12 ms·

‘Excited delirium’, used by police to justify brutality, is junk science

130 points by 1as 6y ago

ponker 6y ago
I hope that the people who want to stop police from using this as a defense are also willing to stop murderers from using it when they are begging to not get life without parole.
- DaveFr 6y ago
  Maybe, maybe not, but surely we can recognize the difference between trained, sworn, gov't-empowered law enforcement professionals and murderers, right?
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > but surely we can recognize the difference between trained, sworn, gov't-empowered law enforcement professionals and murderers, right? Those are overlapping sets.
- crooked-v 6y ago
  What are you even talking about?
  - dang 6y ago
    Please don't break the site guidelines yourself, even when replying to comment that is bad or you feel is bad. That only makes the thread even worse.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    Presumably a reference to the "temporary insanity" defenses used by criminal defendants to try to evade responsibility (without much success in general). The asymmetry obviously being that arguing you shouldn't be responsible for what happens when the pharmacy runs out of your anti-psychotic medication is very different then arguing that you shouldn't be responsible for beating down some distressed mentally ill civilian when the pharmacy runs out of their anti-psychotic medication.
ve55 6y ago
Excited delirium is a very well-known and documented phenomenon, primarily in individuals that are on excessive doses of stimulants: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Cause However, nothing about its existence implies anything about police brutality. For some reason the article thinks it needs to deny the existence of something that obviously exists in order to argue against police brutality. This is a strange logical fallacy to commit, because you can easily argue brutality is bad regardless of what substances an individual is on. Responding to child comments, it's possible that this condition is not unique enough to require its own name and label. But in that case, one can simply refer to the effects of doses of the given stimulants themselves, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effect.... Please note I'm not making any claim that brutality is okay or ever justified, just that there obviously does exist strong psychological and physical conditions that occur when an individual is on doses of very strong stimulants.
- triceratops 6y ago
  From the Wikipedia article you linked: "The condition is not recognized by the American Psychiatric Association, American Medical Association or the World Health Organization." It's under the section titled "Controversy_related_to_policing_techniques".[1] Just because something is well-known and documented doesn't mean it's recognized as a medical or psychological condition. Sometimes it can be that medicine hasn't caught up, and sometimes it's BS. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Controversy_related_to_policing_techniques https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Controversy_r...
  - ve55 6y ago
    Yes, it is controversial for being used as a justification for police brutality and having been involved in a lot of bad incidents. But the existence of it is not controversial, as it is basically a subset of affects of substances such as methamphetamine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effect.... Does it need its own specific name and label? perhaps not, and that is part of why some organizations have not officially recognized it
rimjongun 6y ago
One time when I lived in Hawaii, I had snuck into an apartment’s hot tub with a girl. When leaving, I saw this massive tree of a Hawaiian man, and I’m 6’3”, so this guy was huge. This man was screaming and hitting his wife, who was trying to run away. I yelled out to distract him so she could get away. Before I could even comprehend it, he had run across the street and was right in front of me. I was a very well trained martial artist at the time and I was scared for my life, this guy was clearly high or crazy. I jumped on a ledge where he couldn’t reach me, and he ran off after the wife. I pounded on people’s doors until the cops came and saw them try to talk him down. Three cops tased him before he went down, but then he pulled them out, stood up, and punched the window out of a nearby jeep. He was eventually subdued. A cop later told me that this was fairly common in that area, because of PCP use. I’m amazed this guy came out of it alive because of how easily he shrugged off tasers.
oxygenmolds 6y ago
How long are we going to keep ignoring the fact that statistics do not show any racial bias in police killings, and if anything they show bias against white perpetrators rather than black?
- at_a_remove 6y ago
  I mean, if you have citations for these, trot them out.
  - throwaway29102 6y ago
    For someone with all the answers, he’s awfully quiet...
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    The police kill more white people in absolute terms than black people. But white people are a larger percentage of the population, so it's still disproportionately black people. But the disproportionality goes the other way if you account for the difference in violent crime rates. Then someone could argue that the difference in violent crime rates is itself a result of racism, and someone else could argue that that is a separate question from whether the police, rather than e.g. high school guidance counselors (or just factors like parental income), are the root cause of the disparity. By this point there is enough space between the error bars that each side can declare victory because the other side hasn't been able to prove that their position isn't within them, even though nothing has really been decided and the level of data collection and detailed analysis required to get there is more work than anybody is ever actually willing to do.
    - mistermann 6y ago
      It would be nice to see one well done summary analysis of all the data that is available, including inclusion of as many as possible of reasonable "...but on the other hand..." caveats as possible. I have not once encountered a single article that even attempts this, it seems everything is written from a biased perspective.
Simulacra 6y ago
I wouldn't call it junk science. I am not a scientist but I do know of times I've gotten so emotional (and really, pick an emotion here) that I've lost myself. IMO there is a breakpoint for most people when we either get too depressed, or too manic, to fully appreciate and control our behavior. With the fight or flight response kicking in, I think we can find ample evidence of people under extreme stress or duress just...losing themselves and going on autopilot.
- mikkergp 6y ago
