[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

NOPD boots homeless drummer from his usual spot. It was legal, but shouldn't be.

Running of the Sheeple: Videos of Black Friday Brawls and Stampedes in America

Good Samaritans Shutdown, Ticketed for Feeding Homeless During Thanksgiving Holiday

How Jeff Sessions Plans to End Medical Marijuana Before the Year Is Over

5 Myths About Marijuana You Can Ignore (or laff at)

New Data (Again) Shows Fewer Kids Are Using Marijuana — Despite Legalization

Black Lives Matter Plans To Block White-Owned Businesses On Black Friday

I am The Field Artillery!

VA study shows parasite from Vietnam may be killing vets

Mom Arrested, Charged with Felony for Putting Recorder in 9-year-old's Backpack to Catch Her Bully

Trump ‘frightened by black people’

Judge Protects Former House Speaker and Admitted Child Rapist, Telling His Victim He Can’t Sue

Joe Barton apologizes after nude photo circulates on social media

How CBS News Aided the JFK Cover-up

6 Card Games Every Man Should Know

When Good-Faith Medicine Raises ‘Red Flags’

FBI Admits: Trump Dossier Filled With Nothing But Rumors

Type of alcohol determines whether you become merry or maudlin

Mysterious Marijuana-Related Illness Popping Up In Emergency Rooms

Wes Goodman: Anti-LGBT Republican politician 'caught having sex with man in his office' facing 30 sexual misconduct accusations

A Man Is About To Launch Himself In His Homemade Rocket To Prove The Earth Is Flat

Wrecked And Retching: Obscure Vomiting Illness Linked To Long-Term Pot Use

Family Calls 911 for Help, Cops Show Up, Beat Handcuffed Mentally Ill Man Instead

Police are using DNA mugshots to arrest innocent people

Confederate Flag Over NC Fire Department: ‘We’re Not Going To Take Down The Flag’

Thanksgiving for JFK

Police: Adults gave baby with broken leg marijuana; failed to seek treatment

Meet 'Oumuamua! The 1st Interstellar Visitor Ever Seen Gets a Name

Steve Martin's 'King Tut' Sketch Is Racist, Liberal Arts Students Say

Fake News Is Only the Beginning. The FCC Votes to Let Monopolies Decide What Local News You See

No, you’re not being paranoid. Sites really ARE watching your every move

JFK Files: The CIA Planned To Murder American Citizens In Miami And Blame It On Cuba During Operation Mongoose

Video So Gruesome, Cop Sentenced to 5 Years For Shooting Into Car of Teens, 16 Times

Study Debunks Feminism: Women Still Attracted to “Toxic Masculinity”

Student radio hosts yanked from air, suspended after using the word ‘tranny’

Cowboys, Truckers and Us

PV Police Chief's Gun Missing (Realizes he left it in the Library Bathroom, 4 days later)

General says he'd deny 'illegal' order for nuke strike

Happy Thanksgiving 2017!

Vegas Massacre Cover-Up: PR Firm Hired by Mandalay Bay Exposed Pushing Disinformation on Conspiracy Theories

20,000 DWI Cases May Be Thrown Out After Cop Arrested for Tampering With Breathalyzers

Country music legend Mel Tillis dead at 85

Helter skelter: The history of Charles Manson and rock 'n' roll

Grant Cardone was at Mandalay Hotel and he doesn't believe the official story

How a government-sanctioned scam in Newburgh Heights has taken thousands of dollars from drivers

The Cops Were Chasing a Shoplifter. They Ended Up Destroying an Innocent Man's Home.

Amtrak train smashes car in New Hampshire after GPS directed driver onto tracks

Cooking Hamburgers With Thermite

Making Charcoal the Easy Way

Homemade Gunpowder, For Science!


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Health/Medical
See other Health/Medical Articles

Title: Utah nurse screams 'help me' as she's cuffed by cop for refusing to draw blood on unconscious patient, video shows
Source: Fox News
URL Source: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/0 ... cious-patient-video-shows.html
Published: Sep 2, 2017
Author: Fox News
Post Date: 2017-09-02 00:34:39 by Pinguinite
Keywords: None
Views: 577
Comments: 75

Nurse arrested for refusing to draw unconscious man's blood

A Utah nurse screamed “help me” after a cop handcuffed her for refusing to draw blood on an unconscious patient July 26, police body camera footage showed.

The video showed University of Utah Hospital nurse Alex Wubbels, an Alpine skier who participated in the 1998 and 2002 Winter Olympic games, calmly explaining to Salt Lake Detective Jeff Payne that she could not draw blood from a patient who had been injured in a car accident, according to The Salt Lake Tribune.

Wubbels told Payne the patient was required to give consent for a blood sample or be under arrest. Otherwise, she said police needed a warrant. Payne threatened to imprison Wubbels if he was not given the blood sample, according to the video.

“I either go away with blood in vials or body in tow,” Payne is shown saying.

Wubbels, who was on the phone with her supervisor, explained the situation to the supervisor, who agreed with the nurse and reportedly told the cop, “sir, you’re making a huge mistake because you’re threatening a nurse.”

