Salt Lake City Police Detective Roughs Up Nurse

[wing2000]

Nurse is arrested for defending the Constitutional rights of a patient:


By all accounts, the head nurse at the University of Utah Hospital’s burn unit was professional and restrained when she told a Salt Lake City police detective he wasn’t allowed to draw blood from a badly injured patient.

The detective didn’t have a warrant, first off. And the patient wasn’t conscious, so he couldn’t give consent. Without that, the detective was barred from collecting blood samples — not just by hospital policy, but by basic constitutional law.

Still, Detective Jeff Payne insisted that he be let in to take the blood, saying the nurse would be arrested and charged if she refused.

......


‘This is crazy,’ sobs Utah hospital nurse as cop roughs her up, arrests her for doing her job

 

[iluvatar5150]

Welp, let's hope that results in a 7-figure settlement and the cop being fired.

 

[majj27]

Wow. That's... that's just basic thuggery.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

A new dawn in the land of the free…

 

[Maren]

To give a bit of context; Utah, like many states, has a law allowing that, if you drive, you consent to a blood test to see if you are driving under the influence. I will admit, this case is something of a gray area, since the man did not have the opportunity to refuse to be tested; though that is, per law, an admission of guilt. The policeman was operating under the idea that since the man could not refuse, the law gave him the right to take the sample -- and legally he could be correct.

Having said that, the policeman was wrong in this case. Particularly with the law in Utah, he should have taken the time to obtain a warrant, which should have been easily granted, rather than arrest a nurse for doing her job and protecting the rights of the patient.

 

[PreviouslySeeking...]

To give a bit of context; Utah, like many states, has a law allowing that, if you drive, you consent to a blood test to see if you are driving under the influence. I will admit, this case is something of a gray area, since the man did not have the opportunity to refuse to be tested; though that is, per law, an admission of guilt. The policeman was operating under the idea that since the man could not refuse, the law gave him the right to take the sample -- and legally he could be correct.

Having said that, the policeman was wrong in this case. Particularly with the law in Utah, he should have taken the time to obtain a warrant, which should have been easily granted, rather than arrest a nurse for doing her job and protecting the rights of the patient.

Not arguing, just wanting to understand.

How is it a gray area? The patient was hurt in a head on collision with some idiot the police were chasing. He's literally an innocent bystander. One who, depending on state law, may be able to sue the police department. Many departments don't do high speed chase precisely because of the collateral damage they can cause.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

When the police tell you to do something, you do it without question. I am sick of people that think the rule of law applies to everyone.

 

[Tigger45]

When the police tell you to do something, you do it without question. I am sick of people that think the rule of law applies to everyone.

No way. All medical personnel are instructed in and held to HIPPA regulations. This head nurse is quite aware of those regulations and could not only lose her job, be fined by the government and be sued by the patient or his family for allowing the blood draw. This is completely on the arresting officer for not simply obtaining a proper warrant .

 

[wing2000]

To give a bit of context; Utah, like many states, has a law allowing that, if you drive, you consent to a blood test to see if you are driving under the influence. I will admit, this case is something of a gray area, since the man did not have the opportunity to refuse to be tested; though that is, per law, an admission of guilt. The policeman was operating under the idea that since the man could not refuse, the law gave him the right to take the sample -- and legally he could be correct.

Having said that, the policeman was wrong in this case. Particularly with the law in Utah, he should have taken the time to obtain a warrant, which should have been easily granted, rather than arrest a nurse for doing her job and protecting the rights of the patient.

from the article:

“So why don’t we just write a search warrant,” the officer wearing the body camera says to Payne.

“They don’t have PC,” Payne responds, using the abbreviation for probable cause, which police must have to get a warrant for search and seizure.

 

[wing2000]

Welp, let's hope that results in a 7-figure settlement and the cop being fired.

The city's attorney office will be busy....

 

[iluvatar5150]

I had trouble reading the article earlier due to some poor reception.

The patient was an innocent bystander AND the cop's lieutenant ordered him to arrest the nurse? Lol, holy jeez.

From the article:

A neighboring police department sent Payne, a trained police phlebotomist, to collect blood from the patient and check for illicit substances, as the Tribune reported. The goal was reportedly to protect the trucker, who was not suspected of a crime.

Lol, who believes that they were trying to protect the trucker and not themselves?

Anybody?

Anybody?

Hello?

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Plain clothes detectives pulling guns and threatening drivers during traffic stops, others roughing up and arresting nurses during warrant less attempts to draw blood from unconscious patients, people advised to remain still during interactions during police in case the cop feels threatened and decides to shoot.

