Friday, September 21, 2007



Police taser wheelchair-bound granny to death

This blog documented numerous cases where police use of Tasers resulted in the death of the individual. This, allegedly “safe” form of control is, in fact, dangerous and lethal.

When dealing with mentally disturbed individuals there is a problem. Police think that threatening someone with a Taser will get them to obey orders. That assumes a functioning rational process. If the person is irrational this threat rarely works. Instead of finding other means of dealing with the situation the trigger happy cops just Taser someone to make life easy for themselves, even if that leads to the unnecessary death of the person involved. Our previous article on numerous such killings is here.

Emily Delafied had mental problems. She was schizophrenic. She was also confined to a wheelchair, which certainly limited her mobility and the type of threat she could become. It wasn’t as if she could leap at someone and harm them. And to direct her chair she needed to use her hands. She couldn’t pursue someone easily and carry a weapon at the same time. In addition her family says her range of motion was very limited. And due to her medical condition she was on oxygen. Clearly this was a fragile woman who really couldn’t pose a real threat.

In April 2006 Emily didn’t take her medication and she had an episode. I knew a schizophrenic who periodically got the idea in his head that Jesus would heal him, and to show his faith he had to stop taking his pills. The result was always a pretty scary psychotic episode. And that is what happened to Emily.

That day she called the police saying her sister was going to hurt her. When police arrived they found Delafield in her chair holding two knives and a hammer. She would swing them at family who approached her believing they were going to hurt her. It appears from press reports that Delafield was hallucinating that she was under threat and was trying to protect herself. There is no indication that she was planning to harm herself.

Clearly the woman couldn't be reasoned with and threats would make the situation worse. No one else was under immediate threat. Family could vacate the premises quite easily. Delafield was in no position to pursue. The situation seems relatively easy. Vacate the area, keep Delafield confined and under surveillance, try to talk to her from a distance so she doesn’t feel threatened and wait.

If she was trying to harm herself then perhaps a different strategy would be necessary. If she was able to harm others then a different strategy would be necessary. If unable to do either then a little patience, until she calmed down, may have resolved the case. Police were clearly impatient. They used the Taser on the woman after “a 13-minute standoff” -- just 13 minutes. That was the entire amount of time they were willing to invest in trying to find a non-lethal way of solving this problem.

Police were impatient. One police officer used a Taser on Delafield nine times and a second officer used a Taser once, all in under three minutes. The repeated shocks combined with a heart condition to kill the woman. The medical examiner listed cause of death as a homicide.

Police Chief Robert Musco tried to justify the killing saying that the use of the Taser, ten times, “was utilized and the subject was disarmed.” True, she was disarmed, she was dead. It is very critical to remember what sort of threat this “armed” women posed. First, she was in her late 50s, not a spring chicken. Second, she was confined to a wheelchair. She wasn’t going to leap tall buildings in a single bound. She couldn’t even easily hold her weapons and operate her chair at the same time. She had limited range of motion and needed oxygen just to breath. This wasn’t Rambo but an older woman in a wheelchair with extremely limited ability to inflict harm on anyone.

Of course the police officers were cleared. They always are. The only way that bad cops go down is when they are taped committing the offense.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

You yourself say the person was having an episode AND had several deadly weapons at the ready. If that isn't a threat, then I pose this:

I'll sit in a wheelchair and swing some knives at you when you try to get close. I'd be VERY interested in your solution to the problem.

My grandparents used to say "If you don't have something useful to say, don't say anything at all". So what would YOU do in that situation? Hmmm?

H2Oman said...

I tend to believe the situation would have played itself out, given time. I see no reason what so ever to have to bring violence, let alone a tazer. Try to stay focused here. This was an elderly woman, on oxygen for health reasons. Not for use like at an oxygen bar. You said "How about I get into a wheelchair with those deadly weapons, the outcome would have been much different". What you didn't say was "what is YOUR AGE, YOUR SEX, or what is YOUR PHYSICAL CONDITION?" It's not a game of king of the wheelchair. Again, "FOCUS" on those involved, their condition, and their immediate surroundings. And more importantly, do they impose a real threat to them selves, or anyone else in their immediate surroundings? The answer WAS NO! It was said that all occupants could easily exit the dwelling, and she wasn't herself, in any kind of danger of harming herself. So, other than another clear cut case of "big boys, their lethal toys, and (most likely) on roids, equals one more less person "to protect and serve". My favorite though, belongs to Yucaipa's Sheriff Dept. You see, they were called by a distraught wife who was worried sick about her husband. He'd been laid off, could not find work, and was very depressed. When his depression worsened, he'd locked himself inside his bedroom. He wouldn't communicate any longer with his wife, and she got scared, as she knew he owned a hand gun and kept bit in the bedroom. So, she called the Yucaipa Sheriff's "for help"! What she got was the deputies showing up, learning that "he owned a hand gun, not that he was in possession of it, or threatening to kill himself or anyone else"! They entered the home, then "gained access to the bedroom" (kicked in the door), the husband then retreated to the bedroom's closet. (and "locked himself in the closet!" Really? What bedroom's closet has a locking door? Let alone locking from the inside!!?). They bull rushed the closet, and gained access. When confronting him (inside of the closet), the 2 officers simultaneously taze him. Yet, he is able to wrestle the hand gun "away from one of the deputies", while still being tazed by both of the 2 deputies, and manages to "SHOT HIMSELF IN THE HEAD"! Please note; He didn't shot himself with his own gun!" And, He had to "WRESTLE THE HAND GUN AWAY FROM ONE OF THE DEPUTIES!" That means, "The deputy had both his TAZER and his HAND GUN OUT, and the tazer deployed. Me, I'm not "bull rushing" anyone's closet, if the occupant is seriously believed to in possession of a loaded firearm! Nothing was RIGHTR about this story. From "the wife called for help", To "the deputies "bull rushing" the "locked closet", To "the man shooting himself in the head while being tazered by 2 deputies!" I mean seriously!!! To ANONYMOUS; "I suppose this guy needed killing too!" It's like this. You'll never get it, until you (or someone you care for) is on the receiving end of one of these BEAT DOWNS!