Disturbing video shows Utah nurse dragged away by cop for refusing to draw unconscious patient’s blood https://t.co/y6ZjfDHeyp pic.twitter.com/k3SrUsSjqh — Raw Story (@RawStory) September 1, 2017

Upon hearing that, Payne announced Wubbels was under arrest and physically moved her outside the hospital while she screamed.

Wubbels yelled, “Help! Stop! I did nothing wrong!” while being handcuffed.

Payne was attempting to get a blood sample from a patient who was burned after being involved in a head-on crash with a pick-up truck driver that was fleeing police, the Washington Post reported. The driver died in the incident.

Wubbels was not charged and police have started an internal investigation. Payne initially remained on duty although he was suspended from blood-draw duties. Later on Friday Utah police announced that he had been put on paid administrative leave.

Police Chief Mike Brown said in a statement that his department will comply with the investigation into Payne. Salt Lake County's Unified Police Department will run the criminal probe into Payne's actions. Brown and the mayor of Salt Lake City have apologized for the incident and changed their policies to mirror hospital protocols.

Christina Judd, a spokesperson for the Salt Lake City Police, said the department was alarmed by what they witnessed in the video.

Judd said the department was working to investigate what went wrong and is seeking to repair the “unfortunate rift” it has caused.

Wubbels said she had been told of other hospital employees being harassed by officers and this footage proved their claim. She has not pressed charges yet but would consider it if police did not change their ways.

“I can’t sit on this video and not attempt to speak out both to re-educate and inform,” Wubbels told The Salt Lake Tribune. Police departments “need to be having conversations about what is appropriate intervention.”

The hospital supported Wubbels actions and said it would consider pressing charges.

"University of Utah Health supports Nurse Wubbles and her decision to focus first and foremost on the care and well-being of her patient,” said Suzanne Winchester, the hospital's media relations manager. “She followed procedures and protocols in this matter and was acting in her patient’s best interest. We have worked with our law enforcement partners on this issue to ensure an appropriate process for moving forward.”


Poster Comment:

I was unclear if the cop was expecting the nurse or staff to make the blood draw and they were refusing, or if the cop wanted to draw it himself and the staff was preventing him from doing so.

This article clearly states the cop was expecting the staff to do it, in which case the nurse was arrested for refusing to do something the cop wanted.

It seems the nurse, so far, is being nice in not suing the cop & department. That's characteristic of a true public servant.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Pinguinite, misterwhite (#0)

Wubbels was not charged and police have started an internal investigation. Payne initially remained on duty although he was suspended from blood-draw duties. Later on Friday Utah police announced that he had been put on paid administrative leave.

Come on mister white make some of your pussy boy excuses.

A K A Stone  posted on  2017-09-02   0:39:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: A K A Stone (#1)

Come on mister white make some of your pussy boy excuses.

It's safe to say he needs no encouragement.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   0:45:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: misterwhite (#0)

BTW, if the cop arrested the nurse because she would not do the blood draw, and not because she was preventing the cop from doing the draw, then any law about implied consent and obstruction of justice is a non-issue. The issue instead is one of whether a cop can force a citizen to assist him in conducting a bodily search of another person, and arrest that person if s/he refuses.

And especially in the case of a blood draw, there's no way in hell any court will give rubber stamp approval as it's a medical procedure that comes with risk, even if small, to both drawee and drawer.

The nurse's supervisor can be heard telling this cop over the phone that he was making a huge mistake. If it was because he felt he could force the nurse to do a blood draw, then the mistake was at minimum, enormously huge.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   2:13:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Pinguinite, A K A Stone, misterwhite (#3)

I wouldn't worry too much.

A cop could beat a bushel of puppies to death in front of an elementary school on main street or he could rape that same nurse and then shoot her on her way home from work and he still wouldn't face the kind of investigation they're doing now over this incident.

But cross the hospital mafia? Holy crap. This is why the mayor and police leadership all apologized promptly, this is why there's a criminal probe of the cop's action and a likelihood of a penalty, more so than if he shot some assorted persons of color.

The costumed clowns have a mafia and it has rules. The cop clowns do not mess with the hospital clowns. Ever. They value the hospital services too much.

Here's the exchange. Another small win for cop body cameras to catch the cops doing Bad Stuff like this.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-02   6:07:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Pinguinite, misterwhite (#3)

And especially in the case of a blood draw, there's no way in hell any court will give rubber stamp approval as it's a medical procedure that comes with risk, even if small, to both drawee and drawer.

Why did the psycho cop insist on a blood draw in the first place? The unconscious man was that way because of the police chase that caused the driver of the car being chased to slam into his pick-up truck.

The only possible reason for the badged prick to demand a blood test would be to try and "get" the victim of the accident on some charge in order to cover his own ass just in case his car chase was not "by the book"

“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Deckard  posted on  2017-09-02   11:24:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Pinguinite (#0)

I was unclear if the cop was expecting the nurse or staff to make the blood draw and they were refusing, or if the cop wanted to draw it himself and the staff was preventing him from doing so.

