Buckdog

Doc Taser should have been prevented from testifying. Swerdlow is a tainted witness. This guy will testify for any company willing to pay him money: see - http://www.drug-injury.com/druginjurycom/2009/02/medtronic-sprint-fidelis-study-finds-more-failure-of-heart-device---by-barry-meier-nyt-february-24-2009--a-widely-used-h.html


From his profile (see: http://www.cvmg.com/Physicians.aspx?ID=15) it says:

"Dr. Swerdlow lives with his wife Linda and two sons, Mark and Michael. For recreation, he does yoga, hikes in the Santa Monica Mountains, swims, builds models with his sons, and listens to alternative rock and vintage Grateful Dead."

Maybe counsel should have asked him if he would want one of his sons to be tasered 5 times while he was doing yoga to Garcia?

This is a real problem where Taser Corp is concerned. Much of the research into the effects of Tasers is funded by the company. There are few independent studies and Taser would like to keep it that way and continue to use as experts people who have connections to the company and experts who cite company sponsored research.
People expect expert testimony to be unbiased and unconnected to the company that manufactures Tasers but this is rarely the case.

Anything marked Taser is automatically tainted and I'm not talking just about the product.

Anything coming from them is about as welcome as poison ivy at a picnic.

Whatever happened to real police work--feet on the beat--and use of psychology and investigative techniques? Have the law enforcers
become so complacent and falsely reliant on a suspect technology that they've gotten addicted to it?

If people can get addicted to cell phones and Blackberries then maybe they can get complacent and addicted to the Taser and the lazy boy way of policing.

Can we afford this sort of thing?