Original communication
Forensic reporting of TASER exposure: An examination of situational
and exposure characteristics
Natalie Erin Todak a, *
, Gabriel T. Cesar b
, Brooks Louton b
a
School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona State University, 411 N. Central Ave., Suite 600, Phoenix, AZ 85004-0685, USA
b
Arizona State University, USA
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 28 March 2015
Received in revised form
10 June 2015
Accepted 14 June 2015
Available online 21 June 2015
Keywords:
TASER
CED
Arrest-related death
Police
Autopsy
Medical examiner
a b s t r a c t
The current study examines the content of autopsy reports (N ¼ 184) for deaths that occurred following
TASER exposure by police. Guided by previous research and national autopsy standards for other
weapon-specific deaths, we evaluate 1) whether reports document situational characteristics of the
police-citizen encounter and 2) whether reports document characteristics of the TASER exposure. We
find a large portion of reports are often missing a police report summary and information regarding the
TASER exposure. Considering the expanding use of TASERs by police, we emphasize the importance of
creating national standards that require documentation of police report summaries, TASER injuries, and
TASER logs.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd and Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The use of conducted electrical devices (CEDs) by police has
proliferated over the last two decades. The TASER, the most common
model, has been distributed to 17,000 law enforcement
agencies, private security companies, and military operations
worldwide.1
In a recent survey of 662 U.S. police agencies, 80%
reported they were using CEDs.2
To date, the device has been
deployed in the field almost 3 million times, with an estimated
250,000 TASER deployments taking place in the field annually.3
Despite this widespread use, TASERs still represent a relatively
new addition to the toolbox of modern policing. To date, 500
recorded arrest-related deaths (ARDs) have occurred proximate to
use of the TASER by police.3e5
The role of the device in these fatal
events remains empirically unclear. Debate surrounds whether
TASER-proximate ARDs result from a combination of exposure and
compounded emotional and physical strain and injury, or if the role
of TASER in these events is incidental. As such, forensic treatment of
TASER-proximate ARD is currently only loosely defined.
Autopsy reports are used as an official data source for understanding
what transpired during these events, and for empirical
research in policing, forensics, and legal medicine.5e9
However,
although the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME)
provides official autopsy standards for common categories of death
and injury,10
there are no standards for CED exposure. This oversight
is likely due to the relative novelty of CEDs, compared to more
established methods of police force. Such lack of clarity inhibits the
ability of forensics practitioners to accurately and consistently account
for the role of TASER in their investigations. Further, the lack
of standards highlights a need for further empirical inquiry into the
role of TASER in arrest-related death. To address these concerns, we
analyze the content of autopsy reports (N ¼ 184), each detailing the
death of a suspect in police or correctional custody proximate to
one or more TASER exposures. We draw on existing literature and
national autopsy standards to direct our inquiry.
1.1. TASER use & arrest-related death
Research suggests the TASER1
may reduce police use of deadly
force by offering an alternative to firearms,11
and allows police to
subdue suspects and deescalate conflict.12e17
Still, some groups
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 805 908 1211.
E-mail addresses: Natalie.Todak@asu.edu (N.E. Todak), gcesar@asu.edu
(G.T. Cesar), Brooks.Louton@asu.edu (B. Louton).
1
In accordance with previous research,9
the term “TASER” is used as a general
term for a CED throughout this paper. TASER is only one brand of conducted
electrical weapon, but it is used by over two-thirds of police departments in the
United States.24
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jflm
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2015.06.010
1752-928X/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd and Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine. All rights reserved.
Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine 35 (2015) 4e8
have advocated for stricter policies governing police use of the
TASER based on reports of misuse by police and deaths of individuals
who had recently been tased.4,18,19
Others suggest the
TASER poses minimal health risk for the majority of people who
come into contact with the police.20e22
The manufacturer of the
device has also issued a policy statement warning against deployment
near the chest area, noting “exposure in the chest area near
the heart has a low probability of inducing extra heart beats … In
rare circumstances, [this] could lead to cardiac arrest.”23
Further complicating matters, it is difficult to account for the
combined effects of violent police-citizen encounters, which typically
include sustained physical exertion and the use of multiple
forms of physical force by police against a resisting party before,
during, and after TASER deployment.3
White and colleagues9
characterized the TASER-proximate ARD events in their study as
“complex, dynamic encounters between suspects who were
actively and aggressively resisting police, and officers who were
drawing deeply into their arsenal of force options in an attempt to
control them” (pg. 102). The multifaceted, evolving nature of these
encounters has made it difficult to assess the TASER's role, if any, in
arrest-related death. In short, the potential role of the TASER in
subsequent ARD remains a major gap in current forensic knowledge.