The cop was trained in drawing blood. The nurse was trying to prevent him from doing so. She was wrong. The cop was right.

BUT, in order to maintain a good relationship between the police and the hospital, the police have to pretend it was their fault.

Put me in charge and she'd be sitting in jail waiting for her trial of obstruction and resisting arrest. While she's sitting there she'll have time to become familiar with Utah state law which clearly says that a person gives their implied consent to a blood draw when they acquire a driver's license.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   11:26:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Deckard (#5)

Why did the psycho cop insist on a blood draw in the first place?

Because it was department policy to do so.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   11:29:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: A K A Stone (#1)

Come on mister white make some of your pussy boy excuses.

I offer no excuses. All I've done with this case is to point out the facts and the law. They speak for themselves.

Now, if you want to whine and cry about how the cop hurt her feelings and how he could have been more gentle, fine. But that doesn't change the facts or the law. The cop was right. She was wrong.

I have zero pity for those ignorant "victims" who face off against a cop and tell them they "have no right" to do something when they clearly do. People either need to learn the law or shut the f**k up.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   11:35:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: misterwhite (#6)

Put me in charge and she'd be sitting in jail waiting for her trial of obstruction and resisting arrest.

Of course you would - you think anyone here at LF would believe otherwise?

Your self-admitted cop-worship is no big secret here.

The asshole cop had no fucking reason to demand blood from an unconscious man who had committed no crime and was not suspected of wrong doing.

WTF is wrong with you? Why do you even remain in the United States when your fascist tendencies would be more welcome elsewhere?

“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Deckard  posted on  2017-09-02   11:36:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Deckard (#9)

The asshole cop had no fucking reason to demand blood from an unconscious man who had committed no crime and was not suspected of wrong doing.

I agree. He had no reason YOU'D accept. But he does't care what you think.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   11:44:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: misterwhite (#10)

I agree. He had no reason YOU'D accept.

No reason that any sane person would accept.

But he does't care what you think.

Obviously he doesn't care what anybody thinks - he's above the law and can do pretty much anything he wants, at least according to the resident copsucker here.

“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul

Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.

Deckard  posted on  2017-09-02   11:48:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Deckard (#11)

he's above the law

He IS the law and knows it better than some nurse. Obviously.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   11:53:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Deckard (#5)

Why did the psycho cop insist on a blood draw in the first place? The unconscious man was that way because of the police chase that caused the driver of the car being chased to slam into his pick-up truck.

Obviously, if the cop could have gotten a warrant, then he probably would have, but he likely would have failed to do so as the driver committed no infraction related to the crash.

It is a good question though which begs an answer. The victim was, in fact, a part time cop himself. I do not see how it is possible the blood draw could have helped the victim, contrary to the officer's claim, as it could only yield evidence that could hurt him, not help him (I.e. if it turned out that in spite of not committing any driving infraction contributing to the crash, he could have been on drugs or alcohol). Perhaps the cop knew the victim and had some sinister motive. Perhaps, as you speculate, the cop did something to cause the crash and wanted to incriminate the victim somehow, perhaps by tainting the blood sample he wanted in his possession. But clearly there was no legit reason to require the blood draw, and the hospital policy for refusing it reflected that lack of legitimate need.

The only possible reason for the badged prick to demand a blood test would be to try and "get" the victim of the accident on some charge in order to cover his own ass just in case his car chase was not "by the book"

Yes. This question should be part of the investigation, of course.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:03:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: misterwhite (#6)

The cop was trained in drawing blood. The nurse was trying to prevent him from doing so. She was wrong. The cop was right.

You contradict the fox news article which clearly states the cop wanted the hospital to do the blood draw.

Put me in charge and

We appreciate the offer to volunteer, but...... no thank you!

As is made clear, consent is a non-issue if the cop arrested the nurse for not drawing the blood. Unless you can show a law requiring licensed medical staff to draw blood of third parties upon police demand.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:07:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: misterwhite (#6) (Edited)

She was wrong. The cop was right.

Oh, FU if you're not just trolling every single day. Or even if you are.

She needs to take this psycho asshole's house, car, pension, TV - everything. Don't steal from the taxpayers for this pig's arrogant violence.

Hank Rearden  posted on  2017-09-02   12:09:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Pinguinite (#14)

You contradict the fox news article which clearly states the cop wanted the hospital to do the blood draw.

You contradict the Salt Lake Tribune headline which clearly states:

"Video shows Utah nurse screaming, being dragged into police car after refusing to let officer take blood from unconscious victim"

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:12:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Hank Rearden (#15)

Oh, FU if you're not just trolling every single day. Or even if you are.

I stated the facts and the law. What you got? Feelings and emotion. F**k you.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:13:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Pinguinite (#13)

It is a good question though which begs an answer.

