Speaker 1: Genocide ship. Okay, fuck um Sophie helped me out here.
Speaker 1: I was just shouting genocide. That's not a good way
Speaker 1: to open a podcast. Um No, that's basically the same
Speaker 1: as shouting genocide. Um. This is Behind the Bastards in
Speaker 1: the podcast not once been introduced like an actual professional.
Speaker 1: One time you did it like so proci But you
Speaker 1: were doing a bit. Oh, I was doing a bit.
Speaker 1: That must have been the ascid episode. I've forgotten which
Speaker 1: episode was the won't tell me? Will tell me your series?
Speaker 1: Of Which episode do you think Robert was fully on
Speaker 1: acid for when we recorded? It's one of the older episodes. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, and if you're really really Behind the Bastards
Speaker 1: fan trying to figure out which one I was just
Speaker 1: fucking blazed on two c I for. But that's a
Speaker 1: story for another day. This is Behind the Bastards podcast,
Speaker 1: worst people all the history. Tell you all about him?
Speaker 1: My guest today, Mr Ben Bolan, Ben, how are you doing?
Speaker 1: I'm so excited, you know, guys, it's it's it's a
Speaker 1: wild time. I snuck into this office where I'm sitting
Speaker 1: in the darkness at turn Off Video because wifi' is weird,
Speaker 1: because everything is kind of terrible in general. Uh, but uh,
Speaker 1: you know, it's a it's a bright light, uh, to
Speaker 1: to be together with you guys today. I wanted to
Speaker 1: tell you I was talking Robert was Sophie earlier. I
Speaker 1: really enjoyed the episode you guys did on the Protocols
Speaker 1: of the Elders of Zion. I thought that was a
Speaker 1: protocol stand. I'm really sad that that doesn't have his
Speaker 1: video on because I would have loved seen your face too.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, because I thought it was stuffed people.
Speaker 1: UM need to know about the genesis or the evolution
Speaker 1: of that kind of stuff and just how dangerous it is.
Speaker 1: So I wanted to just shout out that episode in particular. Um,
Speaker 1: and I do wish I had I wish I had
Speaker 1: the video on. I think all three of us are
Speaker 1: far flung across the country right now, but it's really
Speaker 1: great to see you guys scattered to the winds. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's great to kind of see you and your Mark
Speaker 1: Ruffalo icon. Yeah, Ben, this is actually speaking of the
Speaker 1: Protocols of the Elders of Zion. This has been a
Speaker 1: great week for genocide, or I should say this has
Speaker 1: been a great week for recognizing historical genocides media. Yeah,
Speaker 1: well what what where? This has nothing to do with
Speaker 1: the episode, but I think it's nothing pretty rad. Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: recognized for the was the first American president last week
Speaker 1: to recognize the genocide of the Armenians that started in
Speaker 1: nineteen fifteen and hasn't really ended by a lot of accounts, um,
Speaker 1: which no other president had the had the cojones to
Speaker 1: do up until now. And the best thing that well,
Speaker 1: not the best thing about it, but a rad thing
Speaker 1: about it, is that urda One, the dictator of Turkey,
Speaker 1: um shot back at the United States by threatening to
Speaker 1: recognize the genocide of the Native Americans that the US committed.
Speaker 1: And so we're now in this it's like Cold war
Speaker 1: nuclear brinksmanship, but with the recognition of historic crimes against humanity.
Speaker 1: And I'm yeah, yeah, let's keep recognizing genocides. Yeah, like, hey,
Speaker 1: watch out, buddy. I might also start telling the truth
Speaker 1: to school children. Yeah, I'll talk about all the horrible things.
Speaker 1: You're cut good, let's throw be in here, fuck it,
Speaker 1: let's recognize all the genocides. Um. So yeah, this is
Speaker 1: actually one of those weird times where like stupid political
Speaker 1: dick measuring is seeming seems to be objectively Pause. Now
Speaker 1: everybody's talking about different genocides committed by imperial powers, which
Speaker 1: I'm supportive of, so good, good speaking of genocide, Ben, Wow,
Speaker 1: you can make a case that American policing has a
Speaker 1: lot in common with different genocidal regimes throughout history, namely
Speaker 1: in the use of state power to oppress specific racial
Speaker 1: and religious groups. M m m m. That's kind of
Speaker 1: what we're talking about. Not not not quite, but we're
Speaker 1: talking about Have you ever heard of the term excited delirium? Ben,
Speaker 1: I have actually heard of the term excited delirium. Though,
Speaker 1: I am going to be honest with you, Robert Sylphe,
Speaker 1: I am not caught up with the textbook definition there.
Speaker 1: What are we talking so excited delirium? In short, just
Speaker 1: to introduce the concept is a lot of doctors would
Speaker 1: argue is a faked disease invented by police to justify murder.
Speaker 1: And that's what we're talking about today. Now the story
Speaker 1: gets much more complicated and shady than that. This is
Speaker 1: a wheel really gonna piss you off? Um, But I
Speaker 1: think I should start um with kind of the most
Speaker 1: recent touch point for the term excited delirium, which was
Speaker 1: the killing of George Floyd by now convicted murderer Derek
Speaker 1: Chauvin UM, formerly a police officer. When Derek Chauvin put
Speaker 1: his knee in his entire body weight on George Floyd's
Speaker 1: neck for like eight minutes or so, uh, the other
Speaker 1: cops present with him knew that something was wrong. One officer,
Speaker 1: a fellow named Lane, asked Chauvin should we roll him
Speaker 1: on his side. Chauvin declined, saying no, staying put where
Speaker 1: we got him. Officer Lane then said, I am worried
Speaker 1: about excited delirium or whatever. Now, first off, that's a
Speaker 1: very casual or whatever or whatever. Right, yes, whatever. Whenever
Speaker 1: somebody adds or whatever at the end of a sentence,
Speaker 1: that means they don't care. That's like when somebody adds
Speaker 1: for you at the end of a compliment that means
Speaker 1: they don't like you. Yeah, it's it's Can you imagine
Speaker 1: like going into the doctor and being like, yeah, your
Speaker 1: kidneys are probably shutting down or whatever, like you you
Speaker 1: would you would not feel great about that doctor. Yeah. Um.
