Mt. Vernon cops: Hatchet-wielding woman subdued with stun gun

[x635 4,066]

Kudos to the officers involved in mitigating this situation!

Mt. Vernon cops: Hatchet-wielding woman subdued with stun gun

By Timothy O'Connor • The Journal News • March 15, 2009

MOUNT VERNON - Police used a stun gun to subdue a hatchet-wielding 62-year-old woman Friday afternoon, Commissioner David Chong said.

FULL STORY: http://www.lohud.com/article/20090315/NEWS02/903150334/1018

[Guest alsfirefighter]

I really wish those in the press would learn a little more about the stories they cover. It may not mean a lot to the average person but to me accuracy breads good readership and respect. A stun gun? How about they used a TASER. Two completely different devices with two completly different actions when the TASER is used with probe deployment.

Some of the others that irk me:

Calling Marines Soldiers.

The use of "Nerve Gas" when its actually Nerve Agent.

Of how about finding out where a patient actually went instead of making EMS providers look like jack asses to their colleagues and so on.

Kudos to the MVPD officers to bring a safe end to the event. They should be applauded on their restraint as they could have easily used deadly force. It makes me feel for those who don't have these devices and the injury reductions to officers that the device limits. Unfortunately or mostly liberal society doesn't always see it that way. Good job brothers!

Edited March 15, 2009 by alsfirefighter

[CPAGE 2]

Good Job by MVPD

Good job by my old friend Tommy G.

Stay safe

[Bnechis 3,961]

Just a question for the Law Enforcement members, when a person needs to be controlled with a tazer, are ther potential side effects that need to be reported to EMS?

What is the potential for a person in their 60's to have underlying medical issues that EMS and the Hospital might look at differently if they knew the patient had been tazered?

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Just a question for the Law Enforcement members, when a person needs to be controlled with a tazer, are ther potential side effects that need to be reported to EMS?

What is the potential for a person in their 60's to have underlying medical issues that EMS and the Hospital might look at differently if they knew the patient had been tazered?

Barry...obviously not law enforcement, however I went through the training with my tac team and helped develop the policy for the other tac medics on my team and outside EMS providers for the removal of probes, immediate transport criteria and monitoring.

There are little to no "side effects" attributed to TASER use. In fact thousands of officers during training to carry the device experience the action of it and not one death has occurred. Additionally, there are many police departments who remove the probes themselves and only contact EMS or transport to the hospital if their policy has criteria for such.

There are several factors in which one must understand with the TASER:

1. The amperage that is delivered over 5 seconds is well under the fibrillation threshold.

2. If a person (such as the 60 y.o. mentioned) would happen to have a cardiac event it would generally manifest quickly. Recovery time from the device is very remarkable.

3. Most people suffer from minor injuries associated with falling from a standing position when the device is deployed.

4. After removal of the probes, simple monitoring is often the best bet. 2 sets of vitals and if a cardiac condition is present, a 12 lead EKG would be a plus.

5. One must also keep in mind the risks associated with excited delirium with all patients TASER use or not. They are at extreme risk for sudden onset cardiac arrest particularly if the arrest involved an extended struggle.

If you visit youtube or other video sights search "TASER" and/or "TASER Demo" and you can see how quick the recovery time is of a person who has had the device used on them. I know locally where I operate when the unit has had to be deployed in my presence there has only been a handful of individuals who did not immediately comply after one discharge of the device.

I can tell you personally that I took a 1 second blast and it hurt like hell and caused my legs to contract as if I kicked myself in the a**.

I have developed a "Medical Aspects of Less Lethal Weapons" as I have mentioned before. I cover TASER, less lethal munitions, chemical incapacitants etc. in it. Contact me if your interested.

[Bnechis 3,961]

4. After removal of the probes, simple monitoring is often the best bet. 2 sets of vitals and if a cardiac condition is present, a 12 lead EKG would be a plus.

5. One must also keep in mind the risks associated with excited delirium with all patients TASER use or not. They are at extreme risk for sudden onset cardiac arrest particularly if the arrest involved an extended struggle.

I have developed a "Medical Aspects of Less Lethal Weapons" as I have mentioned before. I cover TASER, less lethal munitions, chemical incapacitants etc. in it. Contact me if your interested.

Thanks for the info. My point was this 60 y/o was tazered (I am not questioning the use of the Tazer, (It makes great sense in protecting everyone) the barbs removed. The person transported to the hospital and admitted for psych evaluation (note: not under arrest). The hospital staff found out that the person was Tazer'ed by:

A) the police dept

B.) EMS unit that transported the "patient"

C) The Journal News (article 24 hrs later)

D) All of the above

The answer should have been "D" but in this case the answer was "C".

[helicopper 1,050]

Thanks for the info. My point was this 60 y/o was tazered (I am not questioning the use of the Tazer, (It makes great sense in protecting everyone) the barbs removed. The person transported to the hospital and admitted for psych evaluation (note: not under arrest). The hospital staff found out that the person was Tazer'ed by:

A) the police dept

B.) EMS unit that transported the "patient"

C) The Journal News (article 24 hrs later)

D) All of the above

The answer should have been "D" but in this case the answer was "C".

