Taser Lawsuit Filed Following South Carolina Death in 2006

|

A lawsuit was filed last week in Charleston, South Carolina, by the family of a man who was fatally shocked with a Taser in 2006. The complaint names Taser International, Inc., who manufactured the weapon, together with the local police department, the city and the county.

Tasers are weapons used by many law enforcement agencies throughout the United States in situations which do not necessarily call for the use of a traditional firearm.

The device uses Electro-Muscular Disruption technology to incapacitate neuromuscular function, allowing police to subdue people who pose a threat, who are fleeing or who are potentially dangerous.

Hair-Dye-Cancer-Lawsuits
Hair-Dye-Cancer-Lawsuits

In October 2006, North Charleston police used a Taser to subdue Kip Darrell Black, a mentally ill 38 year old man. Police officers used their Taser when they encountered Black acting erratically after using cocaine.

Although only about 1 to 2 jolts are generally necessary to subdue an individual, police officers delivered up to 10 Taser jolts on Black. The family claims that his subsequent death at a local hospital was caused by the Taser use.

The Taser lawsuit alleges that the officers knew or should have known that the excessive use of the weapon might result in death. It also contains product liability counts against Taser International, Inc. for manufacturing and selling the dangerous weapon.

There are a number of lawsuits involving Tasers which have been filed throughout the United States alleging severe and fatal injuries after the weapon was used. Taser International, Inc. has been named in many of these lawsuits, but has generally been successful in defending themselves in the product liability lawsuits.

Amnesty International has documented over 245 deaths that occurred after use of a Taser.


3 Comments


  1. Gina

    The city of North Charleston is located in South Carolina….

    CORRECTION NOTICE: An error in the original article has been corrected, reflecting that this Taser lawsuit was filed in South Carolina, not North Carolina.


  2. Todd

    Your first paragraph assumes liability from the start. For a legal web site this seems a very poor. “Fatally shocked” assumes it was the TASER from the onset. You then contradict more than explain later in the article that the man died at the hospital. It is pretty well known that someone electrocuted dies instantly, not later. Taser has also lost only 1 lawsuit on liability and all legal experts think that will be overturned. Your comment on “generally successful” seems to show a bias also. What is the position of your web site, legal or judgment of cases prior to all the facts coming out? Seems anyone looking for legal advice might better chose another site that has a better handle on facts and legality of their comments.


  3. Kelly

    I concur with Todd’s assessment that your story is biased from the start. This man was acting erratically after ingesting cocaine–a drug known for causing heart failure in some people. The man was also 38 years old and, depending on his level of health and his length of drug abuse, could have dropped dead at any minute. Does anyone remember Len Bias and Don Rogers? They were 22 and 23-years-old respectively. Cocaine killed them both and, go figure, no Tasers were involved.


Share Your Comments

This field is hidden when viewing the form
I authorize the above comments be posted on this page
Post Comment
Weekly Digest Opt-In

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

MORE TOP STORIES

As new BioZorb lawsuits continue to be filed over complications with the recalled breast tissue markers, lawyers indicate they are on track for the first of four test cases to go before a jury in September 2025.
Women pursuing Depo-Provera meningioma lawsuits will have to provide documentary proof of their diagnosis and the versions of the birth control shot they received within 120 days of filing their case.
An Indiana woman has filed a Cartiva SCI implant lawsuit, indicating that the toe implant failed due to a defective design, resulting in the need for revision surgery and recommendations to permanently fuse her big toe.