Nurse forcibly arrested for not allowing cop to draw blood of unconscious patient(Video)

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

and once again you rush in and attack cops before the investigations are complete so save it.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

and once again you rush in and attack cops before the investigations are complete so save it.

Sorry I didn't know you were against free speech, is there a protest somewhere you can go to and shout people down and tell them to shutup and scream that they are fascist ?

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Free speech - absolutely for it.

Uninformed attacks before the investigation completes is another factor entirely.

as for the last asinine comment there is a difference between protesting and rioting in this country. Protesting by voice is acceptable.. assaulting people, destroying property and blocking public right of ways is not protected.

www.sltrib.com...

Salt Lake City Mayor Jackie Biskupski stated that “I been working with Salt Lake City Police Department to increase our use of de-escalation techniques and we have had great success, and this incident is a troubling set back to those efforts.” While we wonder whether Payne received that training, it is not clear from the video that de-escalation is the central issue. Whatever de-escalation opportunities occurred before the video starts, it is clear that by the start of the video both sides are already entrenched in their positions and well on their way to a showdown. Furthermore, de-escalation probably does not resolve the basic impasse, even if it may have led to a more civil arrest. The problem appears to be that Wubbels and Payne had fundamentally different objectives that simply could not be reconciled. The video does reveal a lot about Payne’s approach to conflict and negotiation. He relies entirely on the authority of his badge to pursue his goal, apparently without any consideration of less authoritarian approaches. In law enforcement the term “badge-heavy” is used to refer to officers who are quick to wield their authority over citizens and who will not bend or brook any disagreement. Early in the video Payne notes with some surprise that he may have to arrest Wubbels for obstruction, while admitting, “I’ve never had to go this far before.” Clearly Payne expects a badge-heavy approach to work and it is revealing that Payne’s angry outburst is triggered by Wubbels’ supervisor directly questioning his authority and criticizing his approach.

you can harp about cop haters all you want check my posting history ive defended cops far more then throwing them under the bus i been a member for a long time here .

from same link

First, Payne or his supervisor needed to recognize the boundary conditions of their procedures: they were not able to force compliance and needed to consider different approaches for satisfying the needs of the investigation. Second, Payne needed to be comfortable in an ambiguous situation: his anger and frustration demonstrate an emotional response rather than a professional command of the situation.

and one more quote because you seem to want to demonize wubbles as some cop hating person that just wanted to thumb her nose at a cop again from same link

Finally, Payne and his supervisor needed to employ a problem-solving rather than a proceduralist mindset. It turned out that the hospital had already taken a blood sample from the comatose truck driver as is routine in such cases. This information Wubbels willingly shared when asked. A little patience might have resulted in the police department gaining access to the test results.

so quit lying SHE DID offer it and your using your false interpenetration of the incident to try to demonize her

and last i ask admittidly in a hostile manner when god forbid your hurt in the line of duty do you want a freindly nurse to police or one that may decide that you may not make it if your wounded and just stop offering services and let god sort the wounded out? because if you and your fellow officers keep defending a blatantly wrong officer you would do well to remember that while nurses have a long memory of people that have mistreated them at least you can know that even if they truly hate you and all cops they will still do their ethical duty to defend a patient in their ward and do the best they can to help them due to their oath because they are of a better kind perceptional by the public,but push them to far and they too may one day forget what they promised and their own "blue wall" will come into play and officers may die one day if stuff like this continues

a reply to: Xcathdra


Thanks I'm well aware of that fact.


Like you I'm entitled to an opinion, its fine you do not like my opinion, its not fine for you to tell me what to do.


This attitude, the one on display is very similar to the attitude this cop had with the nurse, do you see it ?


You don't get to tell me what to do, unless I'm in the back of your cruiser under duress and lucky for me I'm not there....so...

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas
The "incident" should have ended when the requesting agency told the detective to "Forget it, we'll do it another way."

No deescalation required. Detective leaves hospital and keeps his jobs.

It's clear who had the big chip on their shoulder and wanted to bully.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

No - she only offered the information about the blood after she was taken into custody and only after the Lt. arrived on scene and spoke to her. 2+ hours after Payne made initial contact.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Thank you for proving my point about you.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Thank you for proving my point about you.

Ok then if you think you won the debate, good for you.....

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Thank you for proving my point about you.

Ok then if you think you won the debate, good for you.....

Lol not the debate - just my point.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Thank you for proving my point about you.

Ok then if you think you won the debate, good for you.....

Lol not the debate - just my point.

If your point is that you are displaying an authoritarian attitude much like the cop this thread is about then we would be in agreement .....

Other than that you need to elaborate....

a reply to: Xcathdra

A nurse telling law enforcement they already took blood is not PHI information.

Can you show me, anywhere in any of the transcripts, body cam footage or statements, where Officer Payne asks Nurse Wubbles if the hospital drew the victims blood? What law requires a nurse to voluntarily disclose patient information that hasn't been asked of them?

How do you think Officer Payne would have reacted if Nurse Wubbles just blurted out, "We already took a blood sample, so you don't need to do a blood draw"?