Properly contextualizing and documenting police use of TASER
in the field is therefore critical to fostering accurate
characterizations of TASER-proximate ARDs.
1.2. National forensic autopsy standards
The National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME) offers
nationally recognized accreditation to promote standardized, scientifically
grounded practices for conducting autopsies.10
Accreditation
signals that an office performs at a “high-level of competence” and
enables the office to receive some forms of federal funding. The
guidelines provide standards for conducting investigations into
specific types of deaths (e.g. drowning, heart attack), with specific
instructions for various forms of weapons (e.g. gunshot injuries,
stabbings). For example, when evaluating gunshot cases, NAME
standards require a physical description of each injury, the location
of entry and exit, and the direction of the trajectory. They must also
remove and document foreign objects and correlate external injuries
to internal injuries. Other injury categories include burns, blunt and
sharp force wounds, unique pattern injuries, and bite marks. Here,
standards require a description of the injury's appearance, distribution,
location, and size, as well as a sample of any foreign materials.
These standards have important implications for the evaluation of
injuries from a TASER device. When used properly, police issued
TASER prongs produce punctures in the skin.23
However, there are
no national standards that expressly regulate the evaluation and
documentation of injuries caused by a TASER. Considering use of the
TASER by police is increasing across the country, documenting these
injuries systematically will help forensic professionals more accurately
assess the nature of arrest-related deaths.
2. Methods
Focusing our study on autopsy reports from TASER-proximate
ARDs allowed us to move beyond White et al.'s9
incident-level
profile by specifically analyzing one forensic process for documenting
and evaluating police use of force. Guided by research on
TASER use and arrest-related death, and NAME standards for conducting
autopsies,10
the current study analyzes:
1. Whether autopsy reports for TASER-proximate deaths document
situational characteristics of the police-citizen encounter,
and
2. Whether the reports document characteristics of the TASER
exposure.
2.1. Data
The current data were drawn from a larger study on TASERproximate
arrest-related deaths.9
Using the online media search
tool (www.webclipping.com) White and colleagues9
compiled
media reports detailing cases in which police deployed a TASER
device during a police-citizen encounter and the individual who
received the TASER exposure died during the incident. This search
resulted in 392 unique cases. To expand on both the quality and
quantity of the information provided in the media reports, Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) requests were then filed in corresponding
jurisdictions, requesting autopsy reports for all 392 deaths. The
follow up search produced autopsy reports for 213 cases, or 54%.
The success of each FOIA request depended on voluntary cooperation
from local and state agencies, and was constrained by ongoing
police investigations, litigation, and state law requirements (e.g.
some states require the applicant obtain permission from next-ofkin).
The current study systematically examines the content of
the obtained autopsy reports. Criteria for inclusion in the present
study are listed below. Cases that did not fit the criteria were
excluded from the study.
1. The report indicated that the decedent received2
a standard
TASER or drive stun exposure.
2. The report indicated that the exposure occurred within 24 h of
the death.
3. The report was legible.
After removing cases that did not fit the criteria for inclusion,
the final sample (N ¼ 184) represented 87% of total cases where
autopsy reports were obtained by White and colleagues.9
Reports
were only dropped in cases where low quality or missing information
prohibited our ability to code the document. For instance,
some reports included in the FOIA requests were illegible to the
researchers, while others made no nominal reference to a TASER
device being used during the fatal event. The nature of case attrition
in the current study results in a selection bias toward reports
containing more information and/or higher quality, and suggests
that our sample represents the ‘best of the best’ with regards to our
variables of interest.
2.2. Coding
We constructed a coding instrument totaling 15 variables (see
Table 1). We selected variables to assess whether reports addressed
characteristics of the police-citizen encounter and characteristics of
the TASER exposure. We coded each variable for its presence or
absence in the document. To ensure the reliability of the coding
procedure, we recoded 10% of the data (18 cases) to assess level of
agreement. The intercoder reliability test resulted in a high agreement
rate (Cohen's k ¼ .84e1.0).
