Police shootings after electrical weapon seizure: homicide or suicide-by-cop

Homicide Manner-of-Death Classification in Arrest-Related Death

ABSTRACT

Multiple studies have documented various factors that influence or determine forensic pathologist classification of manner of death. There do not appear to be any published studies on manner of death classification specifically regarding arrest-related deaths (ARDs). The goal of this study was to consider a large body of cases of nonfirearm ARDs to analyze the homicide classification with regards to numerous decedent and practitioner (medical examiner/coroner [ME/C]) variables. We analyzed 1145 US autopsy reports from the years 2006-2020, inclusive, and considered decedent variables of age, ethnicity, height, weight, body mass index, toxicology, and mention of a conducted electrical weapon and ME/C influence variables of gender, country region, and year. We found that the homicide classification likelihood increased by a factor of 1.04-1.05 per year, 1.34-1.37 for a female medical examiner, and 1.4-1.5 going from Southern states to Western states. There is an increasing trend for ME/C to label nonfirearm ARDs as homicides in the United States. The homicide classification is more common in Western states and less common in Southern states, and it was more common with a female ME/C.

Confusion between firearms and electrical weapons as a factor in police shootings

Conducted electrical weapons (CEW) have risks including trauma associated with uncontrolled falls, probes penetrating the eye, and fume ignition. A lesser-known risk is weapon-confusion error with officers mistakenly discharging their firearm when they intended to deploy their electrical weapon. We searched for incidents of possible weapon confusion with the TASER® brand CEWs via open-source media, litigation filings, and a survey of CEW law enforcement master instructors. We found 19 incidents of possible CEW weapon confusion in law enforcement field uses from January 2001 to April 2021. We eliminated a case as not meeting our criteria for probable weapons confusion leaving 18 cases, thus giving a demonstrated CEW discharge risk of 3.9 per million with confidence limits (2.4-6.2 per million) by Wilson score interval. Ipsilateral carry of the weapons was historically correlated with increased risk vs. contralateral carry. Officer gender was not a predictor of weapon confusion. The psychological issues behind weapon confusion under stress are discussed. The concurrent carry of electrical weapons and firearms presents a very small but real risk of injury and death from confusion between an electrical weapon and a firearm.