Taser Loses First Product Liability Case

This one's a little closer to home than some, which doesn't make it more important than the Guantanamo and terrorism cases. But does at least indicate that there might someday be some decent legal doctrine prohibiting police officers from torturing American citizens whenever they want to coerce them into instant compliance:

Taser International Inc., the largest stun-gun maker, lost a $6.2 million jury verdict over the death of a California man who died after police shot him multiple times with the weapon. The defeat is the first for Taser in a product- liability claim.

A San Jose, California, jury yesterday said Taser had failed to warn police in Salinas, California, that prolonged exposure to electric shock from the device could cause a risk of cardiac arrest. The jury awarded $1 million in compensatory damages and $5.2 million in punitive damages to the estate of Robert Heston, 40, and his parents. The jury cleared the police officers of any liability.

His parents sued Taser, alleging failure to warn of the dangers of the weapon, and Salinas police officers, claiming excessive force. The jury “exonerated the police because they said the police didn’t know repeated exposures could kill someone,” Burton said.

I've written a ton on tasers and for those who don't read this blog often, let me just issue the standard disclaimer that I understand that the police have hard jobs and that there are times when a taser can be a useful alternative to deadly force. These product liability cases like that mentioned above deal with the physical dangers that tasering presents to people who may have health conditions that make a taser deadly or suffer from repeated tasering.