Speaker 1: So the way he used it, excited delirium may kind
Speaker 1: of seem like a nonsense term to you, even if
Speaker 1: you are a medical professional. I know we have a
Speaker 1: number listening, because most doctors do not recognize excited delirium
Speaker 1: as a thing. If you don't know the history I'm
Speaker 1: about to go over today, that term probably flew over
Speaker 1: your head. Is just a piece of cop jargon. Um,
Speaker 1: someone who isn't a doctor trying to diagnose a man
Speaker 1: struggling to breathe. But the reality of what that term
Speaker 1: means and how it's used is actually much more sinister
Speaker 1: than that. You might be aware that the initial press
Speaker 1: release the Minneapolis Police sent out after Floyd's death was
Speaker 1: man dies after medical incident during police interaction, um, which
Speaker 1: is yeah, medical and sid it. I mean technically that's
Speaker 1: like you shoot somewhat to death and you're like, well,
Speaker 1: he had a medical incident as a result of the
Speaker 1: lack of blood in his body, and it's like, that's
Speaker 1: not inaccurate, but let's tell THEO. But anyway, you're probably
Speaker 1: aware that Chauvin's defense attorney, in a constellation of right
Speaker 1: wing bad faith actors, blamed Mr. Floyd's death on a
Speaker 1: drug overdose. What you might not be aware of is
Speaker 1: that the term excited delirium is more or less an
Speaker 1: invented condition created mostly by a mixture of cops and
Speaker 1: the Axon Corporation who make tasers in order to blame
Speaker 1: mostly black men murdered by the police for their own deaths.
Speaker 1: The whole story of this is bug fuck and it
Speaker 1: will make you want to do things that put the
Speaker 1: burning of the Third Precinct to shame. Um. The most
Speaker 1: immediate precursor to excited delirium, the modern term was something
Speaker 1: called Bell's mania, and Bell's mania was first described in
Speaker 1: eighteen forty nine by Dr Luther beav Luther V. Bell
Speaker 1: in a publication with the no ship real name, The
Speaker 1: American Journal of Insanity. I mean, do the page numbers
Speaker 1: go sequentially or like, how how weird are they getting
Speaker 1: with it? You know? And then I guess it's a
Speaker 1: pretty boring journal. I kind of want to put out
Speaker 1: a journal that just cut it, that's just titled You're
Speaker 1: not gonna believe this fucking ship just weird physics and
Speaker 1: deep sea fish wild right, Yes, yes, And there's like
Speaker 1: always one article about poop, just so we can keep
Speaker 1: it on the nose enough. So Luther Bell published an
Speaker 1: article in the American Journal of Insanity based on his
Speaker 1: work at the psychiatric ward at the Clean Hospital in Boston.
Speaker 1: He observed forty patients admitted with what he called fever
Speaker 1: in delirium, and noted that many of them went from
Speaker 1: experiencing hallucinations, agitation, and fever to death within several weeks
Speaker 1: of admission. Now Bell was taking notes on a very
Speaker 1: real phenomenon, or at least a series of different aminons
Speaker 1: that kind of presented in similar ways. The most likely
Speaker 1: cause from most of the symptoms he was observing was
Speaker 1: basically a lack of antipsychotic medications, which didn't exist at
Speaker 1: the time he was doing his work. When those were
Speaker 1: developed in the nineteen fifties, Bell's mania grew markedly less
Speaker 1: common as a diagnosis. Doctors today now recognized that most
Speaker 1: of Bell's patients who died were likely suffering not from
Speaker 1: any kind of mania, but from infectious or autoimmune encephalitis,
Speaker 1: something that also became much easier to recognize and treat
Speaker 1: in the early nineteen twenties. These were a lot of
Speaker 1: people who are put in institutions with poor sanitary standards.
Speaker 1: They died as a result of that, but because they
Speaker 1: were kind of acting erratic and agitated and you know,
Speaker 1: shrieking and stuff. He just kind of like, oh, this
Speaker 1: is some sort of mania, right. The realities they have
Speaker 1: fucking encephalitis in most cases, and um antipsychotic medications would
Speaker 1: have dealt with most of the rest of the things.
Speaker 1: But at the time, you know, Bell is not a
Speaker 1: bad guy here, He's he's doing the best or not
Speaker 1: to my knowledge based on what I can read, he
Speaker 1: seems like he's doing the best he can to diagnose
Speaker 1: the symptom and he just gets it wrong because it's
Speaker 1: sucking eighteen fifty and no one knew anything, you know, right,
Speaker 1: this is also people forget you know, we put um there.
Speaker 1: There are people who have done such excellent, meaningful work
Speaker 1: in the world of medicine, but we forget that medicine
Speaker 1: as an institution has these deep systemic problems. Like what
Speaker 1: was the guy's name, Samuel Weiss, the guy who got
Speaker 1: the ship beat out of him for asking doctors to
Speaker 1: wash their hands. Yeah, that was a huge controversy. So
Speaker 1: I'm like, I I know, like there, I love that
Speaker 1: you said bad faith actors, man, because there are people
Speaker 1: who are working in good faith assiduously with the best
Speaker 1: information they have at the time. So I feel like
Speaker 1: what you're saying about Dr Luther Bell is that he's
Speaker 1: not trying to be a dick, right and he not
Speaker 1: to knowledge. Yeah, not not to what we what we
Speaker 1: understand from the record. And uh, I would I would
Speaker 1: ask you, you know, I know we're going somewhere with this,
Speaker 1: but I want to think about this like one of
Speaker 1: the big questions because I think I see where we're
Speaker 1: going here, Robert. One of the big questions is how
Speaker 1: would he feel about the way the successor of his
Speaker 1: ideas being used? Right? Yeah, And I don't know enough
Speaker 1: about Bell to tell you that, um, but it's it's
Speaker 1: it's going to go to some unexplained, unexpected places. He certainly,
Speaker 1: I don't think saw this coming when he was he
Speaker 1: was doing his best to kind of diagnose what he
Speaker 1: thought was a single syndrome. Um And kind of that
Speaker 1: story I just told Bell diagnosed of this mania in
Speaker 1: the eighteen fifties, and then in the nineteen fifties, because
Speaker 1: of better medications, it goes away. That would probably be
Speaker 1: the end of the story of Bell's mania if it
Speaker 1: weren't for a friend of the pod cocaine. Yes, in
Speaker 1: the eighties cocaine. In seventies, cocaine became markedly more common
Speaker 1: as a drug of abuse. Uh and in nineteen eighty five,
Speaker 1: in particular, Miami was rocked by a sudden spate of
Speaker 1: deaths among black female sex workers. Thirty two women in
Speaker 1: total died, and upon initial examination, their deaths seemed inexplicable.
