A Waterboro man convicted in June of luring a woman to a remote residence in Arundel in 2015, assaulting her with a cattle prod-shaped Taser cane and attempting to force her into a van for ransom has appealed his conviction.

Christopher Hall Photo courtesy of Maine State Prison

Christopher T. Hall was found guilty of aggravated assault and attempted kidnapping, both Class B felonies, and Class C assault in connection with the October 2015 incident following a two-week trial in York County Superior Court in Alfred and was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

He was sentenced in July and is in the Maine State Prison in Warren.

Now, his attorney, David Paris, is appealing on his behalf, arguing that the trial court erred in its instructions to the jury in connection with the definition of a dangerous weapon, instruction on statutory definition of bodily injury and whether the Taser cane had been altered.

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments in the case Tuesday in Portland.

Paris said that an electronic weapon is not defined as a dangerous weapon in statute; he said instead, it is a disabling weapon.


“Nothing says it cannot be a dangerous weapon,” said Chief Justice Leigh Saufley during the oral arguments.

The victim in the case sustained injury to her legs from the use of the Taser cane and endured a three-week convalescence.

Paris said he was “not minimizing” the injury, “but the victim walked away.”

“We don’t know what the voltage was. It was not tested,” he said.

York County Assistant District Attorney Kyle M. Myska told the supreme court justices that the issue on appeal is whether the stun cane, which he referred to as a high-voltage weapon, constitutes a dangerous weapon.

Myska said the state was not required to prove serious bodily injury, but whether the weapon was capable of causing it.


“The burns to her inner thighs took three weeks to heal,” said Myska. “Had it not been for her tenacity and grit, (the wounds) would have been more severe.”

“This was no ordinary Taser,” Myska continued. “It was 3 feet long with an activation switch on the handle and probes on the other end. The victim had to squeeze her legs around it to prevent further injury on other parts of her body.”

Myska said the state had received information in a letter Hall wrote to another party prior to the trial suggesting he had altered the voltage of the cane. He said an expert had been engaged to look at the Taser cane to determine if it had been disassembled and that information was given to defense counsel soon thereafter, prior to trial.

According to Myska, Hall testified at trial that he had lowered the voltage of the stun cane. It was unclear from the oral arguments whether the Taser cane had been found by the expert to have been altered.

During sentencing in July, Myska told Superior Court Justice Thomas Delahanty that Hall had targeted the victim because she worked as a guardian ad litem in a custody issue involving his children several years ago.

Myska told Delahanty that Hall’s desire to get his children back led to the idea of kidnapping those involved in the custody issue. He said Hall had planned to tie up those individuals in the woods and hold them for ransom.

“He contacted the victim and then laid in wait for her. … He was there and waiting,” said Myska. “Before she got out of her car, he pounced on her and tased her over and over again on her legs. She was able to fight him off.”

Tammy Wells can be contacted at 780-9016 or at:


Comments are not available on this story.