One Officer’s Wild Encounter With “Excited Delirium”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

To read about the hyperaggression and superhuman stamina of a suspect in the throes of excited delirium is one thing.

To experience it face to face with your life on the line is vastly different, especially when one of your .40-cal. rounds has blown up your attacker’s aorta and another has drilled into his spine and he still keeps struggling and threatening to kill you and when a K-9 that’s supposed to be helping you is instead chewing into the hand supporting your gun and when the dog finally lets go he attacks his handler and you’ve got to rescue him and you’re trying to control this whole crazed scenario in the middle of a high-speed roadway.

That unforgettable challenge confronted Ofcr. James Peters, 30, a 6-year veteran of the Scottsdale (AZ) PD. With the help of an advisor to the Force Science Research Center, Peters was exonerated this spring in a shooting that ultimately proved fatal to a classic ED subject.

It was the third shooting in Peters’ short career. Incredibly, he’s had a fourth since then, in which he killed a truck jacker who was holding a gun to the head of a supermarket meat cutter he’d taken hostage at the end of a police pursuit.

Scottsdale’s legal advisors declined to let Peters be interviewed, but Sgt. Todd Larson, who worked the ED case as a homicide investigator, supplied Force Science News with exclusive details.

“I’ve never seen anything like this in my life,” says Larson, a former SWAT sniper who has worked homicides prosaic and bizarre for more than 13 years. “With everything he had to cope with, Officer Peters’ actions were absolutely heroic.”

The horror-movie encounter started in the pre-dawn darkness of a Monday morning last October when Peters and K-9 Ofcr. Dave Alvarado heard a radio call about an attempted break-in of a car in the lot of a large automobile paint and body repair complex.

A security officer reported he had discovered that a window of the car had been smashed. He’d spotted an unidentified W/M nearby, “acting strange” and seemingly “on something.” When challenged, the man peeled off an outer shirt, claimed he had a gun, and picked up a 40-lb. landscaping rock and hurled it at the guard. As typical, few of these details were included in the barebones dispatch Peters and Alvarado heard, but the dispatcher did make clear that the suspect had thrown a rock and claimed to have a gun.

Alvarado should have gone off-duty about 15 minutes earlier and Peters, “a very assertive patrol officer” who was about to be transitioned to an elite street-crimes unit called HEAT (High-Enforcement Arrest Team), was nearly 3 hours past his normal shift. But they were busy trying to locate some suspects who’d fled from a stolen car and other crimes.

The repair complex was only a mile or so away and the description of the troublesome subject there was a general match to one of the suspects they were looking for. Alvarado, driving a K-9 SUV, was assigned as backup for the call. Peters, who was in uniform but driving a black unmarked unit, decided to respond too, intending to surreptitiously check out the vicinity.

Following closely behind Alvarado on the 6-lane thoroughfare that runs past the repair complex, Peters noticed the K-9 officer make a U-turn near the property and head toward a driveway. Then apparently having spotted something, Alvarado abruptly stopped, blocking 2 lanes of southbound traffic. Simultaneously, Peters saw a shadowy figure run across the pavement from the opposite side of the road and approach behind Alvarado’s SUV.

Then as the K-9 handler was stepping out of his unit, Peters saw the threat.

The figure, a white male with a substantial build, was clutching an 18-in. length of pipe with a square metal plate welded to one end, like a stanchion. He moved fast around Alvarado’s rear bumper, raised the pipe with both hands over his head, and swung with full force down at the officer.

Alvarado saw the attack in time, back-peddled, and dodged the blow. He drew his sidearm but didn’t shoot for fear of striking traffic whizzing by in the background.

Peters slammed his car into PARK in the northbound lanes, bailed out, and started shooting “all in one move,” he told Todd Larson. Later his car door was found to be so badly bowed by the force of his thrusting exit that it had to be repaired before it could be closed. “He was in immediate fear for Alvarado’s life,” Larson explains.

At the sound of Peters’ Glock 22, the suspect, initially more than a lane-and-a-half away, turned toward the officer, raised the pipe back over his head, and charged. Peters kept shooting, 4 rounds in all. The first 2, it is now believed, missed the suspect and hit the wall of a storage building in the background.