Why? It's department policy. They don't need your approval. And they certainly don't need to justify it to you.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:29:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: misterwhite (#16)

You contradict the Salt Lake Tribune headline which clearly states:

"Video shows Utah nurse screaming, being dragged into police car after refusing to let officer take blood from unconscious victim"

Not necessarily. The officer clearly wanted to take the blood and stated as much (he would leave with either blood or body, I think it was). But the SLTrib article does not say who would do the actual blood drawing.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:30:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: misterwhite (#18)

Why? It's department policy. They don't need your approval. And they certainly don't need to justify it to you.

Please try not to be too stupid. It's all part of an investigation.

If Utah police set up a checkpoint stopping all motorists and doing a blood draw, right on the highway, then the question of why would still be important.

By your way of thinking, cops could legally, without any question whatsover, set up such check points every 1/2 mile on a 100 mile interstate, resulting in the death of all drivers due to loss of blood / shock perhaps by no more than about the 80 mile marker.

No, such a police tactic would be above and beyond the question of any American citizens, because it's "the law".

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:36:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Pinguinite (#19)

But the SLTrib article does not say who would do the actual blood drawing.

So it was just a coincidence that he was at the hospital and he was trained in taking blood?

Are you being this dense on purpose?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:38:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Pinguinite (#20)

then the question of why would still be important.

That implies the answer to that question is then subject to your approval. It's not. So why ask it? To get into an argument with the cops?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:42:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Pinguinite (#19)

But the SLTrib article does not say who would do the actual blood drawing.

"to let officer take blood from unconscious victim".

So you think that could mean he wanted the nurse to draw the blood, then place the vial of blood in the unconscious victim's hand, whereupon the cop would then take blood from the victim.

That's how you read the headline? Why do you insist on making yourself look so incredibly stupid?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:49:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: misterwhite (#23)

The SLTrib article does not explicitly say who was to draw the blood.

The Fox news article, to which the AP contributed, does explicitly say the hospital staff was to draw.

And the cop is on admin leave, which was a decision made by me.

Just kidding, but you can have some fun with that I'm sure.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:52:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Pinguinite (#20)

By your way of thinking, cops could legally, without any question whatsover, set up such check points every 1/2 mile on a 100 mile interstate, resulting in the death of all drivers due to loss of blood / shock perhaps by no more than about the 80 mile marker.

Because they can, you assume they would?

Congress can set your taxes at 100%. Gosh, if they did that you'd have no money. Let's worry ourselves to death about that, too.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   12:54:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Pinguinite (#24)

The Fox news article, to which the AP contributed, does explicitly say the hospital staff was to draw.

Round and round we go. The Salt Lake Tribune -- a local paper with local reporters -- did explicitly say that the nurse refused to let the officer take blood from unconscious victim. The officer went to the hospital get blood, was trained to draw blood, and was legally allowed to do so.

If the hospital had a policy of not drawing blood for any reason, then he, by law, was allowed to do so himself.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:02:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: misterwhite (#25)

Because they can, you assume they would?

Well, since you already established that taking blood from any driver at any time can be done for any reason or no reason whatsoever, then if they were to do as I theorized, then no one has any standing to question it.

And you'd say it's okay because of the implied consent law.

I get it. The law does not serve the people. The people serve the law. That's why people exist. And if a choice needs to be made of an innocent person dying or the law broken, then the innocent person needs to die. That's how you think. I understand that now.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:04:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: misterwhite (#26)

If the hospital had a policy of not drawing blood for any reason, then he, by law, was allowed to do so himself.

In which case, he did obtain the blood draw after arresting the obstructing nurse?

Or did that not happen?

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:05:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Pinguinite (#24)

And the cop is on admin leave, which was a decision made by me.

He's on admin leave for bullshit, politically correct reasons because his linquini-spined supervisors decided to kiss the hospital's ass rather than educate the hospital staff on state law.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:09:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: misterwhite (#26) (Edited)

If the hospital had a policy of not drawing blood for any reason, then he, by law, was allowed to do so himself.

But instead, the pig decides to arrest her for not submitting to being his slave against policies she's just read to the pig.

She needs to take all his stuff, keep what she likes, sell what she can and burn the remainder on the front lawn of his new tenement shack.

Hank Rearden  posted on  2017-09-02   13:10:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: misterwhite (#29)

politically correct reasons

You are sounding like a government salesman pitching for fascism.

buckeroo  posted on  2017-09-02   13:13:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Pinguinite (#27)

then no one has any standing to question it.

They can question it, complain about it, challenge it -- at the appropriate time to the appropriate people.

The nurse and her supervisor chose to question it at the wrong time with the wrong person. Furthermore, they went beyond questioning it and actually interfered based on the mistaken belief that they were in the right.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:19:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: buckeroo (#31)

You are sounding like a government salesman pitching for fascism.

No. That's what you hear.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:20:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: Pinguinite (#28)

In which case, he did obtain the blood draw after arresting the obstructing nurse?

I assume so. The article doesn't say. Is that important? Does it change any of the facts I cited? Does it change the law?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:24:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Hank Rearden (#30)

But instead, the pig decides to arrest her for not submitting to being his slave against policies she's just read to the pig.