Speaker 1: The only hint medical examiners in police had was the
Speaker 1: fact that they all had some amount of cocaine and
Speaker 1: other drugs in their system. Charles Wetley, a forensics pathologist, decided,
Speaker 1: based on nothing really, that a combination of cocaine use
Speaker 1: and sexual intercourse had killed the women. Whatley decided that
Speaker 1: with chronic cocaine use quote, the male of the species
Speaker 1: becomes psychotic and the female of the species dies in
Speaker 1: relation to sex, which is an incredible It's the coke
Speaker 1: and fucking that's killing them. It makes men crazy and
Speaker 1: it makes women die. Wow. Well, and this is nineteen
Speaker 1: eighty five, right, Bell had we have an excuse for
Speaker 1: him getting stuff wrong. It's eighteen fifty people most of
Speaker 1: medicine involved tax saws than Charles Whatley. There's no excuse
Speaker 1: to be saying this ship um he wrote, quote, my
Speaker 1: gut feeling is that this is a terminal event that
Speaker 1: follows chronic use of crack cocaine affecting the nerve receptors
Speaker 1: in the brain. What Lee started using the term excited
Speaker 1: delirium to refer to this deadly cocaine fueled mania he
Speaker 1: was pretty sure had to exist. Of course he was
Speaker 1: fucking wrong. Better medical examiners and detectives looked into the deaths,
Speaker 1: exhumed a number of bodies and found that the women
Speaker 1: had all been exphyxiated by a serial killer. Excited delirium
Speaker 1: had not caused their deaths. But Whatley was off to
Speaker 1: the races now, and the condition he'd more or less
Speaker 1: invented provided a perfect scapegoat for cops who were increasingly
Speaker 1: getting flak overall the black people they murdered in custody.
Speaker 1: So that's and and Whatley really pulls back to excited
Speaker 1: delirium to say, like, I'm not the first guy recognizing this.
Speaker 1: You know, there's a history of the medical uh and
Speaker 1: it went away in the nineteen fifties, but then cocaine
Speaker 1: brought it back act And this is you know, you
Speaker 1: can't divorce this entirely from the War on drugs, Right,
Speaker 1: You've got Reagan and the White House. People are starting
Speaker 1: to flip out about the dangers of cocaine and crack.
Speaker 1: In particular, crack is you know, more associated with the
Speaker 1: used by by use for people who aren't white and rich,
Speaker 1: so it gets really demonized, and Wetley provides a way
Speaker 1: to blame people for their own deaths when in the
Speaker 1: case like the thing that the name excited delirium comes
Speaker 1: from a bunch of female black sex workers getting murdered
Speaker 1: by a serial killer, and Wetley's immediate jump is like, no,
Speaker 1: it must be their fault. You know, he'd like completely
Speaker 1: misses what it actually happened. Yeah, yeah, it's real fucked up.
Speaker 1: It's mind boggling to me because this is something that
Speaker 1: is that is new information. The idea that one could
Speaker 1: take this meta level of victim blaming, like to the extreme,
Speaker 1: it's over nine thousand level of victim blaming and then
Speaker 1: say uh, and then have it been picked up as
Speaker 1: a convenient cause. I mean, you know, we've always all
Speaker 1: of us actually on the shows that and that hang
Speaker 1: out together and actual friends were all very well aware
Speaker 1: of the the problems with the official narrative of the
Speaker 1: crack cocaine epidemic. But you know, it's like the big question, uh,
Speaker 1: the big question about arms races too, right, like who's
Speaker 1: manufacturing the guts? Right, Who's who's growing the coca plants?
Speaker 1: Because it's certainly not someone in like a you know,
Speaker 1: Los Angeles. Uh. So it feels like it feels like
Speaker 1: this is beyond incompetence. I would argue, it feels like
Speaker 1: this guy is intentionally skipping some cognitive steps to find
Speaker 1: this interesting. Yeah, we're we're gonna be talking about wet
Speaker 1: Ley a bit later in the episode, so keep it.
Speaker 1: Put a pin in that one, ben So got it.
Speaker 1: The excited delirium diagnosis spreads like wildfire after Since there
Speaker 1: were also an awful lot of cocaine overdoses in this period,
Speaker 1: very few people noticed anything fishy. One group of researchers
Speaker 1: in nineteen ninety seven, writing for the Journal of Forensic Science,
Speaker 1: did decide to investigate the troubling rise and excited delirium deaths.
Speaker 1: Quote from a registry of all cocaine related deaths in
Speaker 1: Dade County, Florida, from nineteen sixty nine to nineteen ninety
Speaker 1: fifty eight. Excited delirium deaths were compared with a hundred
Speaker 1: and twenty five victims of accidental cocaine overdose without excited
Speaker 1: delirium compared with controls e d d s. Excited delirium
Speaker 1: deaths were more frequently black, male, and younger. They were
Speaker 1: less likely to have a low body mass index, and
Speaker 1: more likely to have died in police custody, to have
Speaker 1: received medical treatment immediately before death, to have survived for
Speaker 1: a longer period, to have developed hyperthermia, and to have
Speaker 1: died in summer months. In other words, most accidental cocaine
Speaker 1: toxicity deaths were of white people who died suddenly, generally
Speaker 1: not near police, because they were partying and doing a
Speaker 1: bunch of cocaine right, and they just dropped dead suddenly
Speaker 1: because their heart blows up. Right. Meanwhile, black excited delirium
Speaker 1: cocaine overdose deaths were nearly all black people who had
Speaker 1: been restrained by law enforcement immediately prior to their death.
Speaker 1: The study also noted that these excited delirium cocaine overdoses
Speaker 1: tended to have much less cocaine in their system than
Speaker 1: the white cocaine overdoses, so these are all getting blamed
Speaker 1: on cocaine. But the excited delirium deaths are overwhelmingly black,
Speaker 1: overwhelmingly involved police use of force, and they have a
Speaker 1: lot less cocaine in their systems than the people who
Speaker 1: are just dying of cocaine good stuff. Does it add
Speaker 1: up right, say the quiet part out loud, Yes, Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's It was pretty obvious to the to the researchers
Speaker 1: paying attention from the beginning what was happening. But again
Speaker 1: most people don't really catch on at this stage. Now,
Speaker 1: if you can read between the lines just a little bit,
Speaker 1: the picture is very clear. Cops were arresting black people
Speaker 1: for drug possession and restraining them, Like Derek Chauvin. A
Speaker 1: lot of these cops restrained their suspects in a way
Speaker 1: that caused death. Then they blamed that death on cocaine
Speaker 1: and wrote the deaths off as excited delirium cocaine overdoses.
Speaker 1: Dtor Michael baden Of, a prominent forensic pathologist who studies
Speaker 1: deaths in police custody and was once the chief medical
Speaker 1: Examiner for New York City, explained to Brookings, quote, this
Speaker 1: is the germination of excited delirium. The same people who
Speaker 1: did these prostitution deaths now applied excited delirium to cocaine
Speaker 1: users in Miami and people who died while being subdued
Speaker 1: by police. By the late nineteen nineties, good doctors had
Speaker 1: started to realize what was going on, and a series
Speaker 1: of studies were published analyzing all these excited delirium deaths.
