Cops arrest nurse for refusing to draw blood on an unconscious man

exthrower wrote:

Sounds like a lotta people on here didn't have good parenting.....

Lack of respect for authority is a main reason for high crime rates in certain groups....

What groups?

exthrower wrote:

Sounds like a lotta people on here didn't have good parenting.....

Lack of respect for authority is a main reason for high crime rates in certain groups....

0/10

Come on, dude. You're not even trying with that weak shit.

It was in the Washington Post. How is that burying the story?

exthrower wrote:

Sounds like a lotta people on here didn't have good parenting.....

Lack of respect for authority is a main reason for high crime rates in certain groups....

How could you know whether or not this officer had poor parenting, or that it is what caused him to disrespect authority?

Let's see, looks the Wash Post says she was placed into a car while handcuffed--that sure looks like false imprisonment to me:

But the bigger issue is the abuse of citizen's Constitutional Rights. Likely scenario: one or more (probably more, what else do ambulance chasers have to do, but chase ambulances??) criminal attorneys is going to start digging into the arresting officer's (AO) record. Since the AO has already proven to be a moron, the attorneys will find more evidence of abuse and illegal procedures, and then the attorneys will look at the AO's former convictions and attempt to get those thrown out of court. At the same time, the attorneys will start looking at the training and procedures of the department--this part takes it all the way to the Police Chief. Now, if the Chief is smart, he has the AO retire pronto. But, since the AO seems to be a real sanctimonious jerk, I doubt he'll retire, so the Chief will scapegoat the AO to save his own skin.

Personally, I don't think it matters what the nurse does now--there are too many people with an axe to grind with the police, heads are going to roll over at SLC PD.

Where in Leo's post did he mention Payne. He was talking about the guy who was wearing the body camera was going to out of a job. I assume he was talking about how other cops would give him a hard time for having it on and recording this situation.

Although, he probably should be charged, I don't think there is a chance in hell that Payne will be charged with anything. Police get a huge leeway in confrontations with the public.Just look at all the shootings and beatings they are involved in which have been recorded. The vast majority of them get off.

I've worked in the healthcare field my entire life, with no warrant and no consent, the detective had no rights to the patients blood. Hospitals beat this in to the staff. He was wrong, she was right and she stood her ground, and should have. Probably the best bet for her would have been to call her supervisor, but she didn't. No matter, the detective was in the wrong. The detective had no legal grounds to arrest her, should be fired and face charges for assault. He should know better.

Brody wrote:

Leo the lion wrote:

At what point did he falsely imprision anyone? Assault? Is there another video showing him do this because his sure as hell doesn't? He basically did nothing but get some paperwork out of the trunk and you want him charged with assault and false imprisionment?

Are you high?

I'm wonder too why that policeman would face any charges?????

Will all of them that were there?

Here you go:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

I've worked in the healthcare field my entire life, with no warrant and no consent, the detective had no rights to the patients blood. Hospitals beat this in to the staff. He was wrong, she was right and she stood her ground, and should have. Probably the best bet for her would have been to call her supervisor, but she didn't. No matter, the detective was in the wrong. The detective had no legal grounds to arrest her, should be fired and face charges for assault. He should know better.

She did call her supervisor. Her supervisor read the policy to the officer and backed up the nurse.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

I've worked in the healthcare field my entire life, with no warrant and no consent, the detective had no rights to the patients blood. Hospitals beat this in to the staff. He was wrong, she was right and she stood her ground, and should have. Probably the best bet for her would have been to call her supervisor, but she didn't. No matter, the detective was in the wrong. The detective had no legal grounds to arrest her, should be fired and face charges for assault. He should know better.

She did call her supervisor. Her supervisor read the policy to the officer and backed up the nurse.

Well there ya go. Case closed.

Several points:

1. The patient in this scenario was the victim of a crime. He was injured in a hit and run accident following a hide speed chase. The reason the officer was trying to draw blood on him was to try to find some sort of drugs or alcohol in his system in an attempt to shield the police department which engaged in the high speed chase from any liability.

2. This incident happened over a month ago. The officer was placed on desk duty throughout that period. Only when the videotape became public (released by the nurse) did the department place him on administrative leave. That is shameful.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Several points:

1. The patient in this scenario was the victim of a crime. He was injured in a hit and run accident following a hide speed chase. The reason the officer was trying to draw blood on him was to try to find some sort of drugs or alcohol in his system in an attempt to shield the police department which engaged in the high speed chase from any liability.

2. This incident happened over a month ago. The officer was placed on desk duty throughout that period. Only when the videotape became public (released by the nurse) did the department place him on administrative leave. That is shameful.

Agreed.The Chief should also go.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Several points:

1. The patient in this scenario was the victim of a crime. He was injured in a hit and run accident following a hide speed chase. The reason the officer was trying to draw blood on him was to try to find some sort of drugs or alcohol in his system in an attempt to shield the police department which engaged in the high speed chase from any liability.

2. This incident happened over a month ago. The officer was placed on desk duty throughout that period. Only when the videotape became public (released by the nurse) did the department place him on administrative leave. That is shameful.

What's a 'hide speed chase?" Is it like "hide and seek?"

READING IS FUNDAMENTAL wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Several points:

1. The patient in this scenario was the victim of a crime. He was injured in a hit and run accident following a hide speed chase. The reason the officer was trying to draw blood on him was to try to find some sort of drugs or alcohol in his system in an attempt to shield the police department which engaged in the high speed chase from any liability.

2. This incident happened over a month ago. The officer was placed on desk duty throughout that period. Only when the videotape became public (released by the nurse) did the department place him on administrative leave. That is shameful.

What's a 'hide speed chase?" Is it like "hide and seek?"

I think it is one wherein adults recognize typos for what they are and do not think themselves oh-so-clever in pointing them out.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Brody wrote:

I'm wonder too why that policeman would face any charges?????

Will all of them that were there?

Here you go:

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter5/76-5-S102.html

So no assault charges for any of them.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

She did call her supervisor. Her supervisor read the policy to the officer and backed up the nurse.

Well there ya go. Case closed.

To further complicate things, HE also called his supervisor, a Lt., that told Payne to get the blood OR arrest the nurse for interfering.

That Lt should be held to a higher standard than the detective and both should face charges.

I Think wrote:

READING IS FUNDAMENTAL wrote:

What's a 'hide speed chase?" Is it like "hide and seek?"

I think it is one wherein adults recognize typos for what they are and do not think themselves oh-so-clever in pointing them out.

I bet you are the life of the party. You should change your handle to Mr. Serious.

READING IS FUNDAMENTAL wrote:

What's a 'hide speed chase?"

I can't understand this sentence because it has a close quote but no open quote.

incomprehensible wrote:

READING IS FUNDAMENTAL wrote:

What's a 'hide speed chase?"

I can't understand this sentence because it has a close quote but no open quote.

Oh, that's so Obvious.