  The philosophy of this is interesting. As we start to understand more about genetics and psychology, we'll probably be able to more closely pinpoint why people do what they do. But that doesn't mean people shouldn't be held accountable. (Affluenza)[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza] may be a real "condition"? that impacts people, but even if we eventually discover the genetic and neurological reasons behind it, it still shouldn't excuse behavior. I've had similar experiences where I "lose control" because I'm angry, or excited, or "emotional", but I think it's my responsibility to work to make that better. I don't know what this means in terms of consequences, but I know it shouldn't mean letting cops off the hook for brutality.
- gowld 6y ago
  One detail being sort of true doesn't make the overall body of work non-junk.
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
Might save everyone some time with a generic template: ________, used by police to justify ________, is junk science.
refurb 6y ago
Science doesn’t have a great explanation for everything, but that doesn’t make it junk science. Suffice to say it’s not uncommon for people to die suddenly when they encounter stressful situations, even not related to police interactions. I remember reading about a case where a person fell through the ice on a lake, the water never going over his head. He was pulled out immediately, but died of cardiac arrest. What happened? Not unusual to label it vasovagal syncope that resulted in sudden death. Is it a great explanation? No, but it’s the best we have. Similar to excited delirium, we have folks who exhibit similar symptoms and some of them die. Do we know exactly why? Not always, but it doesn’t make “excites delirium” junk science. Not excusing police brutality at all, but it shouldn’t be surprising some of these sudden deaths happen in police interactions too, especially when you’ve got drugs involved and/or mental illness.
- crooked-v 6y ago
  > some of these sudden deaths https://www.floridatoday.com/in-depth/news/2019/10/24/excited-delirium-custody-deaths-gregory-edwards-melbourne-taser/2374304001/ https://www.floridatoday.com/in-depth/news/2019/10/24/excite... > For decades, critics of using "excited delirium" as a cause of death have expressed concern that the term appears almost exclusively on medical reports for deaths in custody or that otherwise involve law enforcement. > About two-thirds of the cases reviewed by FLORIDA TODAY fit that bill. A majority of those cases are complicated by the presence of illegal stimulant drugs like cocaine or methamphetamine. But in those deaths where there was no drug use and the toxicology came back negative, the only common denominator in virtually every case was the involvement of law enforcement, such as in the case of Gregory Lloyd Edwards.
- newacct583 6y ago
  > Science doesn’t have a great explanation for everything, but that doesn’t make it junk science. The issue here is that some people (the police) are applying this idea as if it was a great explanation. That's what makes it junk science.
  - refurb 6y ago
    No doubt cops use excessive for in some cases and blame it on excited delirium. I guess my point is - it’s probably true in some cases.
cool_dude85 6y ago
Shame on the University of Miami, which has peddled this cop-acquitting bullshit for years.
cwkoss 6y ago
I heard someone claim that Excited Delirium idea is being spread by Axon (Taser company) lobbyists as a way of justifying the deaths of victims of improper taser use. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7622314 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=762231... "But according to civil-liberties groups and legal filings, Taser may have financial reasons to support — and even encourage — the use of the excited delirium diagnosis. Take the case of Frederick Williams. On a grainy video, Williams is screaming, 'Don't kill me! I have a family to support. I've calmed down!" as several officers carry him into the Gwinnett County Detention Center in a suburb of Atlanta. One officer takes out his Taser and fires it directly onto Williams' chest. The officer yells, "Relax! Stop resisting!" But the shock keeps jerking Williams' chest upward. As several officers hold Williams down, he is stunned six more times. A few minutes later, the officers realize Williams is not breathing. Williams died a few hours later. Williams' family is now suing the county and Taser International. The company has made it clear in proceedings so far that it intends to argue Williams died of excited delirium — not because of the Taser or excessive force. The medical examiner could not determine the exact cause of death."
- GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
  Also, tasers regularly kill people with no underlying health conditions, typically the autopsy will say "heart issue due to drug use" or something along those lines. Whenever there's a taser involved death, Axon has a "response team" which works with police to ensure "correct" death classification. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taser-deaths-insight/as-death-toll-keeps-rising-u-s-communities-start-rethinking-taser-use-idUSKCN1PT0YT https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taser-deaths-insight/...
mzs 6y ago
It also works in practice almost half the time in states that allow the defense to reduce a conviction from murder to manslaughter, and not only for police, cause juries are made up of humans.
_Nat_ 6y ago
If you want to say someone's toe hurts because they stubbed it, you can refer to it as "stubbed toe pain". Even if "stubbed toe pain" isn't an official diagnosis in some health organizations, that doesn't mean it's junk science. I don't get why the article's attacking the term "excited delirium" in the first place, though. I mean, do the authors think that the correctness of police-brutality hinges on whether or not there's such a thing as "excited delirium"? Do the authors think that, if there's such a thing as "excited delirium", it'd justify police-brutality?
- in_cahoots 6y ago
  The question isn’t whether the authors think that, it’s whether the police think that. If you thought a suspect had superhuman strength and was impervious to pain, wouldn’t you use more lethal means to control them?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - _Nat_ 6y ago
    Did you read the article as critiquing the belief that some suspects have superhuman strength and imperviousness to pain? I mean, I Google'd "drug-induced strength". Among the first few hits were [this video][1] and [this article][2], which seem like reasonable evidence of those two symptoms existing together. The article's logic was disjointed, but I read it as primarily focusing on terminology. If it was instead an argument against the existence of those symptoms, that'd be a tad confusing given stuff like the YouTube video. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6FnGeYUOE&t=24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6FnGeYUOE&t=24 [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/16/the-new-drug-that-causes-users-to-rip-off-their-clothes-and-attack-with-super-human-strength/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/1...