Speaker 1: It became increasingly clear that the key commonality in most
Speaker 1: of these deaths was not cocaine or any behavior on
Speaker 1: the part of the deceased, but the fact that they
Speaker 1: had been put in police custody and that less lethal
Speaker 1: weapons like mace or taser's had been used on them.
Speaker 1: One analysis and the Canadian Medical Association Journal found quote
Speaker 1: in all twenty one cases of unexpected death associated with
Speaker 1: excited delirium, the deaths were associated with restraint for violent
Speaker 1: agitation and hyperactivity, with a person either in a prone
Speaker 1: position eighteen people eighty six percent or subjected to pressure
Speaker 1: on the neck three people fourteen percent. All those who
Speaker 1: died had suddenly lapsed into tranquility shortly after being restrained.
Speaker 1: The excited delirium was caused by a psychiatric disorder in
Speaker 1: twelve people fifty seven percent, and by cocaine induced psychosis
Speaker 1: in eight percent, thirty eight and eight people, thirty eight percent,
Speaker 1: eighteen people, eighty six percent were in police custody when
Speaker 1: they died. Four nineteen percent had been sprayed with mace,
Speaker 1: and heart disease was found in another four At autopsy,
Speaker 1: the blood level of cocaine and those whose excited delirium
Speaker 1: was cocaine induced was similar to levels found in recreational
Speaker 1: cocaine users and lower than levels found in people who
Speaker 1: died from cocaine intoxication. Now, it's hard to know the
Speaker 1: precise scope of the problem, but excited delirium deaths are
Speaker 1: based on the evidence we have extremely common. Eleven percent
Speaker 1: of all deaths and police custody in Maryland are attributed
Speaker 1: to excited delirium. In the last decade, at least fifty
Speaker 1: three people have died in custom in Florida. Some council
Speaker 1: were like eighty five and we're blamed on what was
Speaker 1: more or less a fake cause of death, excited delirium. Today,
Speaker 1: law enforcement officers are routinely taught in training that excited
Speaker 1: delirium is a condition characterized by sudden aggression and distress,
Speaker 1: generally brought on by the use of illegal substances and
Speaker 1: often ending in sudden death. Excited delirium is not recognized
Speaker 1: as a thing by the American Medical Association, the American
Speaker 1: Psychiatric Association, the World Health Organization, or the European Society
Speaker 1: of Emergency Medicine, which represents doctors in thirty countries. It
Speaker 1: is not listed in the diagnosis in the Diagnostic and
Speaker 1: Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders the d s M five.
Speaker 1: As far as I can tell, only two organizations of
Speaker 1: physicians recognize it as a thing, the American College of
Speaker 1: Emergency Physicians and its British counterpart. And the story of
Speaker 1: why that is is pretty shady. But before we get
Speaker 1: into that, you know what else is shady, Ben, the
Speaker 1: products and services support this podcast. We are back, and
Speaker 1: I've just promised been that that um, this is going
Speaker 1: to get a lot worse, uh so much worse. Um
Speaker 1: And I'm making that promise to all of you. By
Speaker 1: the end of this again, you'll be thinking about crimes, um,
Speaker 1: which is you know, always always the goal here at
Speaker 1: behind the bastards, uh, make you think about crimes, theoretical
Speaker 1: minecraft crimes. So we're talking about I mentioned earlier, basically
Speaker 1: all the vast majority of like reputable international medical organizations
Speaker 1: where it's like a bunch of doctors and nurses and stuff. Uh,
Speaker 1: do not recognize excited delirium as a thing. That d
Speaker 1: s M does not recognize it as a thing, But
Speaker 1: the American College of Emergency Physicians in its British counterpart
Speaker 1: do And the why of that is a very shady story.
Speaker 1: But before we get into that really quickly, maybe not
Speaker 1: so quickly, I want to at least analyze the supposed
Speaker 1: features of this condition that most doctors don't believe exists.
Speaker 1: According to the American College of Emergency Physicians, excited delirium
Speaker 1: is characterized by quote, bizarre behavior generating phone calls to police.
Speaker 1: So if the cops get called on you, that's a
Speaker 1: sign you might have excited delirium. Um. Next ship, Yeah,
Speaker 1: Next is failure to respond to police presence, and continued
Speaker 1: struggle despite restraint. The syndrome, apparently in Taos, individuals with
Speaker 1: superhuman strength and makes them impervious to pain. If you're thinking, boy,
Speaker 1: it seems like people are using medical jargon to justify
Speaker 1: racism and brutality. You're right, that is very much out. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's nice but terrible. Everyone who resists has an illness
Speaker 1: that kills them. So if they resist and we beat
Speaker 1: them to death, it's their illness that made them resist,
Speaker 1: the police that killed them, not us beating them to death.
Speaker 1: That's cop logic. Oh, you know, the whole time we
Speaker 1: were on the break, this was making me think of
Speaker 1: you know, I can't be the only person in the
Speaker 1: crowd today thinking this makes me think of the way,
Speaker 1: like hysteria got described as a legit medical condition, right yeah,
Speaker 1: but while um skipping ahead a little bit. While hysteria
Speaker 1: was often at least treated by you know, vibrators, um,
Speaker 1: excited delirium is treated with tasers, you also said. You
Speaker 1: also said as stute listeners will notice you use the
Speaker 1: phrase less lethal instead of the entirely misleading phrase non lethal. Right, No,
Speaker 1: there is uh actually no such thing as a non
Speaker 1: lethal weapon. Um. If it's a weapon, it can kill people.
Speaker 1: It might be hard to kill people, but it will
Speaker 1: kill them. Um if you if you really go at it.
Speaker 1: We should probably lay at a few specific cases of
Speaker 1: excited delirium deaths to explain just how often like this
Speaker 1: diagnosis is applied. One A good example is the case
Speaker 1: of Gregory Lloyd Edwards, a thirty eight year old U. S.
Speaker 1: Army veteran with PTSD who was exhibited. He was agitated
Speaker 1: and aggressive and stuff. You know. He was dealing with
Speaker 1: some ship when he was arrested. In order to quote
Speaker 1: unquote restrain him, police beat tasted, pepper sprayed and strapped
Speaker 1: him into a restraint chair at the Brevard County Jail.