She was not allowing him to do his lawful duty. His supervisor authorized him to arrest her if she interfered. That's what he did.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:27:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: misterwhite (#29)

He's on admin leave for bullshit, politically correct reasons because his linquini-spined supervisors decided to kiss the hospital's ass rather than educate the hospital staff on state law.

If so, it may be because of the absolute enormity of backlash they are receiving as this video has gone viral with near universal condemnation from the general public.

Imagine that.... a police department actually caving to the will of the people instead of, if you are right, the law. Such a travesty.

Remember what I said about people being much more motivated by emotions rather than cold logic? Well, that video is an absolute killer. And of course it doesn't help the cop at all that the nurse was shown being very logical.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:28:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: misterwhite (#32)

They can question it, complain about it, challenge it -- at the appropriate time to the appropriate people.

Sure they can. After the fact, of course. In this case, after a lot of people end up dead from blood loss. That's the appropriate time to question things "properly".

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:31:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: misterwhite (#34)

I assume so. The article doesn't say. Is that important?

As far as the question of who was to do the blood draw, it sure is.

If he didn't do the draw himself, then it shows that he likely arrested her for not doing as he ordered, and not for obstructing his efforts to draw it himself.

So yes, very important.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:33:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Pinguinite (#36)

that the nurse was shown being very logical.

So that's the key? Logic?

So if I can logically explain the cop why I was breaking the law by doing 90 in a 45, he'll let me go? And if he doesn't, I can take my case to the Internet to put pressure on the entire department?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:37:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: misterwhite (#39)

So if I can logically explain the cop why I was breaking the law by doing 90 in a 45, he'll let me go? And if he doesn't, I can take my case to the Internet to put pressure on the entire department?

You can try, but I don't think you'll be nearly as successful as this nurse was.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:39:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: Pinguinite (#38)

then it shows that he likely arrested her for not doing as he ordered, and not for obstructing his efforts to draw it himself.

Suppose after the first nurse was taken away in handcuffs a second nurse came forward and volunteered to do the blood draw.

So to answer your question, I would say that the blood was eventually drawn by another nurse. How can you possibly conclude anything by that?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:44:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Pinguinite (#40)

You can try, but I don't think you'll be nearly as successful as this nurse was.

So basically you're saying that the law is whatever an individual says it is based on how sympathetic they can appear to the general public.

That "Rule of Law" stuff is so yesterday.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   13:48:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: Hank Rearden (#15)

She needs to take this psycho asshole's house, car, pension, TV - everything.

Oh noes. Not de big screen tee-bee!

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-02   14:11:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: misterwhite (#41)

So to answer your question, I would say that the blood was eventually drawn by another nurse. How can you possibly conclude anything by that?

In case you've forgotten, the question is simply whether the cop wanted to do the draw himself, or was ordering the hospital staff to do it, because that hinges on the cops reason for arresting the nurse.

If the nurse was obstructing as you claim, then after doing the arrest, he would be free to then conduct the blood draw himself.

But if he did not obtain any blood draw that day, then it implies that the nurse was ordered by the cop to do the draw but did not do so, and that would likely mean the nurse was not arrested for obstructing the cop from doing it himself, but merely not doing something he ordered, and that makes a big legal difference in the justification, or lack thereof, for the arrest.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   14:14:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: Pinguinite, misterwhite, nolu chan (#24)

The SLTrib article does not explicitly say who was to draw the blood.

It does not matter at all who was going to draw the blood. As a matter of policy, the hospital would not allow non-staffers to draw blood.

As to the larger legal question, the hospital was obligated to protect the rights of a vulnerable (unconscious) person from the moment they admitted the patient. They have custodial legal obligations by law in every state.

If the cop was some kind of police phlebotomist or something, he should have drawn the blood before the patient came under the protective status of a hospital, i.e. prior to admission.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-02   14:14:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: misterwhite (#42)

So basically you're saying that the law is whatever an individual says it is based on how sympathetic they can appear to the general public.

That "Rule of Law" stuff is so yesterday.

As I predicted, your defense of the cop in this case has proven extremely entertaining. Thanks for playing.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   14:15:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Tooconservative (#45)

As to the larger legal question, the hospital was obligated to protect the rights of a vulnerable (unconscious) person from the moment they admitted the patient. They have custodial legal obligations by law in every state.

A very reasonable and believable position. If true, and the cop did want to do it himself but was prevented by the staff, then it would be the cop in violation of law, not withstanding any laws related to implied consent by drivers.

If the cop was some kind of police phlebotomist or something, he should have drawn the blood before the patient came under the protective status of a hospital, i.e. prior to admission.

True, but a moot point as to the question of the reason for his arresting her.

