March, the company acknowledged that Tasers "are often used in aggressive confrontations that may result in serious, permanent bodily injury or death to those involved. Our products may cause or be associated with these injuries." However, Taser International President Tom Smith emphasized that the company was not saying its weapons had caused any of the deaths reported to date.

Company CEO Rick Smith said in a press release in April that recent independent reviews "have supported the view that Taser devices, while not risk-free, are generally safe and reduce the risk of injury or death."

In the line of duty 

When former Maricopa County, Arizona, sheriff's deputy Samuel Powers was shocked with a Taser in a 2002 training session, he suffered a compression fracture of his T7 vertebra. He filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging it failed to warn of the potential for injury. Powers's case is believed to be the first products liability claim filed against Taser International. The trial is scheduled for June. (Powers v. Taser Int'l, No. (N-2003-013457 (Ariz., Maricopa County Super. Ct. filed July 14, 2003).)

Dillingham and Thomas Wilmer--another Phoenix lawyer and Dillingham's cocounsel in Powers--said that in Taser International's SEC filings, Powers's injury was described as a shoulder injury, with no mention of his compression fracture. But in the litigation, the company's own medical expert agreed that Powers's fracture was caused by the muscle contractions triggered by the Taser's electric current.

"There is lots of support in the medical literature for the proposition that muscle contraction from electrical current can cause numerous injuries, including fractures," Wilmer said.

"The company's training materials have always warned of potential injuries from the Taser's barbs and secondary injuries from falls, but prior versions claimed zero risk of long-term injuries," he noted. "We believe the prior versions of Taser's training materials have caused a false sense among law enforcement personnel that the Taser cannot cause long-term or direct injuries, other than minor injuries."

Taser International's most recent training materials, issued in January, require officers who will be shocked in training to sign a release form. They also say that someone with a pre-existing condition that could cause injury from muscle contractions should not be shocked in training.

The company recommends that trainees in both user and instructor-certification courses experience a shock. "Taser claims it never required end users to take a hit to get certified," but trainers--usually other officers who were certified by the company--have often required it, Wilmer said. Some law enforcement agencies now prohibit officers from being shocked in training.

Excessive force?

A Taser brochure suggests that the devices can reduce police departments' litigation costs for use-of-force liability, but several lawsuits involving Tasers have been filed against police.

"In several cases, the officers' actions appear to have resulted from a lack of clear guidelines or training on the risks involved in using Tasers in certain situations," Amnesty International noted in a November report. "In other cases, the alleged actions appear to amount to deliberate ill-treatment."

For example, the report describes the Taser-injury cases of a 71-year-old blind woman in Oregon and a California woman who was shot with a Taser when six months pregnant and then lost the baby. The report also cites a statistical analysis, produced for Taser International in 2002, which found that suspects shocked with Tasers were unarmed in about 80 percent of 2,050 field applications.

In the report, Amnesty International called for Taser use to be suspended until more safety studies are completed. In response, Taser International CEO Smith said in a press release, "Amnesty International's assertion that officers should place themselves in jeopardy of injury by resorting to more dangerous hand-to-hand combat techniques rather than using nonlethal, low-injury Taser devices ... would clearly yield more officer and subject injuries if implemented."

"I think police departments nationwide have to reconsider their use-of-force policies regarding Taser usage," said David Henderson, a Bethel, Alaska, lawyer. Henderson represents Kevin Patrick, who was shocked seven times after being handcuffed by police and suffered burns that resulted in scarring and emotional distress. Patrick sued the state and the police officer for using excessive force, and a jury found in his favor. (Patrick v. State, No. 4BE-03-113 CI (Alaska, Bethel County Super. Ct. Oct. 11, 2004).)

Henderson noted that if the Taser's trigger is held down, it will keep firing. However, "according to Taser International, it should only take one shot of the Taser, which lasts for five seconds, to incapacitate someone," he said. "In Taser's training, police officers generally fall down within one second."