Speaker 1: From an article by Florida Today. Quote when deputies found
Speaker 1: Edwards unresponsive in his cell at the Brevord County Jail
Speaker 1: about twenty five minutes after their confrontation with him ended,
Speaker 1: he was strapped in a restraint chair, his hands cuffed
Speaker 1: behind his back, with a fine mesh spithood over his
Speaker 1: head and pepper spray still on his face. Notwithstanding his
Speaker 1: restraint was deemed to be of secondary importance when Breford's
Speaker 1: medical examiner, Dr Sajid Kaiser established a cause of death.
Speaker 1: According to the autopsy report, Edwards died of excited delirium
Speaker 1: and complications due to hyperactive and violent state with subsequent restraint.
Speaker 1: His widow, Kathleen Edwards, was both perplexed and frustrated by
Speaker 1: Kwaiser's found finding sitting in a cracker barrel restaurant with
Speaker 1: her small daughter. She said she never heard of the
Speaker 1: term before. What is that? Like? I know what delirium is,
Speaker 1: and I know what being excited is, But what is
Speaker 1: excited delirium? How does that kill you? That's a good question.
Speaker 1: Eighty five people in Florida have died from excited delirium
Speaker 1: over the last ten years. Florida Today to Day review
Speaker 1: of those deaths, which took place from two thousand nine
Speaker 1: to two thousand nineteen, to try and analyze just how
Speaker 1: it was applied. They note that medical reports for deaths
Speaker 1: and police custody are quote almost exclusively. The only places
Speaker 1: where the term apply appears in medical reports throughout the state,
Speaker 1: so the only almost the only time the diagnosis of
Speaker 1: excited delirium is given is when people have died in
Speaker 1: police custody. Most of these cases did involve illegal drugs,
Speaker 1: usually cocaine or methamphetamine, but use of force by law
Speaker 1: enforcement was just as common. Sixty excited delirium deaths in
Speaker 1: Florida involved police use of force. In another fifteen percent
Speaker 1: of cases, it was unclear whether or not police used force.
Speaker 1: Of excited delirium deaths are men. Thirty six percent of
Speaker 1: Florida's eighty five excited delirium deaths were black men. While
Speaker 1: seventy percent of excited delirium deaths involved some sort of
Speaker 1: sim of sim of stimulant narcotic, All but one of
Speaker 1: the deaths that did not involve drugs involved use of
Speaker 1: force by law enforcement from Florida Today quote. One such
Speaker 1: case took place on February ninth, the two eighteen, when
Speaker 1: twenty year old Aaron Parker was reportedly found naked, bleeding
Speaker 1: and sweating profusely, and lying in the medium of a
Speaker 1: Tallahassee street. Police tried to handcuff Parker and admit him
Speaker 1: under the Marchmon Act, the drug abuse equivalent of the
Speaker 1: Baker Act. The Tallahassee Police Department said Parker began throwing punches,
Speaker 1: prompting a sergeant to deploy his taser. He was then
Speaker 1: given a sedative by e MS. Parker had to be
Speaker 1: resuscitated en route to the hospital. He died a week later.
Speaker 1: His death is reportedly still under investigation, and police withheld
Speaker 1: use of force information from the public for a week
Speaker 1: following his death. The medical examiner ruled Parker's death and
Speaker 1: accident due to excited delirium associated with probable drug use.
Speaker 1: Ker's toxicology turned up positive only for cannabinoids, not stimulants.
Speaker 1: So this guy gets beaten and taste by police, dies
Speaker 1: on the way to the hospital. The medical examiner says,
Speaker 1: it's an excited delirium, probably because of all the drugs
Speaker 1: he was doing, and then they found out he just
Speaker 1: had a little bit of pot in the system. Like that.
Speaker 1: I'm quoting this because it's representative of a lot of
Speaker 1: these debts. Wow, and you know that. What's what's interesting
Speaker 1: there is, you know, the immediate question would be, is
Speaker 1: there someone who has a cause of death listed as
Speaker 1: excited delirium without in any way touching on uh, you know,
Speaker 1: the like law enforcement finding them and and doing these
Speaker 1: horrific things to them, Like, is there is there someone
Speaker 1: I'm just interested. Yeah, there are some excited delirium deaths
Speaker 1: that don't involve police use of force and do involve
Speaker 1: drugs a lot. Like some medical examiners will say, well,
Speaker 1: it seems like it was a drug overdose or someone
Speaker 1: whose heart stopped because you know, they or on drugs,
Speaker 1: and excited delirium is an odd thing to apply to that. Well,
Speaker 1: we'll get into that a little bit. It is not
Speaker 1: always diagnosed for people who die in police custody, but
Speaker 1: it is predominantly diagnosed for people who die in police custody.
Speaker 1: More than three quarters of excited delirium deaths are ultimately
Speaker 1: determined to be accidents. Only seven percent are declared to
Speaker 1: be homicides. This is significant because when a death is
Speaker 1: declared a homicide, there has to be an investigation, but
Speaker 1: it means a homicide at death. Being a homicide means
Speaker 1: that a person's death was the result of another human
Speaker 1: being's actions. This is why police like to have them
Speaker 1: declared excited delirium, because then a death that was the
Speaker 1: result of a person's action gets declared not that, and
Speaker 1: there doesn't have to be an investigation. This is why
Speaker 1: Minneapolis police tried to declare George Floyd's death caused by
Speaker 1: a medical incident, because then it's not a homicide. Then
Speaker 1: there's no investigation. Right. That's the value of this diagnosis
Speaker 1: to law enforcement. It's cool stuff. Yeah, having a hard
Speaker 1: time articulating just how horrific that is because you can
Speaker 1: get you tell me and I'm I'm here for it.
Speaker 1: I'm here for it, but I'm just thinking like this
Speaker 1: is essentially at least in some cases. I think you've
Speaker 1: I think you've made a very solid argument that this
Speaker 1: functions as a not a necessarily get out of jail card,
Speaker 1: but to stay out of jail card for law enforcement.
Speaker 1: Would you agree with that? Yeah, And it's it's a
Speaker 1: it's a sweep it under the rug diagnosis. It's a
Speaker 1: we call this is this was just the result they
Speaker 1: took drugs, So number one, it's their fault. And number two,
Speaker 1: we don't have to be investigated for how our behavior
Speaker 1: may have contributed to their deaths. That's why you do it.
Speaker 1: Dr Wetley, who popularized the term excited delirium, continues to
Speaker 1: be one of the most prominent voices in medicine supporting
Speaker 1: the existence of excited delirium as a deadly syndrome. He
Speaker 1: and other doctors like him theorized that the debt these
Speaker 1: deaths are caused by an excess of catechola means catechola
Speaker 1: means whatever. I'm not a doctor, a category of neurotransmitters
Speaker 1: that includes adrenaline. Again, I'm not a doctor, so I
Speaker 1: can't weigh in on this one way or the other.
