This piece examines why Tasers did not stop a knife attack in Times Square, summarizing expert analysis about probe contact, body composition, and positioning during the encounter while preserving key witness quotes and embedded media for context.
Video of the incident shows officers deploying Tasers with little visible effect before resorting to firearms, and the suspect later died along with one of her victims. Observers noted how chaotic the scene was, with an attacker advancing and officers trying to react in real time. The central question became why the conducted energy devices failed to incapacitate the assailant despite multiple attempts. A retired NYPD detective and Taser instructor offers a clear, technical explanation rooted in how the devices work and how human physiology interferes.
Tasers function by sending electrical pulses through two probes that must make solid connection with muscle tissue to override voluntary control. When the probes only contact clothing, fat, or span a narrow distance, the circuit either shorts or fails to stimulate enough muscle. In close, moving confrontations officers often cannot aim for optimal probe placement, so the device’s effectiveness drops rapidly. Training protocols assume certain probe spreads and contact points that simply weren’t achievable in this episode.
One practical factor the expert highlights is the distance between probes at impact and where they land on the body. If probes strike close together or land in padding rather than on muscle, the electrical path does not engage the large motor groups needed to lock limb motion. Targeting the back or legs typically produces stronger motor incapacitation because those areas have less subcutaneous fat and provide better connections to major muscle groups. In a fast, jostling fight for life there is rarely time to aim for those specific zones.
https://x.com/nypost/status/2094923243396227439
Body composition also plays a big role in how the current travels. Electrical pathways favor lower resistance, and excess adipose tissue and thick clothing act as insulators that reduce the current reaching muscle. That means two probes that appear to have hit skin may still deliver insufficient stimulus to stop a determined attacker. Environmental variables like probe spread, clothing thickness, and probe angle compound the problem and alter real-world outcomes compared with controlled training scenarios.
Eyewitness video shows officers attempting deployments as the suspect moved and pushed toward them, which makes it hard to obtain the ideal probe spread required for efficacy. Any deflection, sideways motion, or probe ricochet reduces the chance of both probes embedding at appropriate sites. Add the natural instinct to close distance when facing a knife, and the window for a successful Taser intervention becomes extremely small. Officers frequently must choose between trying a less-than-ideal Taser shot and using lethal force to stop an imminent threat.
Training materials and device specifications stress that both probes must make solid contact and that a proper spread matters, but training cannot replicate every dynamic of a real attack. As the expert noted, areas such as the back and back of the legs have less fat and are more likely to result in effective incapacitation, yet those are not always viable targets during a frontal assault. The incident highlights a limitation of conducted energy devices that is often underappreciated outside tactical circles. This is not about device failure alone but about the interplay of human movement, anatomy, and split-second decision-making.
Artur Sadowski, a retired NYPD detective and Taser expert, said Pamela Cisernos, 49, was able to fight off multiple Taser deployments because the officers were unable to make solid contact with the waddling killer.
“The thicker the padding in front of the muscles, the more difficult it is for the taser to get to the muscles and be effective,” Sadowski said Tuesday of the body-fat factor.
Sadowski, who wrote the Taser playbook that the NYPD used for training, noted that the devices can only work when both of its probes make solid contact — and that there was enough distance between the officers and jostling stabber to make that all but impossible.
Putting this into plain terms, if probes do not reach muscle tissue the delivered pulses will not trigger the sustained, involuntary contractions that stop coordinated movement. A probe strike that lands in abdomen padding or on thick clothing may cause localized pain or twitching but not the global motor disruption needed to prevent an attacker from advancing. Even where there is some effect, single-cycle deployments are sometimes insufficient against highly motivated or physically bulky subjects.
When the cops tried tasing her to bring her down, they appeared to hit her at least once in the middle of her stomach, Sadowski said.
But “even when probes hit, a narrow spread, thick clothing, or body fat can limit the electrical effect,” the former Axon master instructor said, adding that areas like the back and back of the legs have less fat and make tasers more effective.
“She may have felt pain or muscle cramping in her abdomen but not enough to stop her from advancing.”
For departments and policymakers, the episode underscores the need to recognize device limitations and prepare officers for scenarios where Tasers may underperform. Equipment choice and tactics must reflect the reality that no single tool is universally effective in every violent encounter. Clear guidance about probe placement priorities, alternative options, and rapid threat assessment can help officers make split-second decisions under pressure. This case will likely shape training discussions about when Tasers are appropriate and when other measures must be used to protect the public and responding officers.
Add comment