Tasers are sometimes used not to control unruly suspects but to punish them for their conduct, said California attorney Roth, who represents the parents of Roman Pierson, who died after police shocked him twice. They sued the police for assault and battery, negligence, negligent employment, and violation of Pierson's civil rights. They also sued Taser International for wrongful death based on strict liability, negligence, and failure to warn. The case was filed in California court in November and then removed to federal district court. (Pierson v. Taser Int'l, No. 04-CC-11030 (Cal., Orange County Super. Ct. filed Nov. 9, 2004).)

Roth said that at the time Pierson was shocked, he was not armed or endangering others but was in a drug-induced state of delirium. If the officers knew or should have known that the Taser was potentially lethal, "using that level of force on somebody who is simply uncooperative, but not committing any crimes or threatening anybody, is excessive force," he said. Even if they didn't know of the risks, "it is still a use of force. Were they justified in using it?"

It is difficult to show conclusively that the Taser caused a death. In Pierson's case, the county coroner determined there was a high level of methamphetamine in his system and that his death was the result of cardiac arrest, but the autopsy ignores the Taser, Roth said.

"It doesn't even mention that he was [shocked with the device] ," Roth said. "There's no history of what happened. They describe wounds where he was struck by the Taser, but they don't attribute them to any cause.

"Since the Taser is the only force the police applied to Pierson other than handcuffs, it's easy to blame an in-custody death on a drug overdose," Roth said. He added that in this case, the county coroner is part of the sheriff's department.

Last October, Taser International announced that a Department of Defense study shows that Tasers are safe and "without significant risk of unintended results." The report says, "Taser technology is not likely the primary factor in the cause of in-custody fatalities."

"The company continues to dispute that the Taser has any effect on cardiac function," Roth said. "There's a whole line of experts who say that if you apply electrical force and excite somebody's heart by shocking them, it does affect heart function. But there are no objective findings that we're aware of yet that can include or exclude the Taser as a cause of death."

The Taser can increase heart rate in "people who are already in some sort of distress. Their hearts are cranked up because of drugs or a struggle--they're in a very excited state," Roth said. He predicted that more testing may reveal that people in such a state are the most likely to die as a result of a Taser shock. Andrew Schwartz, a Walnut Creek,

California, lawyer, filed a products liability lawsuit in February on behalf of the son of 21-year-old Andrew Washington, who died following six Taser shocks. Washington's autopsy report said the cause of death was cardiac arrest--associated with excitement during a police chase as well as cocaine and alcohol intoxication--occurring shortly after being shocked by the Taser, Schwartz said.

"While every pathologist is entitled to their own opinion, we're confident that we can prove that the factor that caused his death was the electrical shock--nothing else." (Washington v. Taser Int'l, No. FCS025537 (Cal., Solano County Super. Ct. filed Feb. 28, 2005).)

Legislation and testing

California Assemblyman Mark Leno introduced a bill in February that would require police departments to file reports on Taser use to the state's department of justice. Each time the Taser is used, information such as the number of shocks administered and whether the subject or the officer is injured would be recorded.

Roth said officers should stop using Tasers under circumstances when they would not be justified in using potentially deadly force. He added that more independent safety testing should be conducted.

Schwartz agreed. "Taser has an interest in promoting the safety of their product. I'd like there to be some independent research that gives them a clean bill of health," he said.

The U.S. Department of Justice is funding a study on how the Taser affects pigs' blood chemistry, and Taser International has funded other animal tests. But critics say more reliable tests are needed.

"The Taser may have some value as a tool to law enforcement," Wilmer said. "However, whether it should be used and where it should fall in the use-of-force spectrum should be determined by individual law enforcement agencies after appropriate medical studies have been conducted."

In the meantime, some police departments have stopped using or buying Tasers. In February, following the death of a 41-year-old man shocked repeatedly, the Lucas County, Ohio, sheriff suspended the department's use of the weapon until more safety studies could be reviewed. The Chicago Police Department announced in February it would delay purchasing more Tasers and would look into alternatives after a 54-year-old man died and a 14-year-old boy went into cardiac arrest following Taser shocks.