Speaker 1: But other doctors have waited on this, and one of
Speaker 1: them is Dr Michael Baden. He has issues with Dr
Speaker 1: Wetley's reasoning quote. This is Baden. If an overproduction of
Speaker 1: adrenaline is behind excited delirium, why hasn't excited delirium been
Speaker 1: cited as the cause of death for a police officer
Speaker 1: or a soldier since they're also exposed to highly stressful
Speaker 1: situations daily. Right? Why is it only people who die
Speaker 1: in police custody? Almost only people who die in police
Speaker 1: custody who get this diagnosis if it's caused by overproduction
Speaker 1: of adrenaline, Because, like I'm gonna guess, a lot of
Speaker 1: fucking Marines would be dropped into this if it was
Speaker 1: an overproduction of adrenaline issue. You know it's He makes
Speaker 1: a good point. He adds, in general, I am of
Speaker 1: the strong opinion that excited delirium is a boutique kind
Speaker 1: of diagnosis created, unfortunately by many of my forensic pathology colleagues,
Speaker 1: specifically for persons dying when being restrained by law enforcement.
Speaker 1: So that's doctor again. I can't really weigh in specifically
Speaker 1: on and called Dr Whatley wrong. I'm not a doctor,
Speaker 1: but doctor Michael Bayden is a doctor, and he's weighing in.
Speaker 1: I think you're being very fair. Yeah, I mean, I
Speaker 1: just I I try not to like delve too deeply
Speaker 1: into medicine because I'm not a fucking doctor, which is
Speaker 1: why I try to see what other doctors are saying,
Speaker 1: and a lot of them are frustrated by this. Now,
Speaker 1: I will say other credible physicians are somewhat more measured
Speaker 1: in their phrasing than Dr Baden was. Dr Russell Vega,
Speaker 1: chief medical examiner for Florida's twelfth District, described excited delirium
Speaker 1: mass quote more of a behavioral state than an underlying
Speaker 1: medical diagnosis, and in general, medical examiners are statutorially tasked
Speaker 1: with and thus more focused on determining and recording the
Speaker 1: underlying medical condition than the behavioral state at the time
Speaker 1: of death. That is polite doctor speak for saying medical
Speaker 1: examiners shouldn't care how someone acted before they died. They
Speaker 1: should care about what killed them, which is about is
Speaker 1: like restrained away as kind of questioning Dr Wetley's logic
Speaker 1: as you're going to get. Dr Stephen J. Nelson is
Speaker 1: the chair of the Florida Medical Examiner's Commission and the
Speaker 1: Medical examiner for Florida's tenth district. He said that he
Speaker 1: avoids using excited delirium in his district. Quote, it's like saying,
Speaker 1: somebody dies from cardio respiratory arrest. Well, yeah, everybody dies
Speaker 1: because their heart and their lungs stopped working. So it's
Speaker 1: not really helpful. So if you've been paying attention throughout
Speaker 1: all this so far, you should have a couple of
Speaker 1: big questions, chief among them, why do some real doctors
Speaker 1: back up excited delirium as a thing? If medical consensus
Speaker 1: seems to agree that it does not work the way
Speaker 1: cops say it does, even if it might be a
Speaker 1: legitimate way to describe behavior, it's not a medical diagnosis,
Speaker 1: why do some doctors disagree with that? Well, then that's
Speaker 1: gonna bring us two friend of the pod, the Axon Corporation,
Speaker 1: makers of the Taser now the original taser. Yeah yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: we all know that sound. The original Taser was invented
Speaker 1: in the mid nineteen seventies, and the first Taser corporate
Speaker 1: ration was founded in nine It changed its name to
Speaker 1: ax On pretty recently, used to be called the Taser Corporation.
Speaker 1: I'm just going to call them Axon for our purposes
Speaker 1: today because it's easier. From the beginning, the major selling
Speaker 1: point for Taser was that their weapons were less than lethal. Today,
Speaker 1: Axon's website has a whole page titled how Safe our Tasers,
Speaker 1: on which they currently claim that their weapons have saved
Speaker 1: two hundred and forty eight thousand, nine hundred and seventy
Speaker 1: four lives to date nineties. They say that ninety nine
Speaker 1: point seven five percent of Taser uses result in no
Speaker 1: serious injury. Now, given that their business is providing a
Speaker 1: less lethal option for a force option for police, Axon
Speaker 1: stands to lose a lot of money each time somebody's
Speaker 1: heart stops because they get tased repeatedly. So decades ago,
Speaker 1: they decided to make sure that that would not happen.
Speaker 1: Step one was to hire as many doctors as they
Speaker 1: could buy, men and women who would take ax On
Speaker 1: money to carry out studies proving the safety of tasers
Speaker 1: and who would be willing to take to the stand
Speaker 1: in order to defend America's favorite a extrocution tool from
Speaker 1: claims that people sometimes died when shot with it. One
Speaker 1: of their first paid experts was Dr Wetley, the same
Speaker 1: man who popularized excited delirium as a diagnosis back in
Speaker 1: the mid nineteen eighties. That's right, he's an ax On employee.
Speaker 1: There we go, Oh, well done. I didn't want to.
Speaker 1: I didn't want a positive guest because they didn't want
Speaker 1: to seem prejudiced or unfailed. But uh so, so it's
Speaker 1: kind of like, um uh, it's kind of like a
Speaker 1: company that makes that makes ship proof pants is saying
Speaker 1: new studies find shipping your pants randomly is amazing on
Speaker 1: multiple levels. Right, provides a wide variety of health benefits. Right,
Speaker 1: that's terrible. So this is our bastard. Uh well, one
Speaker 1: of them. There's a bunch of them. Actually, a lot
Speaker 1: of doctors are taking that axe on cash, it turns out.
Speaker 1: Um now, I don't know precisely when Dr Wetley started
Speaker 1: working for as On. In two thousands seventeen, Reuters interviewed
Speaker 1: him as part of an incredibly detailed investigation they did
Speaker 1: into taser deaths, a really wonderful piece of work. Dr
Speaker 1: Whatley claimed that the company had approached him quote more
Speaker 1: than a decade ago, which conveniently could mean anything from
Speaker 1: the early adds to the late nineties, when Taser started
Speaker 1: taking off. We don't know exactly when now. Quote from
Speaker 1: Reuter's Whatley said that excited delirium is a genuine condition
Speaker 1: and that the vast majority of deaths involving taser's he
Speaker 1: studied were caused by it. I've never seen a case
Speaker 1: where I could say that a taser actually contributed to
Speaker 1: the death, he said. As far as interfering with the
Speaker 1: heart rhythm, he added, there's never been any convincing evidence
Speaker 1: that that can actually take place. Now, one person who
Speaker 1: disagrees was Dr Whatley is doctor Werner Spitz, one of
Speaker 1: the foremost forensic pathologists in the country. He testified at
Speaker 1: the O. J. Simpsons civil trial and at one point
Speaker 1: was called into review the autopsy of President John F. Kennedy.