The assailant had closed to within 7 feet of Peters’ when he suddenly stopped. The pipe slowly dropped to his side in his right hand, then to the roadway. The suspect himself went down, his face thudding against the pavement. “I knew I’d hit him,” Peters said, but he wasn’t sure how many times.

Twice, as it turned out. Between the 2 rounds, the suspect’s aorta was penetrated, the major artery in his body, as was the vena cava, the major vein. One round lodged in his spine, having bored into the C-6 vertebra. The medical examiner told Larson that if the suspect had been on an operating table at that instant with surgeons standing ready, his life could not have been saved.

He should have been dead right there. But instead he was struggling on the ground, trying to get up, “licking blood off his lips,” and continuing to rant that he had a gun and would kill the officers.

Peters was covering him while calling in the shooting and praying that the traffic oncoming at 50 to 60 mph in the southbound lanes could brake or swerve quickly enough to dodge the sudden crime scene.

He looked up and saw that Alvarado had released his K-9, a muscular Belgian Malinois named Rocky, from the SUV. In an apparent flash of confusion, the dog was charging hell-bent for Peters. “I knew I was going to take a bite,” he told Larson.

The dog clamped his jaws like a vice on Peters’ left hand, which was supporting his Glock in a 2-hand hold. “Peters stayed unbelievably cool,” Larson says. “He knew if he struggled or pulled away, the dog would just chew harder. So he tucked his hands in close to his chest to better steady the gun and let him bite.”

As soon as he realized what was happening, Alvarado ran over, got Rocky to release, and put him in a down position. Peters’ hand was bleeding from the dog’s sharp teeth and he wanted to avoid blood-to-blood contact with the wounded suspect, so he continued to cover while Alvarado started handcuffing.

Alvarado got the right cuff on when the suspect suddenly threw his left elbow back so fast it caught the officer off-guard. Alvarado was fighting to get the suspect pinned when, Peters later told Larson, “I could hear the K-9′s claws on the pavement coming toward us.” He saw the dog “launch”–and sink his teeth this time into his handler’s triceps.

Two years earlier, as a member of Scottsdale’s SWAT team, Peters had attended a class that taught non-K-9 officers how to take a dog off bite. As Alvarado continued to fight to get the tenacious suspect under control and into cuffs, Peters grabbed Rocky’s collar used what he remembered to get the dog to let go.

Alvarado finally got both cuffs on. The suspect persisted in resisting, spitting and kicking. He alternately shouted threats to kill the officers, demanded that they kill him, and babbled gibberish. Brakes screeched around them as near-misses in the roadway traffic multiplied.

“I’ve got to end this now,” Peters decided. He spotted a patch of bare skin near the suspect’s hip. Placing his foot on the handcuff chain to keep the man’s arms down, he grabbed his Taser X26 and delivered a drive-stun to the bare spot.

The suspect went limp long enough for the officers to bind his legs with Ripp restraints. When paramedics and other officers arrived, he struggled anew, trying to sit up, spitting blood, and claiming he had a derringer he intended to use. Of course he was thoroughly searched before being placed, squirming, in an ambulance. No gun was ever found. He was pronounced dead at a hospital 38 minutes after Peters and Alvarado responded to the initial radio call.

Investigation revealed that the 31-year-old suspect, Mark Wesley Smith, was a petty criminal with a persistent history of methamphetamine use. He’d been out of prison just 4 days after serving a term for drunk driving and drug possession. Much of that time, according to a relative, he’d been up on meth.

As part of the investigation of any officer-involved shooting in Arizona, a case file is submitted to the county attorney, who convenes a deadly force review board to assess the matter. In addition, in Scottsdale findings from both internal affairs and criminal investigations are brought before a departmental use-of-force review board.

To compile as complete a dossier as possible, the PD’s investigators thought it important to explain how Smith had been able to maintain his remarkably high level of resistance after being so gravely wounded. Even the medical examiner seemed at a loss to comprehend it.

A sergeant in the investigative circle remembered reading reports about excited delirium that have been published in Force Science News, the free newsletter emailed biweekly to LE professionals from the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato. Smith seemed to match many of the indicators described in those articles, from breaking glass and running in traffic to exhibiting colossal stamina and immunity to pain.

Investigators contacted the Center’s executive director, Dr. Bill Lewinski, for more information. He referred them to Chris Lawrence, a trainer at the Ontario Police College at Alymer, Ont., in Canada.