130 points by 1as 6y ago

I hope that the people who want to stop police from using this as a defense are also willing to stop murderers from using it when they are begging to not get life without parole.

DaveFr 6y ago
Maybe, maybe not, but surely we can recognize the difference between trained, sworn, gov't-empowered law enforcement professionals and murderers, right?
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > but surely we can recognize the difference between trained, sworn, gov't-empowered law enforcement professionals and murderers, right? Those are overlapping sets.
crooked-v 6y ago
What are you even talking about?
- dang 6y ago
  Please don't break the site guidelines yourself, even when replying to comment that is bad or you feel is bad. That only makes the thread even worse.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  Presumably a reference to the "temporary insanity" defenses used by criminal defendants to try to evade responsibility (without much success in general). The asymmetry obviously being that arguing you shouldn't be responsible for what happens when the pharmacy runs out of your anti-psychotic medication is very different then arguing that you shouldn't be responsible for beating down some distressed mentally ill civilian when the pharmacy runs out of their anti-psychotic medication.

ve55 6y ago

Excited delirium is a very well-known and documented phenomenon, primarily in individuals that are on excessive doses of stimulants: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Cause However, nothing about its existence implies anything about police brutality. For some reason the article thinks it needs to deny the existence of something that obviously exists in order to argue against police brutality. This is a strange logical fallacy to commit, because you can easily argue brutality is bad regardless of what substances an individual is on. Responding to child comments, it's possible that this condition is not unique enough to require its own name and label. But in that case, one can simply refer to the effects of doses of the given stimulants themselves, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effect.... Please note I'm not making any claim that brutality is okay or ever justified, just that there obviously does exist strong psychological and physical conditions that occur when an individual is on doses of very strong stimulants.