Speaker 1: Spitz has seen a number of cases where a taser
Speaker 1: caused death, and when informed of doctor Least claim to
Speaker 1: the contrary, he told Reuters quote, if you fire a
Speaker 1: taser into the precordial area where the heart is, whether
Speaker 1: the front or back, the electric current may very well
Speaker 1: interfere with the electrical impulses that go to the heart.
Speaker 1: But I mean, I'm sure we can trust Dr Wetley
Speaker 1: on this. You know, he doesn't have a conflict of interest,
Speaker 1: no reliable, credible, it's good ship. All his all his
Speaker 1: friends and family members get tasers for Christmas. You're right,
Speaker 1: because they're so safe. Yeah, uh safe. You know what
Speaker 1: else is safe? This is a This is a shift
Speaker 1: from the first ad break the RNA next nine missile
Speaker 1: by Lockheed Martin and Raytheon with the R nine X.
Speaker 1: Have you ever been thinking, ben, I want to kill
Speaker 1: most of the people in that car, but not all
Speaker 1: of the people in the other cars around them. Yeah.
Speaker 1: There are a lot of Honda Odyssees in Atlanta, and
Speaker 1: you know it's it's it's tough to tell when you
Speaker 1: look through the window because there could be like nine
Speaker 1: to twelve people in there. You never know there could
Speaker 1: be and maybe you only want to kill three to four.
Speaker 1: That's why we have the R nine X, as Lockheed
Speaker 1: Martin and Raytheon say, the R nine X, it'll funk
Speaker 1: up a Honda Odyssey. Al Right, here's some other ads.
Speaker 1: We are back. Uh, we're back, and we're talking about
Speaker 1: whether or not it's possible to be killed by a taser,
Speaker 1: which a lot of doctors say absolutely. There's hundreds of
Speaker 1: evidence of cases where that's happened in which Dr Charles Wetley,
Speaker 1: paid employee of the Axon Corporation, says, no. Never imagine
Speaker 1: if guns were I mean, gun companies have fought hard
Speaker 1: to be immune not just like liability for what their
Speaker 1: products are used for, but to be immune to liability
Speaker 1: if they make guns that like fire when they're not
Speaker 1: supposed to. Like look up tourists, you know, they there
Speaker 1: was a case where like their safeties didn't work and
Speaker 1: a bunch of people had their guns fire randomly into
Speaker 1: their legs and died, and tourists wasn't liable because again
Speaker 1: it's America. Weapons manufacturers have the inherent right to argue
Speaker 1: that their weapons don't harm people even when they do.
Speaker 1: And that's cool. I guess which can I just say,
Speaker 1: you see things like this happen on a daily basis,
Speaker 1: and I don't know about you guys, but I can't
Speaker 1: even slide on like overdue finds at the library, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean, like Blockbuster knowing my luck will
Speaker 1: probably come find me at some point because I never
Speaker 1: gave back Police Academy. You know, they'll fucking taste the
Speaker 1: ship out of you over that Police Academy DVD. At
Speaker 1: least it's not police academy too. You know, if you
Speaker 1: die over police academy, that's okay. Dying over police academy
Speaker 1: too is a bridge too far. Yeah, yeah, no, it's
Speaker 1: it's given me a dark night of the soul more
Speaker 1: than once, to be honest. But but you're right, like
Speaker 1: the temerity too, especially if you're a medical professional, right
Speaker 1: you one could make the argument that, Okay, funding I
Speaker 1: have received or my employer does not affect my professional opinion.
Speaker 1: I think it's a bullshit argument, but it's an argument
Speaker 1: people can make. But to do that on top of
Speaker 1: this sort of layer cake of you know, pardon me,
Speaker 1: of of actively ignoring a mountain of evidence, that just
Speaker 1: seems like, I don't like, at what point do you
Speaker 1: get your license revoked? You know what I mean? It
Speaker 1: seems like never, And it's like, yeah, it's it's very
Speaker 1: shady where that's a big part of the story that
Speaker 1: we're going to get into because Whatley is not the
Speaker 1: only doctor who's double dipping in this way. Now. When
Speaker 1: I first started digging into this subject and was trying
Speaker 1: to I was trying to answer the question, is excited
Speaker 1: delirium real or is it something that the cops invented um,
Speaker 1: and that article in Florida Today that I've quoted from
Speaker 1: brought me to Dr Deborah Mash, who's a professor emeritus
Speaker 1: at the University of Miami's Miller School of Medicine. According
Speaker 1: to the article, she's been studying the concept of excited
Speaker 1: delirium for decades. She is one of the most prominent
Speaker 1: medical voices who will argue that it is a real syndrome.
Speaker 1: I can't argue with her credentials, but from the beginning
Speaker 1: some of her arguments sounded odd to me. Quote, people
Speaker 1: are in a psychiatric state, and that condition is a delirium.
Speaker 1: This delirium that people experience, which is why police get
Speaker 1: involved in the first place. So that's odd, uh that
Speaker 1: that Like again, she's going back to that, like excited delirium.
Speaker 1: One of the ways we recognize that is if the
Speaker 1: cops get called on you, which seems like a weird
Speaker 1: thing for a medical diagnosis to be. Now, Mash has
Speaker 1: published a variety of peer reviewed articles making the case
Speaker 1: for excited delirium is a real thing, and as far
Speaker 1: as I can tell, I think she's the first person
Speaker 1: who traced it to Bell's mania. It might have been Wetley.
Speaker 1: I'm not exactly certain on that. They both I think
Speaker 1: will make that argument. Mash has published a variety of
Speaker 1: peer reviewed articles in which she makes the case for
Speaker 1: excited delirium being well documented in founded in medicine and
Speaker 1: medical history, tracing its early description to Bell's mania. Um.
Speaker 1: Florida Today asked her for her take on the Gregory
Speaker 1: Edwards case. That's the vet with PTSD who died after
Speaker 1: being tased and restrained and maced. She agreed that Edwards
Speaker 1: was suffering from excited delirium, but she also called his
Speaker 1: death unnecessary, arguing that he should have been taken to
Speaker 1: a hospital rather than being put into custody. And she
Speaker 1: threats an interesting needle here, sort of throwing some soft
Speaker 1: blame on law enforcement for the man's death, but she
Speaker 1: stopped short of actually saying that anything in particular they did,
Speaker 1: or any tool that they used killed him. The feeling
Speaker 1: you get reading her answer is that his excited delirium
Speaker 1: killed him because he did not receive medical treatment for it. Now,
Speaker 1: this sounds a lot more reasonable than the standard law
Speaker 1: enforcement line he died because he was on drugs, But
Speaker 1: it really is just a variant of the same thing.
