I've looked everywhere and found lots of conflicting stuff on this, can anyone here help? Tasers have lots of information out there, and much of it is written by people with an agenda. I'm not sure my information is completely accurate as a result.
Does a tazer leave post mortem evidence? Absolutely. It will leave two small skin punctures close together caused by the dual electrode darts that it shoots out. These punctures may also have a burn mark as well. This is assuming normal operation.
I understand it is just a regular electric shock, is that so? Well, I guess, but so isn't the electric chair. Let's start out with a fundamental fact about electric shocks. You need an entry and an exit would, which is why it has dual barbs. One in, one out. In the case of a lightning strike, frequently you find an entry wound in the upper torso, for example on the shoulder. Exit would will frequently be on one of the calves. The path of the lightning will show on the organs it traveled through with burn marks.
Let's discuss an electrical shock that is commonly seen and definitely induced for beneficial effects. Defibrillation. In defibrillation, an electric shock is induced in your body, with the path of the electricity designed to travel through the heart. The idea behind it is that the electrical shock will cause the heart to stop. As in dead. Then, if you're lucky, your heart will resume beating on its own, in the proper rhythm.
My favorite cluster for defib is when you set the patient on fire. Which is, amazingly enough, survivable. But the reality is that defib is a last ditch attempt to save a dead patient. Because we do not know in any predictable way how electricity will effect individuals. Electric fences use non-lethal doses of electricity, yet people have died from coming in contact with them.
Why? It's assumed that there is an underlying heart condition that no one was aware of that causes the heart to stop beating. Which is exactly the situation normally in deaths caused by tasers. Other deaths involving normal non-lethal doses involves amplifiers such as water, metal grills, et cetera.
Again, however, the methodology of death isn't clear. I've stood in puddles and touched electric fences. Gives a bigger bang for the buck, but hasn't killed. It's killed other people. We're back to the underlying heart condition that no one knows about.
I understand that electric shocks can leave blood clots in the heart or lungs or brain, is that so? Yes, it can fry the blood. But the burn marks would be more evident.
If it is, are these clots somehow different to regular clots? I'd assume so, but I've never looked nor seen pictures, so I don't know for sure.
Doesn't electricity have to have a point of entry? Yes.
Wouldn't that point be burned? It depends. Factors include wattage, amps, skin moisture, volts, and the list goes on.
Surely tazer electric can't be any different to ordinary electric, but then if it's not, wouldn't certain clothing kind of ground you and direct it though you more or less harmlessly? Water is one of the best conductors of electricity in the world. And guess what is the major component of human bodies? Electricity always picks the path of least resistance. This is why standing under a tree in a lightning storm is so dangerous. Humans are much better conductors than wood. The percentage of moisture in a tree is fairly low (the moisture, which is mainly water, is the sap).
Clothing is more typically designed to block electricity. Lineman wear gloves that are tested every month up to several thousand volts to make sure that electricity can't get through it. Although tasers are designed to work through clothing, being as the barbs are designed to do some level of piercing, some clothing can be very resistant to tasers.
This is driving me nuts.