triceratops 6y ago
From the Wikipedia article you linked: "The condition is not recognized by the American Psychiatric Association, American Medical Association or the World Health Organization." It's under the section titled "Controversy_related_to_policing_techniques".[1] Just because something is well-known and documented doesn't mean it's recognized as a medical or psychological condition. Sometimes it can be that medicine hasn't caught up, and sometimes it's BS. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Controversy_related_to_policing_techniques https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excited_delirium#Controversy_r...
- ve55 6y ago
  Yes, it is controversial for being used as a justification for police brutality and having been involved in a lot of bad incidents. But the existence of it is not controversial, as it is basically a subset of affects of substances such as methamphetamine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effects https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Adverse_effect.... Does it need its own specific name and label? perhaps not, and that is part of why some organizations have not officially recognized it

rimjongun 6y ago

One time when I lived in Hawaii, I had snuck into an apartment’s hot tub with a girl. When leaving, I saw this massive tree of a Hawaiian man, and I’m 6’3”, so this guy was huge. This man was screaming and hitting his wife, who was trying to run away. I yelled out to distract him so she could get away. Before I could even comprehend it, he had run across the street and was right in front of me. I was a very well trained martial artist at the time and I was scared for my life, this guy was clearly high or crazy. I jumped on a ledge where he couldn’t reach me, and he ran off after the wife. I pounded on people’s doors until the cops came and saw them try to talk him down. Three cops tased him before he went down, but then he pulled them out, stood up, and punched the window out of a nearby jeep. He was eventually subdued. A cop later told me that this was fairly common in that area, because of PCP use. I’m amazed this guy came out of it alive because of how easily he shrugged off tasers.

oxygenmolds 6y ago

How long are we going to keep ignoring the fact that statistics do not show any racial bias in police killings, and if anything they show bias against white perpetrators rather than black?

at_a_remove 6y ago
I mean, if you have citations for these, trot them out.
- throwaway29102 6y ago
  For someone with all the answers, he’s awfully quiet...
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  The police kill more white people in absolute terms than black people. But white people are a larger percentage of the population, so it's still disproportionately black people. But the disproportionality goes the other way if you account for the difference in violent crime rates. Then someone could argue that the difference in violent crime rates is itself a result of racism, and someone else could argue that that is a separate question from whether the police, rather than e.g. high school guidance counselors (or just factors like parental income), are the root cause of the disparity. By this point there is enough space between the error bars that each side can declare victory because the other side hasn't been able to prove that their position isn't within them, even though nothing has really been decided and the level of data collection and detailed analysis required to get there is more work than anybody is ever actually willing to do.
  - mistermann 6y ago
    It would be nice to see one well done summary analysis of all the data that is available, including inclusion of as many as possible of reasonable "...but on the other hand..." caveats as possible. I have not once encountered a single article that even attempts this, it seems everything is written from a biased perspective.

Simulacra 6y ago

I wouldn't call it junk science. I am not a scientist but I do know of times I've gotten so emotional (and really, pick an emotion here) that I've lost myself. IMO there is a breakpoint for most people when we either get too depressed, or too manic, to fully appreciate and control our behavior. With the fight or flight response kicking in, I think we can find ample evidence of people under extreme stress or duress just...losing themselves and going on autopilot.

mikkergp 6y ago
The philosophy of this is interesting. As we start to understand more about genetics and psychology, we'll probably be able to more closely pinpoint why people do what they do. But that doesn't mean people shouldn't be held accountable. (Affluenza)[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluenza] may be a real "condition"? that impacts people, but even if we eventually discover the genetic and neurological reasons behind it, it still shouldn't excuse behavior. I've had similar experiences where I "lose control" because I'm angry, or excited, or "emotional", but I think it's my responsibility to work to make that better. I don't know what this means in terms of consequences, but I know it shouldn't mean letting cops off the hook for brutality.
gowld 6y ago
One detail being sort of true doesn't make the overall body of work non-junk.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

Might save everyone some time with a generic template: ________, used by police to justify ________, is junk science.

refurb 6y ago

Science doesn’t have a great explanation for everything, but that doesn’t make it junk science. Suffice to say it’s not uncommon for people to die suddenly when they encounter stressful situations, even not related to police interactions. I remember reading about a case where a person fell through the ice on a lake, the water never going over his head. He was pulled out immediately, but died of cardiac arrest. What happened? Not unusual to label it vasovagal syncope that resulted in sudden death. Is it a great explanation? No, but it’s the best we have. Similar to excited delirium, we have folks who exhibit similar symptoms and some of them die. Do we know exactly why? Not always, but it doesn’t make “excites delirium” junk science. Not excusing police brutality at all, but it shouldn’t be surprising some of these sudden deaths happen in police interactions too, especially when you’ve got drugs involved and/or mental illness.