2.2.1. Incident characteristics
We selected 9 variables to examine the extent to which the
reports assessed situational characteristics of the police-citizen
encounter. First, we coded for suspect characteristics, including
2
Reports indicating that one or both of the TASER probes failed to make contact
with the body, or that the TASER device failed to shock the decedent were removed
from the data set.
N.E. Todak et al. / Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine 35 (2015) 4e8 5
the decedent's name, age, race/ethnicity, gender, height, and weight.
ME/Cs are also responsible for making determinations as to the
cause of death and manner of death. We coded for these two variables
as well. Further, we coded for the presence of an incident
summary. These write-ups are typically found in the police report
and provide information about the police-citizen encounter,
including the reason for police intervention, methods of force used,
and the etiology of events that resulted in the suspect's death.
2.2.2. Exposure characteristics
We also coded reports for information about the TASER exposure.
We selected these variables based on national autopsy standards
for other weapon-specific injuries. We coded for the duration
of exposure and the number of times the decedent was tased (times
tased). Also, modern TASER devices feature a Trilogy Log, which
provides a computerized record of every user action.24
In short, the
Trilogy Log indicates for how long and when the device was
deployed, calibration data, and a record of output. This information
can be uploaded to a computer via a USB cord, and electronically
delivered (e.g. via email) to the medical examiner's office. Output
from a Trilogy TASER log includes a table indicating sequence
number, date, time, duration, temperature, and remaining battery
life. We coded reports for the presence of this table (TASER log) and
also if the ME/C referenced that a Trilogy TASER log had been
available for review at the time of the autopsy (TASER log summary).
Finally, we coded for the presence or absence of a description of
TASER injuries. This variable was coded as “1” only if the ME/C
referred to a TASER or CED specifically in reference to one or more
injuries.3
3. Results
Table 2 reports the frequencies with which each of the 24
incident variables were included in reports. Generally speaking,
standard demographic information was almost always documented
in reports. The decedent's name (n ¼ 184), age (n ¼ 183), race
(n ¼ 182), gender (n ¼ 184), height (n ¼ 174), and weight (n ¼ 174)
were each included in most cases. Official autopsy determinations
were also included a majority of the time. Some cause of death
(COD) was determined in 97% (n ¼ 180) of reports. Within these 180
reports, 177 reports identified a COD, while 3 listed the COD as
“undetermined.” Four reports failed to mention any COD. Some
manner of death (MOD) was reported in 90% (n ¼ 166) of the autopsy
reports. Within these 166 reports, 145 identified an MOD,
while 21 listed the MOD as undetermined. Eighteen reports failed
to mention any MOD. Police report incident summaries were
included in 78% of reports (n ¼ 145). Although this constitutes a
majority of reports, it is significant that almost a quarter of autopsies
were finalized without the first-hand information generally
provided in a police report.
Characteristics of the TASER exposure were rarely included in
reports (see Table 3). Descriptions of TASER injuries were present in
70% (n ¼ 130) of the autopsies reviewed, despite that all individuals
in the sample had received exposure from a TASER device. Further,
the number of times the decedent was tased was only reported 35%
(n ¼ 66) of the time, and the duration of the TASER exposure only
12% (n ¼ 23) of the time. Actual printouts of TASER logs (which are
available for standard police issue TASER devices) were included in
only 1% (n ¼ 2) of examined reports, while an additional 5% (n ¼ 9)
indicated that one was made available to the ME/C.
4. Discussion
The TASER is a relatively new yet pervasive piece of the police
arsenal. In fact, use of the device is so widespread that it has been
characterized by police scholars as the preferred less-lethal weapon
for U.S. police.11
Research indicates the TASER provides both safe
and practical benefits both to police and citizens.11,12,15e17,25e28
Table 1
Variable names and descriptions.