Lawrence is recognized as one of the preeminent law enforcement authorities on ED and is a member of FSRC’s technical advisory board. He agreed that the shooting had strong overtones of an ED confrontation, and he provided extensive research materials that helped explain the role methamphetamine abuse could have played in provoking the delirium phenomenon in Smith.

In consultation with Lawrence, Todd Larson crafted a PowerPoint program on ED that he presented both to the county and the departmental review boards as part of his investigative report on the shooting.

Last April, after Peters’ shooting had ground through the investigative process for some 6 months, Scottsdale police finally announced that Peters had been cleared of any wrongdoing or use of excessive force in the encounter. Any doubt that deadly force was the only reasonable response to the circumstances he faced were officially laid to rest.

Similar findings had been made in Peters’ 2 previous shootings. In the first, he was one of several officers who fired rounds at a threatening suspect during a SWAT call out for a domestic. In the second, he shot and killed a disbarred lawyer who was creating a public hazard by pacing the banks of a canal and pointing a shotgun.

Less than a week after his exoneration in the Smith case, Peters was back in the news with his fourth shooting. This time a young gunman had hijacked a donut delivery truck in Peoria, AZ, and had led police on a 40-mile chase into Scottsdale. With officers close behind, the frantic truck jacker ran into a supermarket and grabbed an elderly butcher around the neck as a hostage.

He was trying to escape out of an emergency exit while using the hostage as a shield when Peters, who had responded from another assignment nearby, fired 2 shots from a rifle and killed him. The rounds tore his face away. Police established his identity through fingerprint analysis.

Without a doubt, the grateful hostage told the media, he would have been killed by the gunman if Peters had not shot first. Like Larson, he termed Peters a hero.

Meanwhile, Larson has asked Lawrence to conduct classes for Scottsdale personnel on ED and effective response tactics for dealing with it “so we can train for the future.”

At this writing, James Peters’ shooting remains under investigation. Peters remains on patrol with HEAT, targeting felons and other high-risk offenders. And in his personnel jacket remains a sheaf of superior-performance citations collected from his days and nights on the street.

“Obviously,” says Larson, “he’s an officer who can make the right decision under pressure.”


For more on excited delirium, check out these excellent articles:

  • Do’s and don’ts of handling excited delirium suspects: Part 1


  • Do’s and don’ts of handling excited delirium suspects: Part 2


  • The varied faces of excited delirium


  • Excited delirium and its medical status, Part 1


  • Excited delirium and its medical status, Part 2


Leave a Reply


  • Privacy Policy

Privacy Policy

Effective date: January 06, 2019

Force Science Institute, Ltd. (“us”, “we”, or “our”) operates the https://www.forcescience.org/ website (hereinafter referred to as the “Service”).

This page informs you of our policies regarding the collection, use, and disclosure of personal data when you use our Service and the choices you have associated with that data. Our Privacy Policy for Force Science Institute, Ltd. is based on the Privacy Policy Template from Privacy Policies.

We use your data to provide and improve the Service. By using the Service, you agree to the collection and use of information in accordance with this policy. Unless otherwise defined in this Privacy Policy, the terms used in this Privacy Policy have the same meanings as in our Terms and Conditions, accessible from https://www.forcescience.org/

Information Collection And Use

We collect several different types of information for various purposes to provide and improve our Service to you.

Types of Data Collected

Personal Data

While using our Service, we may ask you to provide us with certain personally identifiable information that can be used to contact or identify you (“Personal Data”). Personally identifiable information may include, but is not limited to:

  • Email address
  • First name and last name
  • Phone number
  • Address, State, Province, ZIP/Postal code, City
  • Cookies and Usage Data

Usage Data

We may also collect information on how the Service is accessed and used (“Usage Data”). This Usage Data may include information such as your computer’s Internet Protocol address (e.g. IP address), browser type, browser version, the pages of our Service that you visit, the time and date of your visit, the time spent on those pages, unique device identifiers and other diagnostic data.

Tracking & Cookies Data

We use cookies and similar tracking technologies to track the activity on our Service and hold certain information.

Cookies are files with small amount of data which may include an anonymous unique identifier. Cookies are sent to your browser from a website and stored on your device. Tracking technologies also used are beacons, tags, and scripts to collect and track information and to improve and analyze our Service.