crooked-v 6y ago
> some of these sudden deaths https://www.floridatoday.com/in-depth/news/2019/10/24/excited-delirium-custody-deaths-gregory-edwards-melbourne-taser/2374304001/ https://www.floridatoday.com/in-depth/news/2019/10/24/excite... > For decades, critics of using "excited delirium" as a cause of death have expressed concern that the term appears almost exclusively on medical reports for deaths in custody or that otherwise involve law enforcement. > About two-thirds of the cases reviewed by FLORIDA TODAY fit that bill. A majority of those cases are complicated by the presence of illegal stimulant drugs like cocaine or methamphetamine. But in those deaths where there was no drug use and the toxicology came back negative, the only common denominator in virtually every case was the involvement of law enforcement, such as in the case of Gregory Lloyd Edwards.
newacct583 6y ago
> Science doesn’t have a great explanation for everything, but that doesn’t make it junk science. The issue here is that some people (the police) are applying this idea as if it was a great explanation. That's what makes it junk science.
- refurb 6y ago
  No doubt cops use excessive for in some cases and blame it on excited delirium. I guess my point is - it’s probably true in some cases.

cool_dude85 6y ago

Shame on the University of Miami, which has peddled this cop-acquitting bullshit for years.

cwkoss 6y ago

I heard someone claim that Excited Delirium idea is being spread by Axon (Taser company) lobbyists as a way of justifying the deaths of victims of improper taser use. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7622314 https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=762231... "But according to civil-liberties groups and legal filings, Taser may have financial reasons to support — and even encourage — the use of the excited delirium diagnosis. Take the case of Frederick Williams. On a grainy video, Williams is screaming, 'Don't kill me! I have a family to support. I've calmed down!" as several officers carry him into the Gwinnett County Detention Center in a suburb of Atlanta. One officer takes out his Taser and fires it directly onto Williams' chest. The officer yells, "Relax! Stop resisting!" But the shock keeps jerking Williams' chest upward. As several officers hold Williams down, he is stunned six more times. A few minutes later, the officers realize Williams is not breathing. Williams died a few hours later. Williams' family is now suing the county and Taser International. The company has made it clear in proceedings so far that it intends to argue Williams died of excited delirium — not because of the Taser or excessive force. The medical examiner could not determine the exact cause of death."

GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
Also, tasers regularly kill people with no underlying health conditions, typically the autopsy will say "heart issue due to drug use" or something along those lines. Whenever there's a taser involved death, Axon has a "response team" which works with police to ensure "correct" death classification. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taser-deaths-insight/as-death-toll-keeps-rising-u-s-communities-start-rethinking-taser-use-idUSKCN1PT0YT https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-taser-deaths-insight/...

mzs 6y ago

It also works in practice almost half the time in states that allow the defense to reduce a conviction from murder to manslaughter, and not only for police, cause juries are made up of humans.

_Nat_ 6y ago

If you want to say someone's toe hurts because they stubbed it, you can refer to it as "stubbed toe pain". Even if "stubbed toe pain" isn't an official diagnosis in some health organizations, that doesn't mean it's junk science. I don't get why the article's attacking the term "excited delirium" in the first place, though. I mean, do the authors think that the correctness of police-brutality hinges on whether or not there's such a thing as "excited delirium"? Do the authors think that, if there's such a thing as "excited delirium", it'd justify police-brutality?

in_cahoots 6y ago
The question isn’t whether the authors think that, it’s whether the police think that. If you thought a suspect had superhuman strength and was impervious to pain, wouldn’t you use more lethal means to control them?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- _Nat_ 6y ago
  Did you read the article as critiquing the belief that some suspects have superhuman strength and imperviousness to pain? I mean, I Google'd "drug-induced strength". Among the first few hits were [this video][1] and [this article][2], which seem like reasonable evidence of those two symptoms existing together. The article's logic was disjointed, but I read it as primarily focusing on terminology. If it was instead an argument against the existence of those symptoms, that'd be a tad confusing given stuff like the YouTube video. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6FnGeYUOE&t=24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6FnGeYUOE&t=24 [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/16/the-new-drug-that-causes-users-to-rip-off-their-clothes-and-attack-with-super-human-strength/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/1...