Shouldn't someone like you, who claims:

I know what im talking about and have extensive training with regards to HIPAA. Before i went into law enforcement I worked public safety in a level 1 trauma facility for 6 years and dealt with it daily.

as well as Officer Payne, KNOW that it's common practice for the hospital to do a blood panel before treating a patient? Didn't Officer Payne know that if the hospital did do a blood draw/panel, that law enforcement would need a warrant to access that information? Isn't that why he wanted to do his own blood draw, to get around the warrant problem?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

What the hell are you talking about?

We arent talking about a warrant. We were talking about the nurs3e failing to disclose to the detective they took a blood draw already. Windword tried to say she couldnt tell the officer that because HIPAA prevented it.

It does not and everything I stated is confirmed in your latest post.

Yes. HIPAA prevented it. She cannot legally disclose medical information that she learned in the scope of doing her job as medical personnel, unless it is for the treatment or billing of that patient. The officer had no legal right to know that information and she would have been in violation of the law to disclose it. Yes, even to a law enforcement officer. Unless he had warrant, which he did not.

My husband is the HIPAA security officer for the local hospital. You are absolutely, completely and indisputably incorrect in your understanding of HIPAA and the various obligations and rights regarding medical personnel and law enforcement officers.

If you are a law enforcement officer, you desperately need more training in this matter.

a reply to: windword

You just make it up as you go.

Had the nurse told the officer they already took blood it would have ended. Instead she dragged it out and only disclosed it after being taken into custody.

You claimed HIPAA prevented her from disclosing it, which is incorrect.

Either pay attention to what you write in your posts or dont bother responding. You have done this a number of times in his thread and its getting old.

a reply to: redhorse

No it didnt.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You keep putting the onus on the nurse.

Did the officer ask whether a blood sample was already performed prior to arresting the nurse?

Also it seems you have completely ignored my rebuttal on the last page, or perhaps you have surrendered the point?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: redhorse

No it didnt.

You do not understand the law or, more likely, just don't care. This is typical of the attitude of law enforcement. They resent any perceived challenge to their authority, and pressure medical personnel to break the law because it is inconvenient for the cop short term. This cavalier and belligerent attitude is why medical personnel are becoming more leery and oppositional to law enforcement in general.

Medical personnel cannot give that information to law enforcement unless they have warrant or the patient is under arrest. There is no other circumstance that would allow for this. This is how they are trained because it is THE LAW and if they break the law, they can lose their livelihood, or even go to prison.

*edited to add*

Please read this. If you are currently a law enforcement officer you need this information desperately.

HIPAA and Law Enforcement

If it is not listed, "covered entities" i.e. health care professionals cannot legally provide the information. HIPAA is fairly simple. None of those listed requirements were met in the situation with Nurse Wubbles, therefore not only was she not obligated to give the information to the police, she was legally required to withhold that information.

Also:

In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court in Missouri v. McNeely said that police have to obtain a search warrant prior to subjecting a DWI suspect to a blood test. The Supreme Court held that the dissipation of alcohol in the blood was not an exigent circumstance for the purpose of seeking a warrantless blood draw without consent.

And:

In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court in Birchfield v. North Dakota ruled that implied consent statutes could not include a criminal sanction for refusal to submit to blood testing. In its decision, the Supreme Court reiterated the fact that absent an exigent circumstance – other than the natural dissipation of alcohol in the blood – a warrant was required for non-consensual blood draw.

Link

I have plenty more. What have you got?

You are wrong. You do not understand HIPAA and you do not understand the law in general. I hope to god that you are not currently (or frankly, that you have ever been) a law enforcement officer. If so, you do not or did not understand your job and I cannot imagine how much harm you have done.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You just make it up as you go.

No, at this point, I'm just picking apart your argument, point by point.

Had the nurse told the officer they already took blood it would have ended. Instead she dragged it out and only disclosed it after being taken into custody.

Did Officer Payne ask her if blood had been drawn? No, you say?

You claimed HIPAA prevented her from disclosing it, which is incorrect.

What law compels a nurse to volunteer medical information to a law enforcement officer, when that officer didn't ask the question?

Why didn't Officer Payne, or you, know that it's SOP for hospitals to draw blood before treating patients?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: windword

You just make it up as you go.

Had the nurse told the officer they already took blood it would have ended. Instead she dragged it out and only disclosed it after being taken into custody.

You claimed HIPAA prevented her from disclosing it, which is incorrect.

Either pay attention to what you write in your posts or dont bother responding. You have done this a number of times in his thread and its getting old.

What makes you think it would have ended had she disclosed the information about the blood draw?

He WAS TOLD to "Forget it, we'll get it another way." as soon as he reported to the requesting agency that the victim was unconscious and unable to give consent. But he didn't walk away, he kept harassing the staff. If he didn't want a fight he could have gone home at that point. Not only did he not walk away he apparently didn't even bother to tell his Lt. that the request had been withdrawn by the requesting agency.

Admit it---the guy was a jerk who was making an unlawful request and had a big chip on his shoulder. Once it was disclosed that the victim was unconscious they called off the request. Anything he did after that was unlawful and unnecessary---a fact you continue to ignore in your defense of him.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Had the nurse told the officer they already took blood it would have ended

It also would of ended if Payne had followed the advice of the investigator who initially requested the sample right?
The investigator advised not to worry about it, they would sort it out and retrieve one later..correct?
www.staradvertiser.com...

But no, Payne was butthurt and had "repect my authoritah" syndrome..end of story.