Salt Lake City Police Detective Roughs Up Nurse

[wing2000]

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.

I agree. He alone escalated what was otherwise a calm scenario in a hospital. He exploded when the nurse's supervisor advised him he was making a mistake and arrested the nurse in an abusive manner. IMO, the officer should not be wearing a badge.

 

[Landon Caeli]

I probably shouldn't say openly what I think about the half-tard.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

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

Our rights should never "disappear" - that how we end up living in a dictatorship

 

[Desk trauma]

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

Thankful they do not.

 

[JackRT]

A new dawn in the land of the free…

And the home of the brave (the nurse).

 

[GondwanaLand]

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.

Actually Utah's implied consent stuff on blood tests got overturned TEN YEARS AGO in state court (IIRC it was state Supreme Court), and wrt blood tests, it would have been overturned in last years' SCOTUS case anyway (breath tests is another story, according to SCOTUS, but taking a blood test is illegal without a warrant or someone being under arrest or having given consent).

 

[Maren]

Actually Utah's implied consent stuff on blood tests got overturned TEN YEARS AGO in state court (IIRC it was state Supreme Court), and wrt blood tests, it would have been overturned in last years' SCOTUS case anyway (breath tests is another story, according to SCOTUS, but taking a blood test is illegal without a warrant or someone being under arrest or having given consent).

If you go back to the link I posted, Utah does have a law currently in place, and it was not struck down by SCOTUS last year. I haven't gone back to see when the currently law was passed; my guess is that the current law was a replacement for the law struck down a decade ago -- and that the old law was similar to the one struck down by SCOTUS.

The law that was struck down, was struck down because it had automatic criminal penalties for refusing to be tested; it is the criminal penalties that were ruled unconstitutional. Utah's law instead merely has civil penalties, such as suspension of your driving license, but no criminal penalties and the Supreme Court has not outlawed those types of laws.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Coward cop and their lieutenant placed on administrative leave.

SLC Police Dept. on Twitter

Let's see if anyone actually loses their job over this

 

[Goonie]

Coward cop and their lieutenant placed on administrative leave.

SLC Police Dept. on Twitter

Let's see if anyone actually loses their job over this

It would be far more deserved than the officer making a truly dumb joke about only killing black people.

 

[USincognito]

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.

If the law allows an officer to physically draw blood then that law not only is idiotic, but probably violates the 4th Amendment.

 

[GondwanaLand]

If you go back to the link I posted, Utah does have a law currently in place, and it was not struck down by SCOTUS last year. I haven't gone back to see when the currently law was passed; my guess is that the current law was a replacement for the law struck down a decade ago -- and that the old law was similar to the one struck down by SCOTUS.

The law that was struck down, was struck down because it had automatic criminal penalties for refusing to be tested; it is the criminal penalties that were ruled unconstitutional. Utah's law instead merely has civil penalties, such as suspension of your driving license, but no criminal penalties and the Supreme Court has not outlawed those types of laws.

Utah's current law does not allow for blood draws.

 

[seashale76]

Without consent or a warrant for such, drawing blood counts as battery. Tort law- as it applies to the profession- is something of which nurses are aware. (I'm a nurse- this was pounded into us in nursing school- and in the facilities in which we work- and by the various BON.) There is absolutely no gray area for this nurse. She did exactly the right thing from a legal standpoint. There is nothing to debate in this particular scenario.