America sounds more and more like East Germany every day. And I'm not even kidding.

 

[Maren]

Not arguing, just wanting to understand.

How is it a gray area? The patient was hurt in a head on collision with some idiot the police were chasing. He's literally an innocent bystander. One who, depending on state law, may be able to sue the police department. Many departments don't do high speed chase precisely because of the collateral damage they can cause.

from the article:

“So why don’t we just write a search warrant,” the officer wearing the body camera says to Payne.

“They don’t have PC,” Payne responds, using the abbreviation for probable cause, which police must have to get a warrant for search and seizure.

It is a gray area, depending on how the law is written. In many states, the law is written where the mere fact you are behind the wheel is considered consent to drug/alcohol testing. Granted, you typically can refuse but it does count as a sort of admission of guild, typically with a penalty of suspension of your driver's license and perhaps additional penalties.

If I understand the officer's thoughts, the man was driving which means he gave consent. That he was unconscious does not revoke that consent -- much as if you create a living will, that is considered your "consent"; the fact you are incapacitated does not change what you previously consented (or gave directives) to be done. I will agree, though, if the cop (or lieutenant) felt that was the case he should have been willing to bring it before a judge and ask for a search warrant.

Regardless, I was providing background I had heard from another source -- as I stated before, I fully disagree with the actions of the police in this instance.

 

[Maren]

I saw this article tonight and it seems to do a good job of explaining the issues in this case.

 

[dgiharris]

When the police tell you to do something, you do it without question. I am sick of people that think the rule of law applies to everyone.

No way. All medical personnel are instructed in and held to HIPPA regulations. This head nurse is quite aware of those regulations and could not only lose her job, be fined by the government and be sued by the patient or his family for allowing the blood draw. This is completely on the arresting officer for not simply obtaining a proper warrant .

He's kidding....

Poe's law - Wikipedia

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

I'm sorry. but was a cop looking for blood alcohol content. If so. I think our rights should disappear.

 

[RadiantGrace]

I normally side with police when it comes to various issues, but this is a clear case of wrong doing that needs to be called out as that.

The officer believes he has a legal right to get blood from a patient. That's fine. He goes to the nurse in charge and tells her she needs to comply with the law as he understands it. She prints out the hospital's policy, which his department has agreed to, and explains that. She evens calls a higher up who tells both of them that she should not comply with his request. As a medical professional, you are liable for any wrongdoing, even if told by an officer. Her hospital policy and a superior are telling her not to comply.

The officer can contact his superiors at this point. He can speak with someone in charge at the hospital. Instead, he decides to ask a question in which she will give him the justification for needlessly arresting her in an unprofessional and provocative way. He then tells her they are done, charges at her, grabs her, and places her under arrest. He does not tell her to comply or be arrested, he finds a way to work out his frustration on an innocent person.

Arresting her serves no purpose, she has done everything she can while remaing calm and polite. He could tell her to comply or be put under arrest. He does not. He could tell her she is under arrest and have her put her hands behind her. Cops do this all the time with criminals in calm situations, such as appearing at an unrelated courting hearing.

This guy is out of line and should be fired or placed behind a desk. Cops are human and can make mistakes and treating every incident in defense of them is wrong.

 

[RadiantGrace]

I'm sorry. but was a cop looking for blood alcohol content. If so. I think our rights should disappear.

That's a separate issue from whether or not the cop's actions are justified which they are not. The nurse is a medical professional who is compelled to protect the rights of patients just as much as the cop is compelled to enforce the law. They are morally and legally obligated to do their job. The problem is that a nurse, acting in a professional way, citing policy and with a call from her superior, is confronted with an officer. He decided to act unprofessionally on multiple levels.

 

[bhsmte]

Another example of police not understanding the laws of the jurisdiction they work in. There is really no excuse for this except; incompetence.

 

[wing2000]

I saw this article tonight and it seems to do a good job of explaining the issues in this case.

<excerpt --regarding Utah's implied consent law>

"But while Utah’s law is constitutional, it turns out not to have permitted this specific blood draw. As written, Utah’s law only permits an officer to conduct such a test where he has reasonable grounds to believe that a person from whom blood is to be taken was driving “while in violation of” the laws regarding driving under the influence of alcohol or other substances. In this case, the detective specifically lacked any such grounds, because the draw was being taken to show the opposite – that the driver was not under the influence. Utah’s implied consent law did not authorize this particular blood draw under these particular circumstances."