You can instruct your browser to refuse all cookies or to indicate when a cookie is being sent. However, if you do not accept cookies, you may not be able to use some portions of our Service. You can learn more how to manage cookies in the Browser Cookies Guide.

Examples of Cookies we use:

  • Session Cookies. We use Session Cookies to operate our Service.
  • Preference Cookies. We use Preference Cookies to remember your preferences and various settings.
  • Security Cookies. We use Security Cookies for security purposes.

Use of Data

Force Science Institute, Ltd. uses the collected data for various purposes:

  • To provide and maintain the Service
  • To notify you about changes to our Service
  • To allow you to participate in interactive features of our Service when you choose to do so
  • To provide customer care and support
  • To provide analysis or valuable information so that we can improve the Service
  • To monitor the usage of the Service
  • To detect, prevent and address technical issues

Transfer Of Data

Your information, including Personal Data, may be transferred to — and maintained on — computers located outside of your state, province, country or other governmental jurisdiction where the data protection laws may differ than those from your jurisdiction.

If you are located outside United States and choose to provide information to us, please note that we transfer the data, including Personal Data, to United States and process it there.

Your consent to this Privacy Policy followed by your submission of such information represents your agreement to that transfer.

Force Science Institute, Ltd. will take all steps reasonably necessary to ensure that your data is treated securely and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and no transfer of your Personal Data will take place to an organization or a country unless there are adequate controls in place including the security of your data and other personal information.

Disclosure Of Data

Legal Requirements

Force Science Institute, Ltd. may disclose your Personal Data in the good faith belief that such action is necessary to:

  • To comply with a legal obligation
  • To protect and defend the rights or property of Force Science Institute, Ltd.
  • To prevent or investigate possible wrongdoing in connection with the Service
  • To protect the personal safety of users of the Service or the public
  • To protect against legal liability

Security Of Data

The security of your data is important to us, but remember that no method of transmission over the Internet, or method of electronic storage is 100% secure. While we strive to use commercially acceptable means to protect your Personal Data, we cannot guarantee its absolute security.

Service Providers

We may employ third party companies and individuals to facilitate our Service (“Service Providers”), to provide the Service on our behalf, to perform Service-related services or to assist us in analyzing how our Service is used.

These third parties have access to your Personal Data only to perform these tasks on our behalf and are obligated not to disclose or use it for any other purpose.


We may use third-party Service Providers to monitor and analyze the use of our Service.

  • Google AnalyticsGoogle Analytics is a web analytics service offered by Google that tracks and reports website traffic. Google uses the data collected to track and monitor the use of our Service. This data is shared with other Google services. Google may use the collected data to contextualize and personalize the ads of its own advertising network.You can opt-out of having made your activity on the Service available to Google Analytics by installing the Google Analytics opt-out browser add-on. The add-on prevents the Google Analytics JavaScript (ga.js, analytics.js, and dc.js) from sharing information with Google Analytics about visits activity.For more information on the privacy practices of Google, please visit the Google Privacy & Terms web page: https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en

Links To Other Sites

Our Service may contain links to other sites that are not operated by us. If you click on a third party link, you will be directed to that third party’s site. We strongly advise you to review the Privacy Policy of every site you visit.

We have no control over and assume no responsibility for the content, privacy policies or practices of any third party sites or services.

Children’s Privacy

Our Service does not address anyone under the age of 18 (“Children”).

We do not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from anyone under the age of 18. If you are a parent or guardian and you are aware that your Children has provided us with Personal Data, please contact us. If we become aware that we have collected Personal Data from children without verification of parental consent, we take steps to remove that information from our servers.

Changes To This Privacy Policy

We may update our Privacy Policy from time to time. We will notify you of any changes by posting the new Privacy Policy on this page.

We will let you know via email and/or a prominent notice on our Service, prior to the change becoming effective and update the “effective date” at the top of this Privacy Policy.

You are advised to review this Privacy Policy periodically for any changes. Changes to this Privacy Policy are effective when they are posted on this page.

Contact Us

If you have any questions about this Privacy Policy, please contact us:

  • By email: support@forcescience.org
  • By visiting this page on our website: https://www.forcescience.org/contact
  • By phone number: 866-683-1944
  • By mail: Force Science Institute, Ltd.