Variables Descriptions Rationale
Name The decedent's name is present in the report. Incident characteristics
Age The decedent's numeric age is present in the report. Incident characteristics
Race/ethnicity The decedent's race or ethnicity is present in the report. Incident characteristics
Gender The decedent's gender is present in the report. Incident characteristics
Height The decedent's numeric height is present in the report. Incident characteristics
Weight The decedent's numeric weight is present in the report. Incident characteristics
Cause of death An official cause of death is present in the report and is labeled as such. Incident characteristics
Manner of death An official manner of death is present in the report and is labeled as such. Incident characteristics
Incident summary A written description of the police-citizen encounter resulting in the death is present in the report. TASER exposure
TASER log The report includes a Trilogy TASER log e a table with six columns indicating sequence number, date,
time, duration, temperature, and remaining battery life
TASER exposure
TASER log summary The report states a Trilogy TASER log was available to the ME/C. TASER exposure
Duration The report states how long the deployment lasted. This variable was also coded as “1” if the necessary
information to determine duration was present (e.g. “the decedent was exposed to three TASER shocks, for 5 s each”).
TASER exposure
Times tased The report states the number of TASER exposures sustained by the decedent. TASER exposure
Table 2
Incident characteristics (N ¼ 184).
Variable Frequency Percent
Name 184 100
Gender 184 100
Age 183 99.5
Race/ethnicity 182 99
Cause of death 180 97.8
Height 174 94.6
Weight 174 94.6
Manner of death 166 90.2
Incident narrative 145 78.8
3
Coding for this variable was intentionally restrictive. There is dramatic variability
in how ME/Cs document injuries. Some are vague, listing only that an
“injury” exists in a particular location, while others are specific, listing the size,
location, physical description, and instrument likely responsible for creating the
wound. The latter method proceeds in accordance with NAME autopsy standards,
which provide specific instructions for documenting injuries, categorized by
weapon and injury type.10
As such, this variable is coded as “1” only if TASER injuries
are reported in conjunction with these standards. Further, given that a large
portion of cases involved multiple forms of physical force, it was impossible for
coders to assess which “injuries” were caused by a TASER device, versus those
inflicted by hands, batons, knives, handcuffs, etc., if this was not explicitly stated.
The restrictive coding protocol thus provided a set of clear coding instructions to
eliminate variability in assessing whether a description of TASER injuries was
present.
N.E. Todak et al. / Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine 35 (2015) 4e86
However, despite the fact that a TASER has been used in 500 arrestrelated
death incidents in the United States,3e5
there are currently
no national standards for deaths involving TASER exposure. In an
effort to address this problem, we analyzed autopsy reports detailing
184 arrest-related deaths involving TASER exposure. Drawing
from existing literature and NAME national autopsy standards,
we first assessed 1) whether autopsy reports for TASER-proximate
deaths address situational characteristics of the police-citizen
encounter. Most importantly, we found autopsy reports were
missing the firsthand details of the fatal incident (i.e. a police report
summary) in one quarter of the cases. Next, we assessed 2) whether
the reports addressed characteristics of the TASER exposure. Key
here is our finding that the total duration of time the individual was
exposed to the TASER device was rarely included in the autopsy
reports, despite that TASER devices are equipped to provide this
information via a TASER log. These findings suggest three implications,
which are discussed below.
First, in 500 documented cases, a suspect has died in police
custody after receiving a TASER exposure in the United States.3e5
Research9
in this area has characterized the events as “complex,
dynamic encounters between suspects who were actively and
aggressively resisting police, and officers who were drawing deeply
into their arsenal of force options in an attempt to control them”
(pg. 102). In other words, police often used multiple forms of force
to arrest the individual before, during, and after the TASER was
deployed. The dynamic nature of these encounters has made it
difficult to assess the TASER's role, if any, in the death. In any event,
the police report can provide information otherwise unavailable to
the ME/C, including the reason for the interaction, officers' reports
of the suspect's behavior, officers' reports of the effectiveness of the
TASER device, the complete series of weapons deployed during the
encounter, and the amount of time that elapsed between the TASER
exposure and subsequent death. To accurately investigate and
formulate decisions regarding these forms of fatalities, it is understandably
important that ME/Cs obtain, document, and consider
the details from the police report. With that said, we analyzed
whether autopsy reports for TASER-proximate deaths included
these situational characteristics from a police report summary and
found 39 (21%) of the 184 reports did not include any summary of
the police-citizen encounter. Though most reports did include the
police report or a summary thereof, we argue here that incident
report summaries should always be included in the autopsy report
for all arrest related deaths, particularly for those complex cases
where a TASER device was used. In fact, for all deaths resulting from
complex police-citizen encounters, decisions regarding the cause
and manner of death should not be put forth without this
information.