I think it most likely that the cop was demanding the staff do the draw and give him the samples, and was not asking for access to do it himself. I mean, heck, it's a hospital. When you are in a hospital and want something like a blood draw done, one would typically ask a nurse to do it. Prior to the dispute arising, it would be most reasonable for the cop wanting a blood sample to ask the hospital staff to provide one and that he had every expectation of it being provided to him. Even if he was trained, it's not his primary field so that is what a reasonable person would do. Plus there is the matter of sterility. A cop walking into an ER has all his gear all over him, and was presumably at the scene of the accident, so it would not be prudent for staff to allow that under normal circumstances anyway.

It is most likely then that the cop wanted the staff to draw the blood and did not attempt to do it himself, at least prior to the arrest.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   14:28:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Pinguinite, misterwhite, nolu chan (#44)

In case you've forgotten, the question is simply whether the cop wanted to do the draw himself, or was ordering the hospital staff to do it, because that hinges on the cops reason for arresting the nurse.

I think the bigger question is why the cop was demanding a blood draw from a victim who was grievously injured as a result of a high-speed police chase.

I think he was hoping to find something in the guy's blood, like a low alcohol level or some prescription or illicit drug that might be claimed to have impaired his driving ability.

I think the trooper was collecting blood as a lawfare method, to try to get anything on that driver so they could try to defend against a lawsuit after the cops chased this guy into a head-on crash with him.

The circumstances and length of the chase could make a big difference if the victim sues the cops. This legal status of high-speed chases is full of controversy and a lot of lawsuits in various states, CA in particular, some others in FL. Various cities and states have passed laws to try to regulate when and how a high-speed police chase is allowable due to the substantial danger that the perp will crash disastrously into a bystander or another vehicle, exactly as happened here.

We need to know a lot more about that police chase and hear why this cop was so determined to collect that blood. And who ordered him to do it and why.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-02   14:28:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Tooconservative (#48)

I think the trooper was collecting blood as a lawfare method, to try to get anything on that driver so they could try to defend against a lawsuit after the cops chased this guy into a head-on crash with him.

Deckard and I both speculated on this exact point previously. It's not out of the question the cop could have intended to taint the blood samples on his way to the lab, if he was outright crooked. Normally such speculation would be groundless, but given the arrest response was so extreme, such mal intent would set the stage for the harsh response.

The circumstances and length of the chase could make a big difference if the victim sues the cops. This legal status of high-speed chases is full of controversy and a lot of lawsuits in various states, CA in particular, some others in FL. Various cities and states have passed laws to try to regulate when and how a high-speed police chase is allowable due to the substantial danger that the perp will crash disastrously into a bystander or another vehicle, exactly as happened here.

I think I read once the rule is to not engage in pursuit if the danger the pursuit poses to the public exceeded the danger to the public of not immediately capturing the suspect.

We need to know a lot more about that police chase and hear why this cop was so determined to collect that blood. And who ordered him to do it and why.

Such questions are moot and pointless in conducting the investigation.

According to misterwhite.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   14:40:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: Pinguinite (#49)

According to misterwhite.

He's the biggest a-hole on the Internet.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2017-09-02   14:47:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: misterwhite (#6)

She was wrong. The cop was right.

Nope, on hospital property, with the patient in hospital custody. The cop has no right to do any blood drawing there without a warrant.

Nor does the cop have the power to command a civilian to do something unconstitutional.

The cop and the police department will lose this.

You are not in charge, and nobody will ever put you in charge, because the way you think is German, not American.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-09-02   15:18:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: misterwhite (#42)

the law is whatever an individual says it is based on how sympathetic they can appear to the general public

I am very sorry to disappoint you but police are not lawmakers, if they want to be, they should run for state legislature or Congress.

Either way, do you realize that you are doing a horrible PR for your buddies? If they knew you would be in a big doo doo.

A Pole  posted on  2017-09-02   17:12:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Pinguinite (#44)

In case you've forgotten, the question is simply whether the cop wanted to do the draw himself, or was ordering the hospital staff to do it, because that hinges on the cops reason for arresting the nurse.

He could have asked her to do it. She said no. Then he said he'll do it. Then she obstructed.

"If the nurse was obstructing as you claim, then after doing the arrest, he would be free to then conduct the blood draw himself."

He was always free to do the blood draw himself. My guess is he did. Or another nurse volunteered.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   17:34:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: Vicomte13 (#51)

You are not in charge, and nobody will ever put you in charge, because the way you think is German, not American.

I think you just insulted the Germans.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   17:37:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: misterwhite (#53)

I have a right to draw your blood with a rusty nail a straw and an empty pickle jar,

A K A Stone  posted on  2017-09-02   17:38:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: misterwhite (#53)

He could have asked her to do it. She said no. Then he said he'll do it. Then she obstructed.

Thanks for the on-the-scene, play by play call, though your summary doesn't match the video very well.

He was always free to do the blood draw himself. My guess is he did. Or another nurse volunteered.

From other reading, it appears that after the arrest that it was discovered that the staff had already done a blood draw in the course of treatment, and that blood may or may not have sufficed for what they wanted.

So it seems things get a bit convoluted. Since prosecutors are now investigating the cops actions for criminality, I'm guessing they should be looking at that, including the reason the cops wanted the blood in the first place. (Which is a question independent of whether they had a legal authority to demand it).