Did the hospital do anything differently for her because she was tasered? Shouldn't it have been the same screening that any incoming psych patient receives?

[ny10570 745]

That absolutely should have been part of the information provided by the EMS crew. Was the EMS crew aware the Taser had been used? While the Taser is relatively safe there are documented cases of a Taser exacerbating an underlying medical condition. A quick EKG should be performed to ensure there is no arrhythmia. Aside from any cardiac issues, the fact that a Taser had to be used speaks to the mental state of the patient and helps to understand the severity of her crisis.

[helicopper 1,050]

Was this person transported by EMS or by PD?

[Bnechis 3,961]

Did the hospital do anything differently for her because she was tasered? Shouldn't it have been the same screening that any incoming psych patient receives?

The question is should they do anything different because she was tasered?

Was this person transported by EMS or by PD?

EMS

[Guest alsfirefighter]

The question is should they do anything different because she was tasered?

EMS

Did my post not satisfy that question?

Let me answer your question with a question then...

What would they possibly have to do differently?

Also as far as getting an EKG...again if you check policies through google searches...and the policy that I wrote...an EKG is only performed if there are abnormal vital signs, AMS, Delirium, intoxication (drugs or alcohol) or prior cardiac history. There is also little documentation to show that TASER use exacerbates medical conditions. In fact TASER International not too long ago won a lawsuit that required a ME to change her cause of death to "accidental" after citing the TASER in the report. By the time EMS sees a person who has been subjected to TASER use the episode is in 1 of 2 phases....the person is in significant distress or there has been a fairly decent amount of time since the last energy cycle.

A break down in communication between agencies is and should be unacceptable. We do not transport every perp who gets TASER'd by policy. As far as this case mentioned...guess what...she is fine...she will be fine (other then her mental issues) and suffer no ill effects from the device. So to me that also answers your question. In all of the TASER uses I've been witness to or have been called into PD HQ to evaluate and remove probes...I have transported only 1 person. Why? Because the probe imbedded just inside of his belly button where apparantly there was some scar tissue that didn't want to let it go. The other probe came out clean, quick and with barb intact. If that other probe removed...he would have never gone to the hospital.

If anyone is having issues with these devices and are getting called in after their use...the best course of action is communication with your local law enforcement agency. Find out what they are looking for, let them know yoru concerns and work with their training officer or whoever their TASER trainer is and get the information they have from TASER international about its use, effect and medical issues. Google is also a wonderful thing and there are many states and agencies between PD, FD/EMS that have policies concerning their response and handing of such persons.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Did my post not satisfy that question?

Let me answer your question with a question then... What would they possibly have to do differently?

Your answer was excellent. I was answering Chris's question with a question.

[helicopper 1,050]

Your answer was excellent. I was answering Chris's question with a question.

Barry,

I imagine that the standard admission exam for any psych patient includes a medical component. That medical exam should uncover anything untoward caused by the Taser or other underlying conditions. Given the mental state of this (or any) psych patient, I'm guessing that you can't rely exclusively on their history.

There does seem to be a breakdown in communications if nobody told the hospital that the patient was Tasered. But, as alsfirefighter indicated, there are many Taser suspects who do not go to the hospital at all making me wonder - besides the incomplete EMS report, what is the big deal here?

[20y2 43]

Thanks for the info. My point was this 60 y/o was tazered (I am not questioning the use of the Tazer, (It makes great sense in protecting everyone) the barbs removed. The person transported to the hospital and admitted for psych evaluation (note: not under arrest). The hospital staff found out that the person was Tazer'ed by:

A) the police dept

B.) EMS unit that transported the "patient"

C) The Journal News (article 24 hrs later)

D) All of the above

The answer should have been "D" but in this case the answer was "C".

MVPD has an absolute policy to leave the barbs in for removal AT THE HOSPITAL by hospital staff only and that ALL people tased HAVE TO be transported by EMS. I find it literally impossible for them not to have realised that she had been tased since 1.) the barbs would have still been in 2.) EMS transported her in and 3.) PD would have, without a doubt been transporting with her and would have been at the hospital with her.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Pretty good points 20....

I have seen them fall out....and as I've seen a few times for some reasons a few perps that yanked them themselves.

[Bnechis 3,961]

MVPD has an absolute policy to leave the barbs in for removal AT THE HOSPITAL by hospital staff only and that ALL people tased HAVE TO be transported by EMS. I find it literally impossible for them not to have realised that she had been tased since 1.) the barbs would have still been in 2.) EMS transported her in and 3.) PD would have, without a doubt been transporting with her and would have been at the hospital with her.

1) the hospital stripped the patient and never found them (the pt was wearing multiple layers of "heavy" clothing) so as ALS pointed out they may have fallen out. 2) EMS transported her, but I do not know what they reported. 3) The staff that treated her had no contact with MVPD.