Speaker 1: His death was unnecessary, but he was not killed as
Speaker 1: a direct result of police use of force. Bad faith
Speaker 1: that argument, right, it does seem like a bad faith argument.
Speaker 1: Would you be surprised to know that Dr Deborah Marsha's
Speaker 1: mentor is one doctor Charles Wetley, Absolutely fucking not. Yeah,
Speaker 1: him her mentor um And he's probably the person who
Speaker 1: recommended that the Axon Corporation hire her to be an
Speaker 1: expert witness in more than a dozen lawsuits. Oh yeah, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's that good ship. That's that good good griftin ship. Yeah.
Speaker 1: It's like these people are like the evil the taser
Speaker 1: doctors are like the evil version of the pot doctors.
Speaker 1: Right in California, before it was legal, we used to
Speaker 1: have all these pot doctors who were like clearly doctors
Speaker 1: who had been disgraced or wanted to retire. It would
Speaker 1: just be like, I'm I used to be a fucking oncologist.
Speaker 1: I saw too many people die. Now I like drunk
Speaker 1: in a room and tell people give people pot prescriptions.
Speaker 1: And that was fine, Like, I have no issue with
Speaker 1: those doctors. Actually it was amazing because anytime I wanted
Speaker 1: because I used to smoke a ton back then, and
Speaker 1: it was it wasn't like I'm not just getting wasted
Speaker 1: during the day, I'm taking prescribed medicine, sir. Like you
Speaker 1: just go down to Venice Speech and there'd be some
Speaker 1: guys in and white coats, the doctors, and yeah, my
Speaker 1: favorite was the doctor was like horribly sunburned, long white hair,
Speaker 1: looked like an old hippie, wearing like board shorts and
Speaker 1: a T shirt with a lab coat over them. And
Speaker 1: outside of his office on Venice Beach there was like
Speaker 1: bolted to the wall of a day glow painting of
Speaker 1: the Mona Lisa with a blunt in her hand, and
Speaker 1: it just felt very medical and super subtle to write,
Speaker 1: very subtle. Yeah, these taser doctors are are not more
Speaker 1: subtle than the pot doctors. But where the While the
Speaker 1: pot doctors are like, I'm tired of practicing medicine. I
Speaker 1: just want to make enough money to retire telling people
Speaker 1: they could smoke pot, these guys are like, I'm not
Speaker 1: tired of medicine, but I would like to make money
Speaker 1: justifying deaths due to police use of force and tasers
Speaker 1: by claiming that tasers didn't kill them, drugs did, which
Speaker 1: is a lot worse um, so you'll see Doctor Deborah
Speaker 1: Mash quoted a lot as a subject matter expert on
Speaker 1: excited delirium UM. That Florida Today article quoted Mash at length,
Speaker 1: but did not note her financial relationship with ax On.
Speaker 1: The thing that makes Dr Mash brilliant is her ability
Speaker 1: to express total sympathy for victims and seemed like she's
Speaker 1: not defending the cops while averting all responsibility from the cops.
Speaker 1: She told Reuters that the Edwards case was heartbreaking and
Speaker 1: avoided the obviously chutty move of blaming the victim directly. Instead,
Speaker 1: she blamed budgetary constraints and the health care system. Quote,
Speaker 1: he was failed by healthcare providers, and the jails don't
Speaker 1: have the money for the staffing that they need. They
Speaker 1: need the nurse practitioners who are trained in psychiatry to
Speaker 1: identify the problem. See, it's not the cops fault, it's
Speaker 1: that it's the fact that they don't have enough money
Speaker 1: to have nurses in the jails. We're got to give
Speaker 1: the cops more money and then these people won't be
Speaker 1: dying because obviously the cops will spend that money on
Speaker 1: nurses and not on more tasers. Oh god, you know,
Speaker 1: I'm golf clapping at the matrix. Dodge sound goes in.
Speaker 1: It's impressive, Like she's not a dumb person, which is
Speaker 1: why ax On Paser Mash is so valuable to ax
Speaker 1: On that she's become their point woman in Florida whenever
Speaker 1: someone gets killed by a taser. But Axon is a
Speaker 1: big company and they employ a number of other medical
Speaker 1: experts in different states. And in part two of this episode, Ben,
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about the saga of Dr Jeffrey Hoe.
Speaker 1: But that's gonna have to come Thursday, um, because because
Speaker 1: we are done for the day, given a give a
Speaker 1: nice little bit of background. Who so, Ben, you got
Speaker 1: some plugs for us? How you doing you get some plugs? Oh? Yeah?
Speaker 1: First off, I'd like to thank everybody at Axon. Uh
Speaker 1: they're they're paying me for a period on this show
Speaker 1: and parts now. Uh yeah yeah. So if if you
Speaker 1: like Behind the Bastards, we uh, I hope you check
Speaker 1: out stuff they don't want you to know. It's a
Speaker 1: show I do with a critical thinking applied to corruption
Speaker 1: and conspiracy theories. You can also check out the show
Speaker 1: Ridiculous History, which is exactly what it sounds like we
Speaker 1: were not super freaking creative with the name. To be
Speaker 1: honest with you, Uh, and you can also find uh
Speaker 1: find me on Twitter or Instagram where I am at
Speaker 1: ben Bolan. This is amazingly depressing. Robert. Yeah, it's it's
Speaker 1: pretty much a bummer. Yes, and I hope everybody makes
Speaker 1: it safely to Thursday. Yes, avoid the cops, don't get tased,
Speaker 1: and if you get excited to don't be delirious. I guess,
Speaker 1: don't be delirious. Eat Derito's. Oh boy, we even't had
Speaker 1: a Doritos plug in a minute, we'll catch Hill on Thursday.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about Dr Jeffrey Ho. We'll we'll throw out
Speaker 1: some ads from our new sponsor, Linco Industries, maker of
Speaker 1: the Bearcat G three, which is of course, the most
Speaker 1: popular wheeled armored response vehicle by American law enforcement squat teams. Lynco.
Speaker 1: If you are a small police department who needs a
Speaker 1: vehicle that can take an explosion for no real reason,
Speaker 1: your best bet is Linco. That's the episode. Uh, good times,
Speaker 1: m