Though to be candid, prosecutors might only be investigating to help pacify the public outrage. I won't hold my breath for any finding of wrong doing, much less criminal action. But we'll see.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-02   17:45:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: Tooconservative (#45) (Edited)

he should have drawn the blood before the patient came under the protective status of a hospital, i.e. prior to admission.

Detective Jeff Payne is a police phlebotomist.

I suppose they could have called him to the accident scene to do the blood draw but my guess is that they wanted to get the victim to the hospital as quickly as possible, figuring they could could do the blood draw there.

"As a matter of policy, the hospital would not allow non-staffers to draw blood."

The hospital had a policy not to do blood draws unless certain conditions were met. Where did you read that police phlebotomists were not allowed to do so?

"the hospital was obligated to protect the rights of a vulnerable (unconscious) person"

Under the State of Utah law, drivers give up their right to refuse blood draws the moment they're issued a license. You may disagree with the law, but it is what it is until the citizens of Utah change it.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   17:53:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: Tooconservative (#48)

I think the bigger question is why the cop was demanding a blood draw from a victim who was grievously injured as a result of a high-speed police chase.

Apparently it's departmental policy. A good one, I think.

In this case, the surviving driver could sue the dead man's estate by claiming the other driver was weaving and acting erratically -- as though he had been drinking or on drugs -- and that behavior caused him to lose control and crash into him.

Without a blood test, we only have his word.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   18:01:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: Fred Mertz (#50)

He's the biggest a-hole on the Internet.

Nuh-uh. You are.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   18:02:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: Pinguinite (#54)

I think you just insulted the Germans.

Vas ist los?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   18:04:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: A K A Stone (#55)

I have a right to draw your blood with a rusty nail a straw and an empty pickle jar,

As always, a true contributor to the discussion.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   18:06:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: Pinguinite (#56)

Thanks for the on-the-scene, play by play call, though your summary doesn't match the video very well.

You're the one citing hypotheticals. So I thought I'd add mine. By the way, the video, as always, leaves out the footage of how everything got to that point.

"including the reason the cops wanted the blood in the first place."

You're like a dog with a bone on that issue. You've lost the argument as to whether or not the police could do the blood draw, so now you're trying to salvage something by hoping to dispute their reason for doing so.

Sad.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   18:15:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: Vicomte13 (#51)

The cop has no right to do any blood drawing there without a warrant.

Not in the State of Utah. No warrant required. This is what -- the 10th time I've cited that? I even gave you a link to the actual law. What's wrong with you?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   18:20:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: misterwhite, Vampire PD (#62)

the video, as always, leaves out the footage of how everything got to that point.

The officer arrived at the hospital with a lust for blood.... then the video.

And after twisting together a crown of thorns, they put it on His head

hondo68  posted on  2017-09-02   18:24:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: hondo68 (#64)

The officer arrived at the hospital with a lust for blood

He wanted blood, but I don't think he was lusting for it.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   18:41:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: misterwhite, nolu chan, Vicomte13, hondo68 (#57)

Detective Jeff Payne is a police phlebotomist.

Then he should have done his job. Not go postal at some nurse who was only obeying written hospital policy. It was her job to refuse him, nothing but.

The hospital had a policy not to do blood draws unless certain conditions were met. Where did you read that police phlebotomists were not allowed to do so?

Once that hospital receives an unconscious person, they assume many legal obligations for medical privacy and to prevent unauthorized medical procedures by anyone. That would include the patient's own doctor if they were not credentialed at that hospital or in that state. There are also HIPPA laws to protect patient privacy and all kinds of ethical guidelines to follow. Undoubtedly, there is statutory law in the state that comes to bear as well as a history of medical privacy cases in the state courts.

No, if he wanted the blood, he had to get it before the patient was transferred from police/EMT custody to the custody of the hospital. Only if the patient was admitted under arrest would the cop have any excuse. Even then, the hospital simple would not allow any non-staffer to do anything that might cause harm or raise privacy issues for them. They would get sued for failing to protect the privacy of the patient while unconscious if they allowed that to happen and their policy does reflect that.

You're just wrong.

Is allowing free-range police vampires to suck the blood out of unconscious victims of reckless high-speed police chases that important to you?

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-02   18:56:33 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: Tooconservative (#66)

Then he should have done his job.

She refused to allow him to do his job. Which is why she was arrested for obstruction.

"No, if he wanted the blood, he had to get it before the patient was transferred from police/EMT custody to the custody of the hospital."

Then why did he, a trained police phlebotomist, even go to the hospital? Certainly he knew he would be denied because "once that hospital receives an unconscious person, they assume many legal obligations for medical privacy and to prevent unauthorized medical procedures by anyone. That would include the patient's own doctor if they were not credentialed at that hospital or in that state. There are also HIPPA laws to protect patient privacy and all kinds of ethical guidelines to follow. Undoubtedly, there is statutory law in the state that comes to bear as well as a history of medical privacy cases in the state courts."