Second, the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME)
provides national autopsy standards for most forms of death and
injury.10
However, there are currently no standards for cases
involving a conducted-electrical device (CED). Drawing on examples
from other weapon-specific cases (e.g. gunshot wounds and
stabbings), and some question as to the relative safety of longer
durations of exposure to TASER shock,29
we evaluated whether
autopsy reports for deaths involving TASER exposure described the
number of times the individual was tased and the duration of
exposure to electrical shock. We found reports did not commonly
report this information. Specifically, reports indicated the number
of times an individual was tased in only 35% of cases, and the total
duration of electrical exposure in 12% of cases. This finding is
especially noteworthy, given that this information is readily available
in TASER Trilogy logs, a feature of the standard law enforcement
issued X26, as well as the newer X2 model.24
Considered in
conjunction with incident narratives and a comprehensive biological
evaluation, these automated logs would provide the ME/C with
a more complete array of available data and facts surrounding the
TASER event. As it stands, however, it appears it is not standard
procedure to include this information in an autopsy examination.
Actual printouts of TASER logs were included in only 1% (n ¼ 2) of
examined reports, while an additional 5% (n ¼ 9) indicated that one
was made available to the ME/C.
Third, national autopsy standards instruct ME/Cs to document
and describe every injury. As such, we assessed whether ME/Cs
documented the number, location, and nature of injuries inflicted
by the TASER device. Although descriptions of TASER-related injuries
were present in a majority (70%) of the autopsies reviewed,
there are currently no explicit instructions for documenting these
injuries in national standards. Considering that use of the TASER
device by police has and continues to proliferate at a rapid pace,
developing national autopsy standards for documenting and evaluation
injuries from a CED would help clarify these complex events
to practitioners and researchers.
5. Conclusion
There is good reason to believe that TASER devices will only
become more integrated in the police use of force arsenal. With that
being said, it is understandable that TASER injuries will frequently
accompany the array of injuries presented to a medical examiner or
coroner during an autopsy examination. We hope that our research
stimulates the development and implementation of national
standards for autopsy examinations involving TASER exposure,
which would require police report summaries, injury descriptions,
and TASER logs be included in the evaluation and reports. We
further suggest more research into the complex, dynamic nature of
TASER-proximate arrest-related deaths be conducted, to guide
autopsy investigations in formulating accurate decisions in these
cases.
Conflict of interest
We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest
associated with this publication and there has been no significant
financial support for this work that could have influenced its
outcome.
Funding
None declared.
Ethical approval
None declared.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Michael White, Scott Decker and William
Terrill for their help in developing this manuscript, and several
anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments, some of which
vastly improved the quality of this manuscript and the professional
growth of these authors.
Table 3
Exposure characteristics (N ¼ 184).
Variable Frequency Percent
Injuries 130 70.7
Times tased 66 35.9
Duration 23 12.5
TASER log summary 9 4.9
TASER log 2 1.1
N.E. Todak et al. / Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine 35 (2015) 4e8 7
References
1. Tuttle S. TASER conducted electronic weapons (CEWs): field data and risk management.
Scottsdale (AZ): TASER International, Inc.; October 2013.
2. Terrill W, Paoline EA, Ingram JR. Final technical report draft: assessing police use
of force policy and outcomes. U.S. Department of Justice; May 2011. Document
No.: 237794.
3. Kroll MW, Lakkireddy DR, Stone JR, Luceri RM. TASER electronic control devices
and cardiac arrests: coincidental or causal? Circulation 2014;129(1):93e100.
4. Trimel S. Amnesty international urges stricter limits on police Taser use as U.S.
death toll reaches 500. Amnesty International; February 15, 2012.
5. Williams HE. Physiological attributes of arrest-related sudden deaths proximate to
the application of TASER electronic control devices: an evidence based study of the
theory of high-risk groups [dissertation]. San Marcos (TX): Texas State University;
2013.
6. Zipes DP. Sudden cardiac arrest and death following application of shocks from
a TASER electronic control device. Circulation 2012;125(20):2417e22.
7. Strote J, Range-Hutson H. Taser use in restraint-related deaths. Prehosp Emerg
Care 2006;10(4):447e50.