Right?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   19:09:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: misterwhite (#63)

Not in the State of Utah. No warrant required. This is what -- the 10th time I've cited that? I even gave you a link to the actual law. What's wrong with you?

The Constitution supersedes what you have said, and the police know it too, which is why they are bending over backwards here, and why the cop will be disciplined.

You're used to the law twisting all around to support the cops. But medicine is higher up the totem pole of power than the police. Doctors are upper class. Cops are working class. Cops get to tell the average schlub on the street what to do, but start manhandling the intelligentsia, and the superior power of the political system crushed cops down and teaches them their place.

That is what is happening here. Cops bow to doctors, as is right and just.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-09-02   19:10:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: Vicomte13 (#68)

Cops bow to doctors, as is right and just.

So, once again you're saying that the law doesn't apply to certain people.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-09-02   19:17:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: Vicomte13, misterwhite (#68) (Edited)

That is what is happening here. Cops bow to doctors, as is right and just.

That's how it seems to work.

OTOH, an EMT can get shoved around by a cop. And there is some recurring rivalry between firemen and cops, like at an accident scene where the fire department is present and may be trying to use a Jaws of Life or put out a fire. There was a case like that a few years back in CA where the CHiPs assaulted some firemen on a freeway at an accident scene. There were a number of firetrucks at the scene, blocking oncoming lanes of traffic. The cops wanted to re-open lanes and ordered the firemen out but one fireman was a EMT or paramedic and refused to leave his patient and the cops got uppity. The leadership of CHiPs and the fire chief had a lot of backpedaling to do to make peace over it.

But the cops never screw with hospitals. At least I've never heard of it.

However, those rules do change somewhat if a suspect is under arrest when he is admitted to a hospital.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-02   20:25:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: misterwhite (#67)

She refused to allow him to do his job. Which is why she was arrested for obstruction.

Once he arrested her, what was to stop him from doing the blood draw? Kinda pokes holes in your little theories.

For that matter, if he was fully entitled legally to draw that blood, he should have pulled his gun on her and forced her to stand aside while he drew the blood himself. So why didn't he (if you are correct that he is fully entitled to draw the blood of any driver at any time for any reason)? Hell, I'm surprised you aren't arguing that he should have shot the nurse dead on the spot for interference in law enforcement.

Tooconservative  posted on  2017-09-02   20:28:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#72. To: misterwhite (#61)

When someone repeatedly shows they have an evil heart. It is no use debating. Insults are in order. There is no convincing you. You have a hardened heart.

A K A Stone  posted on  2017-09-02   20:48:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: Tooconservative (#71)

Hell, I'm surprised you aren't arguing that he should have shot the nurse dead on the spot for interference in law enforcement.

Please do not give him any ideas.

Pinguinite  posted on  2017-09-03   1:15:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#74. To: misterwhite (#69)

So, once again you're saying that the law doesn't apply to certain people.

Not really. I am saying that cops are not at the top of the hierarchy of law. The job of the cops is inferior in importance to the job done by hospitals, so the writ of the cops and their will ends at the hospital door when it comes to touching patients.

Law enforcement is inferior to medical control of medicine - and that IS our law.

The enforcers of law - cops - are not used to encountering things that have superior legal authority to them, that can give orders to THEM and command THEM to stand down, but the superior authority of medical control over medicine has been placed BY THE LAW above mere street law enforcement. Law enforcement is not as important, in our hierarchy of things, as lifesaving. And law enforcement officers are inferior socially - and in LEGAL POWER - to medical professionals operating on the turf of hospitals. This cop was not on the street. He was in a hospital, which means that his badge did NOT, in fact, make him supreme monkey on this mountain. The hospital's authority was superior to the authority of his badge.

But he was a bully and an ignoramus and did not understand that he was NOT the superior authority present. The LAW is always the superior presence, and the nurse was telling him the LAW that HE had to submit to and obey. Unaccustomed to being commanded to stand down, he went rogue, with the blessing of his ignorant watch commander, and committed a crime. He did not have the authority to do what he did - he merely had the force of a badge and a gun and a pair of handcuffs.

So, now the courts, to which all cops are service dogs, will decide the fate of these dogs gone rabid. These cops WILL BE PUNISHED, because they grossly exceeded their authority, falsely imprisoned medical personnel, and showed force to BREAK THE LAW in order to assert their big swinging dicks...which they didn't actually HAVE under the circumstances.

There are legal forces - laws - superior in authority to the police. The police are people of above average bravery and generally average to below average intelligence. They enforce law that they do not have the authority to MAKE, and here, they tried to MAKE law because the ACTUAL LAW told them "no" and they were ignorant of the law.

Unaccustomed to being SUCCESSFULLY stood down, they escalated to violent force - and committed a crime, for which they should be VIGOROUSLY punished, as an EXAMPLE to the rest of the cops and their watch captains. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-09-03   15:27:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#75. To: Tooconservative (#70)

The hospitals are the medical professionals' turf. The street is the cops' turf.

Vicomte13  posted on  2017-09-03   15:28:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com