8. Swerdlow CD, Fishbein MC, Chaman L, Lakkireddy DR, Tchou P. Presenting
rhythm in sudden deaths temporally proximate to discharge of TASER conducted
electrical weapons. Acad Emerg Med 2009;16(8):726e39.
9. White MD, Ready JT, Riggs C, Dawes DM, Hinz A, Ho JD. An incident-level
profile of TASER device deployments in arrest-related deaths. Police Q
2013;16(1):85e112.
10. Peterson GF, Clark SC, National Association of Medical Examiners. Forensic
autopsy performance standards. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 2006;27(3):200e25.
11. Sousa W, Ready J, Ault M. The impact of TASERs on police use-of-force decisions:
findings from a randomized field-training experiment. J Exp Criminol
2010;6(1):35e55.
12. Eastman AL, Metzger JC, Pepe PE, Benitez FL, Decker J, Rinnert KJ, et al.
Conductive electrical devices: a prospective, population-based study of the
medical safety of law enforcement use. J Trauma Injury Infect Crit Care
2008;64(6):1567e72.
13. Hougland S, Mesloh C, Henych M. Use of force, civil litigation, and the taser:
one agency's experience. FBI Law Enforc Bull 2005;74(3):24e30.
14. Jenkinson E, Neeson C, Bleetman A. The relative risk of police use-of-force
options: evaluating the potential for deployment of electronic weaponry.
J Clin Forensic Med 2006;13(5):229e41.
15. Mesloh C, Heynch M, Hougland S, Thompson F. TASER and less lethal weapons:
an exploratory analysis. Law Enforc Exec Forum 2005;5(5):67e79.
16. Holder EH, Robinson LO, Laub JH. Study of deaths following electro muscular
disruption. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
National Institute of Justice; May 2011. Report No.: NCJ 233432.
17. White MD, Ready J. The TASER as a less lethal force alternative: findings on use
and effectiveness in a large metropolitan police agency. Police Q 2007;10(2):
170e91.
18. Amnesty International. Amnesty International's concerns about TASER use:
statement to the U.S. Justice department inquiry into deaths in custody. October
2007. London, UK.
19. Amnesty International. ‘Less than lethal’? the use of stun weapons in US law
enforcement. London (UK): Amnesty International Publications; 2008.
20. National Institute of Justice. Study of deaths following electro muscular disruption:
interim report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice; 2008.
21. Vilke GM, Chan TC. Less lethal technology: medical issues. Polic Int J Police Strat
Manag 2007;30(3):341e57.
22. Vilke GM, Chan TC, Sloane CM, Neuman T, Castillo EM, Kolkhorst F. The effect of
TASER on cardiac, respiratory, and metabolic physiology in human subjects. U.S.
Department of Justice; 2011.
23. TASER International Inc.. TASER handheld CEW product warnings, instructions,
and information: law enforcement. Scottsdale (AZ): TASER International Inc;
2013 Mar 1. Available from: http://www.taser.com/images/resources-and-
legal/product-warnings/downloads/law-enforcement-warnings.pdf.
24. TASER.com [Internet]. Scottsdale (AZ): TASER International Inc. Available from:
http://www.taser.com/ [updated 2015; cited 2015 Mar].
25. MacDonald JM, Kaminski RJ, Smith MR. The effect of less-lethal weapons on
injuries in police use-of-force events. Am J Public Health 2009;99(12):2268e74.
26. Smith MR, Kaminski RJ, Rojek J, Alpert GP, Mathis J. The impact of conducted
energy devices and other types of force and resistance on officer and suspect
injuries. Polic Int J Police Strat Manag 2007;30(3):423e46.
27. Taylor B, Woods DJ. Injuries to officers and suspects in police use-of-force
cases: a quasi- experimental evaluation. Police Q 2010;13(3):260e89.
28. White MD, Ready JT. The impact of the Taser on suspect resistance: identifying
predictors of effectiveness. Crime Delinq 2010;56(1):70e102.
29. Jauchem JR. Exposures to conducted electrical weapons (including TASER®
devices): how many and for how long are acceptable? J Forensic Sci 2014;6(1):
116e29.
N.E. Todak et al. / Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine 35 (2015) 4e88